May
19
Interview with Dr. Avery Willis
Posted by
On Friday, May 16, 2008, Scott Gordon was able to spend some time talking with Dr. Avery T. Willis, who will be one of at least five men nominated for president of the Southern Baptist Convention when we meet in Indianapolis next month.
Dr. Willis’s personal website can be found here, and a website dedicated to his candidacy can be accessed by clicking here.
The quality of the audio is the result of the interview having been conducted through a VoIP service.
21 Comments
May 19th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
So, if I heard Dr. Willis correctly, he’s saying that we don’t agree with everything that the Qur’an says about Mohammed—just that particular verse that asserts Mohammed to be just like all the other prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Jesus, Mohammed…you know) that came before him.
?????
May 19th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Here’s that verse, by the way: “Say: I am not the first of the apostles, and I do not know what will be done with me or with you: I do not follow anything but that which is revealed to me, and I am nothing but a plain warner.”
As for me, I think that Mohammed is neither the first, the last, the median, nor the mean of the apostles, prophets, seers, or whatever else.
May 19th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
(A triple-post…my goodness)
And obviously, neither does Avery Willis believe any of those things. Which makes one wonder why he would go to such lengths to defend a bad book. Even if there is a good idea somewhere buried in that bad book, it is a bad book in desperate need of refinement.
May 19th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Brother Tim or whomever did the interview:
Good job on the interview. I do have a question. I have heard that Avery Willis has a daughter that is an ordained minister in Missouri. Do you know if this is true or not? Just curious.
PM
May 19th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Brother Preacherman,
I am not certain of what you are asking. However, I am sure someone here in blogland can give us an update.
Does anyone know if Dr. Willis has daughter that is an ordained minister?
Blessings,
Tim
May 19th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
I have no idea if she is an ordained minister or not, but according to this Alabama Baptist article she is a co-pastor with her husband.
and daughter Sherrie and husband Stephen Brown live in Kansas City, Mo., and co-pastor Northland Oaks Community Church there. (BP)
She co-authored or contributed to the Master Life book with her father.
Mark
p.s. It is sometimes difficult to read the anti-spam word.
May 19th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
PM,
Thanks for the kind words.
PM & JM,
We have been able to confirm that Dr. Willis’ daughter, Sherrie, has indeed been ordained and does co-pastor a small congregation in Kansas City with her husband, Steve. That is all we know.
Sola Gratia!
May 19th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
I just listened to the Avery Willis podcast and, gee whiz, I am surprised at the responses. This is AVERY WILLIS and the first three comments are going after his view of missions.
You’re kidding, right?
Dr. Willis asked it well—do you witness to Muslims or just criticize those who do?
And is his daughter ordained? Are we going to ask about the theological views of all the children of all of the SBC presidential candidates?
I think Dr. Willis is the first one I heard to endorse the Danvers Statement which is pretty clearly against women in pastoral ministry (and conservative on lots of other gender issues).
Treat the man with a little respect.
May 19th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
In regard to the part of the Camel method discussed in the interview, it is interesting that some Muslims think Muhammad was talking about his physical death/destiny, not his eternal destiny. Here is an excerpt from an interview I had with an Imam in regard to that part of the Camel method:
BT: I have a question about surah forty-six, verse nine, The Sandhills. My translation, Muhammad is speaking: “Say: I am not the first of the apostles, and I do not know what will be done with me or with you: I do not follow anything but that which is revealed to me, and I am nothing but a plain warner.” Is this saying that he did not know his final destination, or what would be your interpretation of that verse?
Imam: Read the verse again.
BT: “Say: I am not the first of the apostles, and I do not know what will be done with me or with you: I do not follow anything but that which is revealed to me, and I am nothing but a plain warner.”
Imam: Okay, that verse reads this way: “Say, I am not a new thing among the messengers,” meaning, I am not the first messenger sent. “Nor do I know what will be done with me or you. I only follow that which is revealed to me, and I am but a plain warner.” Okay, concerning this verse, Allah is showing us that there have been prophets and messengers before Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. So then, whatever happened to those prophets and messengers before him may happen to him—Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him—how some messengers were killed by the people of Israel, and some were tortured. And this may happen to him. And he faced something like that when he went to Taif, when the people—the community of Taif—took the sick people, you know, and also the children, and they were throwing stones to him so as to have him bleeding. And God actually knew about it and sent the angel to him and say, “Whatever you want me to do for these people, I can do,” as He did to other people who used to do prophets like that. So then, God (unintelligible Arabic phrase) of course had the knowledge, and Allah gave him the knowledge, and he can predict things. But he would just let people know that I’m a human being like you. But what is special about me is that I am a messenger (unintelligible Arabic phrase), I am a person who God is revealing things to. So whatever happened to the messengers before can also happen to me, and that’s what I know what I know, what will be done with me or you. Nor do I know what will be done with me.
BT: So he was not talking about the way to heaven. He was talking about physically being attacked on earth.
Imam: There you go. The messengers faced those kind of problems actually before him. Then this—also to let people know that the prophets and messengers who came before him were also teaching the same thing that he is teaching. Therefore he may face the same thing that they faced with opposition from other people. And by the way, if you really want to have an understanding of the Qur’an, this is Tafsir Ibn Kathir. This is the most authentic translation or explanation of the Qur’an.
May 21st, 2008 at 8:47 am
Mitch,
I was in no way disrespecting Dr. Willis. I asked a simple question. Why is it that when people ask honest questions they are seen as disrespectful and attacking that person? Anyway, the point is that during the interview Dr. Willis affirms the BF&M 2000 policy on women in pastoral ministry yet his daughter serves as a co-pastor. As a SB deciding whom to vote for in the election, I find that very odd. It doesn’t matter to me if she is ordained, pastoring or whatever, that’s a local church issue, but I believe if Dr. Willis wants to lead the SBC, an explanation would probably be in order.
May 21st, 2008 at 9:24 am
preacherman-
Let me say, in the interest of full disclosure, that I’m a Willis supporter and will be casting my vote for him in Indy.
That being said, I don’t think you were attacking Willis, and I can understand your concern in regards to his daughter. However, having heard that Willis affirms both the BFM 2000 and the Danvers Statement it would seem to me that there is no question about his commitment to the principle of a male only pastorate.
His daughter obviously disagrees. That sets her at odds, theologically, with her father in that area. My dad is a pastor, and a good one, but he and I stand at odds on a few theological issues. My position shouldn’t cast aspersion on my father, particularly if he affirms his disagreement with me. It simply means that, as an adult who is something of a theologian, I have chosen to believe differently in regards to biblical interpretation.
I don’t think Willis needs to clarify any further, at least he doesn’t have to for me. His open commitment to the BFM 2000 as well as the Danvers Statement is more than ample definition it would seem to me. Just because his daughter disagrees with him doesn’t mean that he is not qualified as a conservative Southern Baptist.
May 21st, 2008 at 11:26 am
Micah,
Well said. I agree with one exception. Your father is not running for president of the SBC. When one casts their name into the ring of politics, they in my opinion need to fully support what SB’s support. It sounded as if Dr. Willis was avoiding the question. He should have just flat out said my daughter and I disagree on this issue but I fully support the BF&M 2000.
May 21st, 2008 at 2:33 pm
preacherman-
I agree with your argument. The difference is that I am convinced that Willis has done exactly what you ask. You state: “When one casts their name into the ring of politics, they in my opinion need to fully support what SB’s support.”
I would assume by that you mean that the candidate needs to affirm the Baptist Faith and Message 2000. In that case, hasn’t Willis clearly stated his support. Remember, Willis the IMB Exec. who angered so many missionaries because he enforced the request that they all sign the BF&M 2000. He has not only stated his support of the document, but as an executive he has reflected that belief in his actions.
It seems to me that by asking him to bring his grown children into the discussion you assume that he must not be completely truthful at some point.
May 21st, 2008 at 2:36 pm
By the way, just as a further point of clarification, I imagine that I would argue your point even further. The main reason why I cannot support Johnny Hunt, for instance, for SBC President, is that his church gives such a small percentage to the Cooperative Program. I’m not a fan of a percentage litmus test, but I’m convinced that a candidate needs to fully support what SB’s support and so his candidacy, in my personal opinion, falls short.
Even though I’m voting for Willis over Cox, I’m pleased to see Cox’s support of the CP.
May 21st, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Micah,
Then why not be up front and open about his daughter in the interview? He knew it would come up. You are right about Johnny Hunt but check their budget. They give thousands of dollars to missions and church plants around the world. He will quickly tell you why is CP giving is what it is and why they pour so much money into other missions efforts. I’m not arguing for any of them by the way. Just an observation from the interview. I would never and did not intend to imply he wasn’t truthful. It was more a don’t ask don’t tell kind of situation to me.
May 21st, 2008 at 4:54 pm
preacherman-
I believe Avery was up front. He was asked a question and he answered it unequivocally in a way that left no doubt as to his conviction. His daughter’s theology is not in question, his is and he clarified his position.
As to FBC Woodstock, I commend their efforts. I am thankful for pastors like Hunt and consider him to be a faithful SBC pastor. I grew up going to conferences at Woodstock and listening to Hunt preach and can remember hoping to be able to preach like him someday.
Having said that, in my opinion, being President of the SBC demands a more significant commitment to the CP than what might be ok for the average SBC churches. Additionally, I don’t think that high CP percentages and large dollars to other missions efforts are mutually exclusive. My church, for instance, gives almost 13% to the CP and yet still gives another 10% to additional missions causes.
My point, essentially, is that I love FBC Woodstock’s commitment to missions and affirm their right to designate their funds as they see fit. For me, however, to endorse someone as SBC President, I want to see a strong commitment to missions giving through the CP which is our designated process. You don’t have to give much to remain SBC, but for me, you have to give much if you want to lead the SBC.
May 21st, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Brother Micah,
Just a point of clarification. You write; I believe Avery was up front. He was asked a question and answered it unequivocally in a way that left no doubt as to his conviction.
Brother Preacherman has a point that he nor other readers realize. Dr. Willis was given these questions a week in advance of the interview. He had to cancel the first appointment because he had double booked engagements. Thus, it was over a week later before he was able to finalize the interview. Therefore, he had the questions for over a week and knew he was going to be asked about this. I, like Brother Preacherman, do feel that he could have stopped such a question from coming by explaining it the very way it has been presented. ‘My daughter and I disagree on this, but I hold to the BF&M and the Danvers Statement.
Blessings,
Tim
May 21st, 2008 at 7:43 pm
Tim-
While I see your point, I remain unconvinced that he did not answer adequately. Let me state it this way.
Did he answer the question regarding his commitment to the BF&M? If so, the question is answered and his daughters theology is irrelevant.
While I am sure you don’t mean this, to press the point further appears to insinuate that he is not responding honestly when he says he is committed to the BFM 2000. Either he is or he is not, his daughter’s theology is not the issue, his theology is and he answered the question about his theology.
May 23rd, 2008 at 3:07 pm
[...] Interview with Dr. Avery Willis [...]
May 28th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
[...] is another of the interviews of the SBC presidential candidates conducted by SBC Today. Click here to listen to the [...]
June 8th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
[...] Actually, the interview with Pastor Puryear was the fifth and the interview of Dr. Avery Willis- HERE- was the [...]