12 Witnesses

So we made it back from camp Saturday.  We had a stomach bug throughout the latter part of the week which kept us on our toes… and knees… and…erm… seats.  Well, we’re back and we took a victory lap last night during the evening service.  Way beyond surviving the bug, we had a couple of salvations, several re-dedications and even a handful of students who have surrendered to ministry and missions.  On top of all of that, our missions fire has been kindled in our Youth Ministry and they are asking for opportunities to go and tell.

Yes!  Really good stuff.

Tomorrow is the Founder’s Conference in Owasso, just north of Tulsa, and I am going, if the Lord wills.  My laptop is acting like the motherboard is about to abandon all hope.  Thankfully, it booted this afternoon and I ran to the store and bought myself an external hard drive to back up all my stuff.  All of that is to say that I may or may not live blog all or part of the conference.

Nothing like a firm commitment, huh?

Ed Stetzer and Voddie Baucham are among the speakers at a conference about church planting and church reformation.  I’m looking forward to it.

Having sufficiently avoided the SBC as a regular topic of my blog for the last year, I think it is relatively safe to give you a few thoughts on the Presidential election happening about 2:45 pm today in Indianapolis.  That’s Central Time, if you didn’t know.

It fascinates me that there are six known candidates and more possibly on the way.  After the last two years, who knows?  We could end up with a baker’s dozen after it is done.

Not knowing the total nominees, I would have no real idea how to predict the vote fallout.  Even if I did, predicting these things has become somewhat less certain than it once was, which is a good thing.

Therefore, I will simply give a couple of thoughts about the overall situation and very weak predictions.

I suspect that Frank Cox or Johnny Hunt will win in a runoff.  They represent the status quo crowd and they are more the “typical” nominee:  Mega Church, the SBC is greater than ever and let’s get out there and win them lost folks by working harder at the same things we’ve been doing.  Curious to me is the fact that Johnny Hunt is running at all.

Johnny has been buffaloed out twice:  once by Bobby Welch and the other by the SBC blogosphere questioning his church’s Cooperative Program giving.  It seemed to most, and certainly to me, that he didn’t want to divide the convention and wanted no part of a “fight” for the presidency.  Now, however, with Cox apparently anointed by the status quo crowd, Hunt jumps in to give those voters a couple of options.

This was somewhat precarious two years ago, with that group of voters divided, allowing Frank Page to win on the first ballot.  I pointed out, at the time, that Page received more votes than both men combined (hence the first ballot win), it showed a vulnerability when running multiple candidates.

I wonder, with them both being from Georgia, how well they know each other and if there is a degree to which Johnny thinks that he’s better for the job.  Who knows?  Not I.

Nevertheless, odd as it may be, they are still both better known than almost everyone else combined.  I suppose that you could lump the other four known candidates into the “reformer” category, though their respective ideas of reform are not all the same.

I’ll not try to give a synopsis for each one, but suffice it to say that Wiley Drake’s ideas of reform are surely different than all the rest.

Les Puryear is to be nominated by the very passionate and well spoken Dwight McKissic.  Let us not forget that Forrest Pollock did more to win Frank Page the election 2 years ago than anyone else, so don’t underplay the nominator.  Let us also not forget that Junior Hill will also be on the stage.  He’s good, and people know him better, which gives Cox an edge.

Les is a small church pastor and has been celebrated this year with the small church conference created by him and hosted at his church with many of the luminaries from the SBC as well as partnerships from Lifeway and the IMB.  That’s tall cotton.  For a small church pastor.

Unfortunately, Johnny Hunt preaches to thousands of SBC pastors every year in various venues and was in his traditional post at the Pastor’s conference this year.  It is a machine, of sorts, and hard to conquer.

Les does have the fact that he represents the average voter in the hall this afternoon.  Going against Les is the reality that most of those guys don’t celebrate the small church the way Les does.  They really want to be Johnny Hunt.  Or Frank Cox.  Or any Mega Church pastor.  Or even a larger than their church pastor.

Which brings us, finally, to the Missionaries.  Bill Wagner seems like a nice enough guy, but he is not well known.  Those that know him are not all convinced, either, so I doubt that he will pull many votes int he first round.  I do admire the straightforward attitude he brought to the campaign, though.  There was no dream/vision, etc.  He simply thought he would be good for the SBC.  I like it.

Avery Willis, though, is the only reformer that I think stands a chance.  Primarily because people know him better than the others and if reformers show up, they will likely do so on behalf of the IMB and its ongoing struggles with the “guidelines” restricting missionary candidates.  I recently read in the Florida Baptist Witness (online) that the “guidelines” were a settled issue and that they weren’t going to be dealt with by the BOT anytime in the near future.  It may well be that the power structure of the BOT considers them settled, but it is clear that the SBC does not.

If enough of those SBC pastors show up at convention, Avery stands a chance, albeit a slim one.

If you are looking for info on the SBC this week, I am sorry that I will not providing the blow by blow for you as I have the last two years.

On the other hand, if you want some long term thinking about the SBC, I can’t recommend any higher to you this post by my friend, Marty Duren:

ie:missional » Dallas Morning News on Denominational Decline

We’re having VBS this week, and we’re off to Falls Creek for camp next week.  Yea!

Bell Shoals Baptist Church - Pastor’s Page

On the Bell Shoals website today is the notice that Forrest Pollock and his 13 year old son have passed from this world. They were on a trip in the family owned aircraft, piloted by the pastor.

This event has shaken me more than I could have realized. It is tragic, to be sure, but Forrest is etched in my memory as dynamic and alive, swaying the crowd in Greensboro. Many of us … many who frequently received and still receive credit for the election of Frank Page … immediately attributed the election to the nomination speech of Forrest Pollock. I did and still do.

I say that not to tap into the political realm of the SBC, but to capture the magnitude of a young, vibrant man who stood to the microphone and held the SBC in his sway, if but for a moment, at a crucial point in our history.

On my heart more than that moment is the loss of his 13 year old son. Having a 13 year old son myself, I am caught by the overwhelming drive to keep him from harm and I sensed that particular loss of the Pollock family, immediately in my mind.

My heart and prayers are with the Pollocks and with Bell Shoals. I encourage you to pray for them as well.

Something crossed my mind the other day and I just couldn’t let it go. In a discussion over a year ago on Missional Cooperation, a Seminary Student included this thought in a comment left on my blog:

“by giving to the cp, they are already giving to ‘their mission dollars to missions they themselves are doing.’”

Apr 10th, 2007 at 8:03 am

I really could not forget that statement and the mindset it represents. Finally, I would just like to put it to be by saying a hearty:

“NUH UHHHH!”

Participation in the Cooperative Program is not doing missions. It is paying someone else to do missions. I’m not saying supporting missionaries that live in a context of lost people is a bad thing. Quite the contrary, I think we should be giving much more to the field.

However, sending money is not the same as personal engagement. We need to be a church that is engaging people in Tulsa, North America and around the world, as described in Acts 1:8. Us. Our church.

The CP has done amazing things, but one of the negative consequences is that our people have become convinced that they do not need to actually get up and do something but by sending some money to the CP, they’ve done missions. and. that. is. a. lie.

Did that get your attention?

This post is not specifically about the SBC or even the local church trying to hold on to the 1950’s, but it could be. Actually, this post is about… the US Post Office.

The Washington Post has revealed that the Post Office is doing its best, despite laws that prevent it from lobbying, to thwart legislation in several states that would create a “Do Not Mail” list, similar to the “Do Not Call” list(s) that prevent unsolicited sales calls at your home. It’s like a spam filter for your “snail mail” inbox: the mailbox at your house.

What’s the problem? The Post Office has revealed that “standard mail” - or junk mail - has become its life blood. It needs junk mail to survive.

The Post’s story also reveals that environmental groups are not in favor of decreasing junk mail. Why? They are junk mailers.

So let’s review:

1. Culture no longer operates in the same way it used to because technology has changed the way people think and communicate.
2. Institution still wants to exist, and fights to keep doing what it has been doing, despite the fact that those it was created to serve no longer need it or want it to do that anymore.
3. Some people claim to want the betterment of mankind, but stick to an institution that works against their cause because they perceive they need it to exist themselves. Yet if they would progress in their communication style, they could be internally consistent, which would help those they are reaching toward to not think them disconnected and hypocritical.

[edit]

I forgot to add point four: Thrash about for life as it may, the institution will survive for a while, but will ultimately be something else. Either it will adapt itself to its context, or it will diminish.

[/edit]

Thoughts?

After more than two years of what has become frustrating and painful opposition, Wade Burleson has announced that he will willingly do what the powers that be inside the International Mission Board of Trustees have wanted, called for, attempted and thus far failed: the removal of Burleson from the trusteeship of the IMB.

Several observations.

First, Wade is probably past due for this. He kept trying to work with people who didn’t want to work with him. In the end, if people in authority want to shut you out, they can. The IMBOT can and did. It amazes me that he still desires to INCREASE his church’s cooperative efforts and continues to encourage others to do the same. The more they shut him out, the more he wants to cooperate.

Secondly, I would not expect the IMB to be less under the scrutiny of the SBC, but more. Wade offered to shut down his blog. I suppose they stood on principle in asking that he apologize for intentionally breaking the anti-dissent policy passed last year, and in so doing repeatedly rejected his offer, though it was their cheif complaint. Nevertheless, Wade has exposed that he has gone a long way toward them and they seemed unwilling to move toward him at all. Thus, they’ve finally “martyred” him to the ultimate level and now he is free to discuss the IMB without any restrictions.

Thirdly, as a result of Wade’s freedom from restriction, you might expect the infamous notebooks containing evidence of wrongdoing to surface. I know of just a few tidbits of information contained therein, and they are pretty explosive. Wade, treasuring the SBC as he does, may withhold them. I think this is, and always has been, a mistake. However, contrary to the constant assertion that there was a tight coalition of “reformation” minded bloggers that were structured and in lock step, we never were anything but independent thinkers going in a similar direction - which explains why Wade never listened to me or anyone else (Marty) when we encouraged him (and Ben and CB) to let the people know the truth about what is going on and release his (their) evidence.

Fourthly, there will be a slew of people begging Wade to run for President of the SBC. I think this would likely be a mistake as it would create a race between two galvanizing forces: Wade and Al.(1) It would not be helpful to the convention, and I don’t think he can win. Name recognition alone would carry Dr. Mohler. If another, more palatable option arises(2), Wade will be H. Ross Perot and suck away enough votes to guarantee a win for Dr. Mohler.

Fifthly, I think, despite Wade’s encouragement to cooperate MORE with the SBC, many will choose to cooperate less. That is not to say everyone will leave altogether. Those not happy with the status quo will most likely begin to diversify their cooperative dollars among other networks as well as the SBC and will no longer be satisfied with only sending CP dollars and taking up Special Offerings for SBC mission efforts. As a result, CP giving and the Special Offerings will decline, per capita, though they may continue to slowly rise overall, for a time.

I said it many times over the last several years, but it is still unheeded. In this battle, if “they”(3) win, they lose. To quote Bowden McElroy, “The SBC will survive. What it will look like is not yet determined.”

_____________________________________________________

1 - While I think Al Mohler is a scholar of the first rate and is highly qualified to be the President of one of our Seminaries, I object to his becoming the President of the SBC in that there is a conflict of interest in his appointing those who appoint those supposed to provide him oversight: the SBTS BOT; he has repeatedly focused on, and spoken out for, things not central to the mind of the SBC: Public School Exit Strategy (frequently dismissed in the form of a resolution at the annual meeting), the idea that a Christian couple’s decision not to have children is “sin,” and the recently revealed piece of information that, although the Southern Baptist Convention was founded and thrives on missions, Dr. Mohler has never taken the Gospel beyond his local context. No, I don’t count appearances on news shows, even nationally televised ones, as mission work. “Speaking prophetically” to our culture is not missions.

2- I do not consider Bill Wagner a viable alternative. He is a Seminary employee, thus raising the Conflict of Interest objection,[edit: Wagner has moved on, as noted in the comment section. My apologies.] He is not well known and I don’t think he stands a chance against almost anyone else. No one from “the other side” is taking him seriously, or they would be trying to discredit him. That should say something in itself.

3 - The “Powers That Be,” the “Inner Circle,” or those who still seek to narrow the parameters of our cooperation to a standard that is comfortable for them, but intolerable to the rest of us.

My friend and colleague, Joe Ball - Youth guru for the Kentucky Baptist Convention - has posted some more interesting data about church health. This is not necessarily about “leaving the church” so it doesn’t get that designation. In fact, it is moderately upbeat in terms of solutions rather than simply diagnosing the problems.

These are 7 megatrends in church health given by Thom Rainer, President of Lifeway, to the State Executive Directors last month (Dec. ‘07).

1. The disappearance of 18-24 year olds in church. Rainer said LifeWay Research has well documented the dropout trends of this age group, and while the church has always seen a drop as young people transition from school to the workforce, “there are solutions emerging.”
2. The growth in the multi-venue and multi-campus church. This trend is accelerating, Rainer noted.
3. The desire for deeper biblical doctrinal studies. “Those in our churches are asking for preaching with biblical depth in addition to life application,” Rainer said. In an attempt to grow their numbers, “churches are trying to get by with shallow teaching,” resulting in “shallow churches with shallow members.”
4. The slowdown in the growth rate of mega churches. “Not a decrease in the number of mega churches,” Rainer clarified, “but a slowing in the rate of growth.”
5. The shortage of pastors. Some seminary graduates “don’t see themselves in rural, white collar, or traditional churches,” Rainer noted. “Some states are already seeing a crisis” among traditional churches.
6. The increasing demand for processes. “Churches are asking for help to put resources together,” Rainer noted. “Churches are saying: ‘Don’t just give us products, show how I disciple this young believer.’”
7. The resurgence of the “open group” in church. “Traditionally we’ve called it Sunday school,” Rainer said, but it may not always be called Sunday school today. Regardless of what you call it, there is a resurgence of the open group in church

I’ve done, now, several posts on young people leaving church (pt. 1, pt. 2, remix, remix redux), but now Lifeway has produced some data revealing that young people are dropping the convention (at least the annual meeting) as well. That is to say, these stats reflect, not that young people are leaving the SBC (that would be the implication of the previous studies referenced), but that young Southern Baptists are absent during the annual meeting.

Scott McConnell said it best in the article when he said, “The general trend is the aging of attendees at the Southern Baptist Convention.” I think I say it better: People aren’t leaving the convention (annual meeting), they just aren’t starting. The surey shows that the same group of people who surged to the meeting back during the CR have remained very faithful to the meeting year after year.

Ed Stetzer, as usual, has a pointed insight:

“Oddly enough, in some quarters there has actually been a debate about whether the SBC attendance is aging and losing its young leaders,” Stetzer said. “Of course, facts don’t convince everyone. My hope is that now, finally, we will stop debating and instead ask the hard question: ‘What is causing so many young leaders to stay away?’

Allow me to speak for myself here, if not for Younger Leaders(1), and answer the question of the day, voiced by Ed.

The SBC I grew up in was a culture and environment that valued the Word of God as Inerrant. The current SBC is a place where the reading of an Inerrant Word is no longer Sufficient, but particular applications(2) of God’s Word have now become divisive - the various resolutions, lawsuits and consistent misrepresentations of others being most openly experienced at the meeting itself.

Moreover, the SBC in which I was raised taught me that the purpose of our organizing as a convention was to better reach the world for Christ. If you have read much of what I have written over the last two years, it comes as no surprise that I perceive the SBC to be regularly marginalizing our missions efforts by prioritizing petty power plays over the smooth implication of our global strategy. Excuse me, our international strategy. We still do not have a unified strategy of reaching the world. Back to the power plays, the censuring of Wade Burleson AFTER he offered to resign and quit blogging right before the Lottie Moon offering is our latest, greatest example.

It does go much deeper than Wade and the IMB, however. The former practice of Inner Circle chosen Presidents running unopposed sends the message loud and clear to young leaders that they are not needed. Now that the practice has been put to an end, is that enough to draw out younger leaders from the next generation?

Unfortunately, it is not the only thing that YSBC (Young SBC) wants or needs from the annual meeting. In terms of missionality, younger leaders want to spend their limited conference time and money on that which will help them accomplish being more missional as well as leading their church to be more missional.(3) At this point, the Pastor’s Conference is anything but useful to that end. Typically, it is the same people encouraging us to do the same things only harder, and I just don’t buy it. I suspect that leaders younger than I buy even less.

All of this begs the question, “Can we fix it?”(4) My answer? I honestly don’t know. At this point, I am rapidly losing my concern with the survival of the SBC and have elevated to top priority the survival of the Gospel in America, western culture and the world.(5) IF the SBC is capable of bringing it’s focus alongside mine and causing the annual meeting to be beneficial to me in pursuing the priorities I have expressed, then it will be worth the time and money to attend. Unless it does, it will not.

I do think I will be at Indy this year, but only because the election of this year’s president will, in my mind, make the difference as to whether or not it is possible to become relevant again. I feel I owe that much. Beyond that, I have no long term plans.

I hope that answers Ed’s question.

*note about comments: At this point, my hosting company seems to be on holiday vacation. The corrupted comment table (thus the ability to comment) may not be up until later in the week.

———–ENDNOTES—————————-

1. It should be noted that I am now 41, and not a Younger Leader by any sense of the word. I am not claiming a voice from their perspective.

2. Please note that I did not use the word “interpretations”. Even now among Southern Baptists, very few interpretations are in dispute. It is the application of the interpretation that now often divides us.

3. They would not mind, I suspect, if people on the podium understood the concept instead of simply parroting it as a new “buzz word” throughout the week.

4. That is to say, if your mind doesn’t jump to the next question, “Should we fix it?”

5. America and western culture because that is where I live and I am called to evangelize wherever I am. The world, because I am also called to evangelize where I am not by going there with the good news.

This is not primarily about the BGCO annual meeting, but I am following up on some stuff from there.

I have been seemingly driven to a point of amazing clarity about the reality of our world and the ability of us - Christians, Baptists, any other number of smaller collectives - to reach that world.

When I went to observe New Bethany Baptist Church in Buford, GA (Pastor, Marty Duren), one of the unique things being done there was that the staff was studying a book together and they discussed it after the calendar portion of staff meeting. The book they were reading was “UnChristian” by David Kinnaman and the Barna Research Group. A couple of weeks ago, Marty called me and told me to drop what I was reading, pick up that book and read chapter 4. That was eye opening.

Some amazing things were revealed to me. Primarily, though, that the things we often do as “evangelism” are actually counter productive. Check this quote from a section of myths and realities (pg. 71).

Myth: Anything that brings people to Christ is worth doing.

Reality: When you are talking dollars, there is no price too high for a soul. But the problem isn’t just cost. In our research with some of the leading “mass evangelism” efforts, we found that often these measures create three to ten times as much negative response as positive. [emphasis Kinnaman] In other words, imagine your church is considering mailing Bibles or videos or other Christian materials to homes in your community. Our research shows that the “collateral damage” of doing so - those whose impressions of your church and of Christianity would be more negative as a result - is significantly greater than the positive impact on those who will respond to these efforts. Moreover, such mass evangelism efforts are most effective with marginally churched adults, while outsiders are usually the ones who respond most negatively.

In other words, our effectiveness is with people who are already church members, but who don’t attend. So we can get them to switch to our church and not attend there. Brilliant. On the other hand, the backlash among lost people means that the things we often do in the name of evangelism actually serves to distance the lost further from the Gospel.

Hmmmm.

Then, I went to the BGCO and heard something about us declining. I have received confirmation from Randy Adams - prompt and very helpful - of the decline of Southern Baptists. Here is a quote from an article that was published in the Baptist Messenger (OK’s Baptist Paper):

In 1980, baptisms recorded by Oklahoma Baptist churches totaled 24,803. In 2005, that total had decreased to 15,916, a decline of 36 percent. When examined in five year increments, one discovers that the decline has been quite consistent over the 25 years, with largest drop occurring between 1980 and 1985. Even more telling is the fact that Oklahoma’s population has increased by 17 percent over the same period, a total of 522,594 people. Thus, the decline in baptisms is approximately 50 percent when population growth is considered. That means that we are baptizing half as many people today, as a percent of the population, than we did twenty-five years ago.

The numbers are even more telling when examined by age-group. The decline is steepest in the 18-29 age grouping, dropping from 6,226 baptisms in 1980 to 2,184 in 2005, a sickening 65 percent decline. Next is the 9-11 age-grouping, where baptisms have dropped from 4,687 to 2,798 for a 40 percent decline. In the 12-17 age-group the decline is 7,014 baptisms to 4,282 for a 39 percent decline. Among the 30-59 age-group the decline begins to flatten out at 12 percent, from 3,792 to 3,322. The only areas of increase in baptisms are those under six years of age, with a seven percent increase to 148 baptisms, and those over age 60, with a 13 percent increase, totaling 676 baptisms.

Upon hearing this, the fire that was being kindled in my mind about our ability (or lack thereof) to reach the lost had begun to be fueled. On top of that, I was directed by some church members to an article in the Tulsa World, Southern Baptists: New Law Won’t Change Ministry, about a resolution I was proud to support. The resolution was basically that we would put the Kingdom first when ministering to the lost - regardless of their situation. This is in response to HB 1804, which is designed to combat those who employ or aid illegal immigrants. The problem is that churches that “minister” to illegals could potentially be prosecuted for doing so - or that is the concern, anyway. The gist of the resolution is that we support the government, but ministry is our command in the Kingdom and the Kingdom (and the people to whom we are sent) are our first priority.

The interesting thing about the story is that it gives a bullet list of other resolutions at the end of a very positive piece and readers who are now allowed to comment take the opportunity to absolutely trash Southern Baptists, until one or two step in and mention the Disaster Relief work that Souther Baptists do. Check ‘em out. It’s eye opening.

As a result, I prepared my Sermon for this week: All Things to All People. Obviously, it is about giving up our rights to spread the message in a way that is comfortable to us. We are, in fact, compelled by Scripture to spread the message in a way that is effective at the sacrifice of our comfort.

At the end of the evening on Saturday, I was finishing up my power point when I went to check on my wife, working on a Grad School project. She was watching a You Tube video and it was, to be blunt, challenging to the core.

I want the video to be the last thing in the post so let me write my conclusion first. The world, our culture, is running away from us at light speed. It isn’t coming back. If we don’t drop every hint of baggage right now and sprint toward the future, we will be irrelevant before we know it. It is hard to recognize this reality, because life is still a lot like it was 50 years ago - lights, indoor plumbing, cars, phones - or even twenty years ago - microwave ovens, home computers, etc.

Anyway, we must recognize that we are rapidly changing. We can’t row a boat in an airplane age. In fact, we need to recognize that water, in this analogy, no longer exists, and boats only cause us to look insane to those around us. Don’t believe me?

Watch this: