This is the question I asked myself as I penned my last post. Since 2006, when I entered the blogosphere, I have constantly defended entity heads along with the trustees and never once identified them in a post of disagreement. I have been one that entered this debate based on the one premise–the entity heads and trustees were duly elected within the structures of the SBC for those positions– and made certain that I never strayed from supporting the person duly placed in that position. That is, until last week.
I vowed to myself after my Acts 29 post to keep quiet about the Great Commission Task Force because they have not placed anything out that is concrete. I asked a question in that post concerning Acts 29 and the response from many completely blew me away. I wish Acts 29 well in their plants and desire to see the nations reached for the glory of God.
However, just the other day I saw the first post from Dr. Akin trying to do away with the “myths” purportedly being presented by many. I do not mean this article as a rebuke to Dr. Akin in his assessment but one as to call on him to reconsider some of his statements. I believe Dr. Akin should dispel any “myths” that may be spoken of by others that have no basis. Thus I would like to offer an assessment of his “myths” and then present where some may be getting their information.
Myth #1-The goal of [particular members of] the Task Force to get more money to the nations is only a smoke screen to get more money to the seminaries. I personally have not heard anyone say this until I saw Dr. Akin’s post. I have to admit that I do understand how some could present this as a possibility.
The gang’s all here for episode 11 of the SBC Today podcast. In this episode, we start with no clear direction, and quickly wander off in all directions. Along the way, we discuss mission board vacancies, the GCR task-force, and whatever else comes to our ADD-infested minds. The good news is, this is our shortest podcast so far, coming in just under half an hour.
You can listen to the podcast on the player embedded below, or subscribe in iTunes and have it delivered to your favorite music player piping hot and fresh from the oven. Clicking the logo in this post (or the iTunes button in the sidebar) will take you to our page in iTunes. While you’re there, please take a moment to give us a rating (the more stars, the better) or take a couple of moments and favor us with a short review. Leave your comments here about how we can improve the podcast, and as always, thanks for listening.
Links to items discussed in this week’s podcast:
We’re back for another installment of the SBC Today podcast, Ed Stetzer edition. Robin Foster was unexpectedly AWOL for the recording, but the rest of the gang is here, and this week’s podcast is all about Ed Stetzer. Okay, not really, but I have been given to understand that the more times you mention Ed Stetzer in a blog post, the more traffic you can expect (I think I heard that from Ed Stetzer). And Ed Stetzer does figure prominently in this week’s podcast, as it is a point-by-point discussion of Ed Stetzer’s recent post on the Between the Times blog, a post wherein Ed Stetzer shares Ed Stetzer’s suggestions for where we go from here as a convention, and what things Ed Stetzer thinks we need to focus on. We don’t always agree with Ed Stetzer, as you’ll see in the podcast, but Ed Stetzer has his eye on the developing trends in our convention, so it’s certainly worthwhile to take a look at what Ed Stetzer has to say, especially regarding the future of our convention. Ed Stetzer.
Listen to the podcast using the player embedded here, or subscribe in iTunes. Clicking the logo in this post (or the sidebar link) will take you to our iTunes page, and while you’re there, do us a favor and write a short review for us, or at least click on some stars (the more, the better) and rate the podcast. We also welcome your feedback in the comments here, as we’re always looking for ways to improve the podcast. Thanks for listening, and we’ll see you next week.
Links to items discussed in episode 10:
The title of this article is a question that should be asked of all Southern Baptists. Why did the CBF leave the Southern Baptist fold back in 1992? We all have been told, and I remember well, many a squabble over the sufficient and inerrant text of the Word of God. The CBF ended up with no legitimate following in their interpretation that the Bible contained errors and they left the convention to form their own denomination.
This brings me to my question. If we are not allowed to disagree over various issues in the Southern Baptist Convention then why not just join the CBF?