There are various analysis of the GCRTF report.  Some are saying things that the report has not said while others are merely expressing degrees of agreement and disagreement. The following analysis is merely one pastor of 40,000 that has read the report and considers the recommendations.  I want to begin by saying that I agree we as the SBC need to do something.  Thus, I am not against the need to look at what we are doing and realign things that need realigning.  I am excited that we are doing this and I look forward to being a part of the changes that may come.  I offer the following, not as a critic of the work of the committee, but as a concerned pastor.

The first recommendation presents a call for all Southern Baptist to rally around a new vision statement.  It should be a vision to fulfill the Great Commission and we should have it clearly defined.  The statement includes the word “Missional” which seems to be a buzz word among the younger pastors.  We now have it in a vision statement even though there is no clearl definition of the word.  The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (CBF)has been using this term for years.  According to this blog they have been using “missional” to express a holistic ministry.  For the CBF one would read the term “missional” to express a “social gospel” ministry. Our GCRTF has presented the statement; “As a convention of churches, our Missional vision is to present the Gospel of Jesus Christ to every person in the world and to make disciples of all the nations.”

A couple of observations: first, as I stated above, there needs to be a clear definition of “Missional” before we can adopt this statement.  Some years in the past I rode with Dr. Ed Stetzer from his hotel to the conference site where he was about to make a presentation.  I asked him about this word as Dr. Stetzer is the one credited with the introduction of this word in the vernacular of Southern Baptist.  He told me that Evangelicals were now using the word to mean most anything.  Second, this vision statement could be used by any evangelical denomination. The Methodist, Presbyterians, Lutherans, even the the non-Christian sect, the Mormons could adopt the vision statement without clearly defining the terms.  I believe there needs to be some definitions clearly communicated in the report coming in May and the statement would sit well using the word “baptizing” in some portion.  The Great Commission Resurgence without “baptize” is really, not completing the Great Commission.

Read More→

When I surrendered to Christ in 1988 someone asked me if I had counted the cost.  As a new Christian I responded that I had, but in reality I could not know exactly what the cost was of following Jesus.  I knew that I had surrendered to Him and it made no difference to me what the cost was, in my reputation or what others said about me.

When you are saved out of a Muslim culture and religion it is more difficult than it is for someone like me.  The only danger I ever had to concern myself with was the laughs and jeers of my drinking buddies.  To one that is saved out of a Muslim culture and religion their lives are placed in jeopardy.

Read More→

For those that may be looking for a new Bible Software to help in sermon preparation this review is for you.  A former contributor to SBC Today, Robin Foster, loves this bible software as much as he loves lollipops.   Seriously, Robin has switched to the Logos Software and gives helpful advice to those that my be looking to use the application.

Logos 4.0: Taking Sermon Prep to the Next Level

Ever since I got the Biblesoft 2.0 edition back in 1997 I have used Bible computer software in my study.  Over the years I remained with Biblesoft upgrading to the 5.0 version last year spring.  I even wrote a review for them to use in their advertising.  For the price, it is a great resource, but as I upgraded, I waited for Biblesoft to produce something that also dealt with syntactical and clausal analysis of the original Hebrew and Greek.  In the DMin program at Southwestern, looking past the particular words to the clausal structure has been a major emphasis and a tremendous help in my preparation to preach God’s Word.

In February of 2009 I went to the Biblesoft table when I attended the Pastors Conference at FBC Jacksonville and asked if they were developing anything that might help in studying the text at the clausal level.  The guy at the table said that they hadn’t and that I really didn’t need to do that because it was a waste of time.  I wouldn’t get much out of it.  My response, “Hmmmmmmmmm? I think it is time to move on to another program.”

While I still believe that Biblesoft is a good program (great for those who have limited knowledge of Greek and Hebrew) and well worth the investment (It is much cheaper than Logos), I wanted to go deeper electronically with my study.  Then I took another look at Logos.  I had kept up with them since my seminary days, but during that time I did not feel the price justified the investment.  Now ……… WOW! I got the Logos 3.0 program after the Pastors Conference and it has been a tremendous help.  They recently released the 4.0 program and I upgraded to the Platinum edition from the Gold I had.  The resources are too numerous to mention.   And yes, they have great syntactical and clausal analysis resources that help in those studies.

What is great with the 4.0 edition is the indexing feature that indexes every word used in the entire library so that if I want to find out more on “baptism” all I have to do is type it and every resource in the library that refers to baptism will come up.  Hours of research are done in just a few seconds.  If I am studying a particular passage in the New Testament, all I have to do is type in the passage and more than thirty commentaries and word studies pop up on the screen saving me hours of researching.  I can also designate which resources are my favorite to get what I need more quickly.  The information is a click away.  The Old Testament resources are not as numerous as the New Testament resources, but in reality, that is true whether you are using Logos or not.  Even so, a wealth of information is available for the Old Testament.

Another bonus is that I can integrate the Logos program with my iPhone.  While Logos is still in the process of getting the entire library available on the iPhone, for the time being I can still do some incredible studies (Logos currently has over 3000 resources) and look up items when I am working with others one-on-one or in small groups.  Just this morning I was discussing some particulars about Herod the Great with other pastors and was able to look up the information on the spot to settle an argument.

The major draw back is that they are still developing the software for the Mac.  While I could use what they have available on my Mac, it would be updated approximately every two weeks and on each update the computer would go and re-index all the material in the program, which would take several hours.  They plan on having the updated edition fully integrated for Mac by the summer.  Until then I can still run the program on my parallel.

If you are serious about getting the most out of your study time in the best way possible and you have the means by which to do so, I would recommend Logos.  If cost is a serious problem, they have discounts for seminary students and professors if your institution has an agreement with them.  They will also allow you to pay the cost in installments.  Check out the web site, www.logos.com to get all the details.

I have not been paid or given any discounts for this review.

One of the criticisms often bandied about in the transition that Southern Baptist Life is undergoing is that people have to realize this isn’t the 1950’s anymore.  I’m grateful for the wakeup call because I was just about to make a run to the local Gibson’s on the corner  I think it might surprise some that I agree the SBC is long overdue for transition – or perhaps a better word is renewal.  Often organizations cycle through a vicious sequence that can lead to demise, decay, and even death.  It’s why I embrace the concept of a resurgence centered on the Great Commission – such is an impetus that could bring unity and clarity.  I think much of the murmuring that is bubbling up in the meantime is the natural byproduct of what happens in the midst of transition.  The question becomes how do we bring people along that are resistant and perhaps comfortable where they are?  I think the following might offer a few suggestions that could help facilitate the process.

Rebuild trust.  Help everyone feel like they are in this process together.  There is a perception in some circles of Southern Baptist Life that some groups are receiving a larger share of input than others because of their position or connections.  I know from many conversations that small church pastors feel disconnected from the process.  I can sense from the reaction of some state convention presidents that some too feel detached from the process.  I’m sure the initial launch that spoke of bloated bureaucracies (while at times true) was perceived as threatening. There is the perception that the megachurch network has a preconceived agenda about the Cooperative Program and the SBC.   I think that the listening sessions are a key component, but I would dispense members of the task force to board meetings, network gatherings, and other venues to make sure that perception does not become the defined reality.  Use venues from Baptist Press to upstart blogs to communicate the necessity of renewal and resurgence.  Tell us the truth – the whole truth about what we need to say adios to.  If NAMB needs to be restructured or even reinvented or merged let us know.  I, for one, am not threatened by dismounting horses that need to be put out to pasture whatever they may be.

Continually define the purpose.  Take us out of the wilderness into the Promised Land.  Different is not necessarily bad.  Different is not necessarily good.  Define the new beginning in images and symbols that resonate with the SBC.  Make sure the “official reason” for change is the “official reason” for transition.  Some people always believe that there are hidden agendas driving change: power plays, personality clashes, and the good old boy system.  Tell us what the purpose of the Great Commission Task Force is.  Tell us over and over again until we “get it”.  Realize that people integrally involved in the SBC may overreact and feel shortchanged.  Not all such folks should be written off as laggards and malcontents – they might just be struggling through the transition.  Paint a picture of what the resurgence will look like.  Help us walk through this with you.  One suggestion would be to allow a mechanism for every Southern Baptist to communicate their ideas and concerns.  Make certain this mechanism is widely communicated.

Buy into the vision yourself.  One of my complaints in past restructuring is that key proponents of the change are no longer even on the SBC scene.  They are AWOL and disengaged from Southern Baptist life.  I am a loyal Southern Baptist and I want loyal Southern Baptists guiding the ship.  We are not starting from scratch but attempting to bring about a resurgence that will lead to new ventures and an expansion of the Kingdom of God.  I want to know that those guiding us to burn some ships will be with us in the future.  Give us an idea of when and how the plan will be unveiled.  Don’t wait until May to tell us what the changes will be.  Give us plenty of time to digest, pray for, and work through the implications of the proposed new steps.  Tell us what has to immediately change, what will take time, and what is absolutely off the table in terms of change.   Above all, make sure the change is initiated and directed by God.  Be willing to scrap the whole enterprise if God is not in it.   I, for one, will pray for God to lead you and us toward a new beginning.

Many argue do not discount how God is using the contemporary church to impact the age. No doubt! Often, though, the arrogance of those engaged in the contemporary sees revolution when what is at work is disillusion, confusion, and many contusions among the body of Christ. Those who dismiss the church as irrelevant forget their own souls have been forged on the anvil of the very altar they wish to discard. Postmodernism is not the final word. Jesus said he would build the church to a triumphant conclusion. That is why an additional corrective to some strident voices of the contemporary church needs to be offered to all leaders. The church will always be relevant. It is not our task to make the church relevant but to be the church period. We live in a paradox where the ancient words of the Ancient of Days are as living as the day God breathed them forth, and yet those words must be lived out. This is the test of every movement. It is not ultimately about form but function. It is not a pragmatic measurement of what works but of God’s workmanship. The seductive sirens of prepackaged publications offer a new and improved solution for every problem that plagues the programs of our day.
Read More→

This is part of an article originally published January 1922 in the Southwestern Journal of Theology by Dr. L. R. Scarborough entitled, “Poisoning the Fountains of Truth.” It was republished in the most recent Southwestern Journal of Theology, “Baptists and Unity.” You can find part one here, part two here, and part three here. May a voice of our past speak to us today. Below is part four of a four part series reprinting Dr. Scarborough’s essay:

3. Another way by which the fountains of truth can be poisoned is by a cer-
tain form of inter-denominationalism and unionism. Here lies the great error
in much of the inter-denominationalism and unionism that is broadcast in
the world today. This was the crux of the matter in the heart of Southern
Baptists when they refused to enter into the Inter-Church World Move-
ment, because they believed that it involved a compromise of the truth
that would eventually take the heart out of the fountains of our life in
our churches. When a Baptist preacher seeks to carry his church into the
Inter-Church World Movement, and when he brings into his church an
inter-denominationalism and unionism which violates the ordinances and
the authority of the church, he poisons the fountains of life. This has ap-
peared to me to be one of the weaknesses of some of our brethren in the
North, who are very strong on some of the fundamentals, especially those
in theology, but by their practice of inter-denominationalism commit an
egregious heresy in ecclesiology. A compromise on one phase of the truth
of Jesus Christ will work death in the life of our churches. A spread of this
form of heresy among the churches of our Southern Baptist Convention
would soon bring the same destruction to the witness and power and life
of these churches that it has done in other sections of the world.

Read More→

This is part of an article originally published January 1922 in the Southwestern Journal of Theology by Dr. L. R. Scarborough entitled, “Poisoning the Fountains of Truth.” It was republished in the most recent Southwestern Journal of Theology, “Baptists and Unity.” You can find part one here. May a voice of our past speak to us today. Below is part two of a four part series reprinting Dr. Scarborough’s essay:

There are a number of ways by which we can cast the poison of erroneous teaching into the very fountains of truth and life among our people. I mention some of them:

1. By allowing the pastor of the church to assume the control and the management of the functions of a church; for instance, when he licenses young preachers or when he appoints unordained men as deacons of the church and allows them to serve without the church ever having elected them or ordained them, or when he or a committee of the church issues letters to members desiring to remove their relations, or when he himself or through a committee dismisses them from the church fellowship, or commits other acts of maladministration contrary to the Word of God. This is an assumption of authority and partakes of the nature of a self-appointed ecclesiascism and this conduct greatly poisons the life of the church.

Reprinted with permission, Southwestern Journal of Theology

All from SBC Today have arrived in Louisville. Let me say that it is great to see all my friends and renew our fellowship with one another. I have also enjoyed seeing many who I interact with in blogville.

Last night I attended the pastors conference. It seems the theme at this year’s pastors conference is the Great Commission Resurgence. The first one up was JD Greear. I heard JD back at Jacksonville at the pastors conference at FBC. After JD preached this sermon a friend of mine who attended Jacksonville made the comment that JD preached the same sermon as he did in Jacksonville (1 Cor. 9), only that he used a different text (Matt 23) to do so this time. I would have to concur with my friend, same message, different text. The one thing that was repeated and that I still have questions about is what are the secondary and tertiary doctrines that we should not divide over? He did mention tongues, but was not specific on other issues.

Next up to bat was Dr. Brunson. I read one blogger’s criticism that Dr. Brunson was yelling loud. Allow me to disagree, I don’t believe Dr. Brunson was yelling, but being passionate about his text in 1 Peter. His message from 1 Peter reflected upon who we should be, a loving and forgiving community seeking unity in Jesus. There were several points I was convicted over in his sermon especially when he talked about retaliation when someone says something against you. Wise words.

One area I did question was when Dr. Brunson seemed to refer to the Great Commission Resurgence and said how can anyone be against the Great Commission. I hope that is not the mantra this year, that if you are critical of the GCR document then you are against the Great Commission. Let me say that all of us at SBC Today are for the Great Commission (Tim Rogers actually did sign the GCR document). While some of us may question some points of the GCR document, we have not wained in our support of Matthew 28:18-20. Even with this, I appreciate Dr. Brunson’s message and passion for preaching God’s Word.

I did not hear much of Chuck Colson’s sermon, but I whole heartily agree with his assessment that the greatest danger we face is the moral vacuum in the church. In my opinion, if morals are to be considered secondary or tertiary and therefore to be left alone, then we will lose our prophetic voice in a dark land. Yes, we need to be a people that supports, loves, and has great unity with one another, but we cannot forgo the commands of Christ in doing so, for that is also part of the gospel message.

I don’t know if I will post again this week, but I look forward to rest of the convention.

Below is an article by Gary Ledbetter, Editor of the Southern Baptist Texan. It was originally printed in the Southern Baptist Texan and is reprinted here with permission.

In November 2008, messengers to the 10th anniversary of the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention annual meeting passed a resolution that defines “Great Commission Resurgence” pretty well. Perhaps the document can be a complement to the statement proposed for the 2009 Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Louisville.

Many will know already that SBC President Johnny Hunt, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary President Daniel Akin, and others have called for a missionary resurgence as a follow up to the already established Conservative Resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s. The thought being that evangelism and missions have not flourished in the SBC over the past 50 years and this fact indicates a deep problem we should address in some way.

Dr. Akin’s formulation of 10 axioms has become the centerpiece of Johnny Hunt’s presidential agenda. They’ve set up a website and many are speculating on an extensive plan for restructuring the denomination that could grow out of what Hunt hopes will be a groundswell. You’ll find the stories at the bottom of this article.

I believe the SBTC’s resolution is complementary to this emphasis because it has a finer focus. It is more local in its source, was more local in its editorial process, and was adopted by a smaller (compared to the SBC) denominational fellowship. The resolution rose up from the grassroots as an effort to clarify a term that was becoming a buzzword in denominational circles.

Read More→