Highs and Lows of the SBC

June 18, 2010


1. Casting Crowns and Tony Nolan’s testimony on Wednesday night. It was great. What a blessing this was.

2. Spending time with my wife. We had a great time together.

3. Francis Chan’s message. This message really blessed my heart, and it spoke to me strongly. I would hope that every Pastor would listen to this one.

4. Dr. Russell Moore’s message. This message brought tears to my eyes, and it blessed me greatly. I will encourage my people to strongly consider adopting.

5. Seeing friends and meeting new ones. It was really good seeing everyone. I had a blast meeting people, and I had some great conversations with some people.

6. Morris Chapman’s report. He boldly, courageously shared his heart and thoughts about the Great Commission Task Force Report. He nailed it, and he took some slams and heat for it. I reluctantly voted for the GCR report…after they tweaked the CP giving part of it. But, this is not the cure all for what ails the SBC. Our hearts have to be set on fire by the Lord. We must have a sweeping renewal of our spirits by the Holy Spirit to really see a GC resurgence.

7. NAMB report. What a blessing to hear the testimonies of the people, who had gotten saved, and to see them in person on the platform and sharing with us.

8. Meeting people from all over the world. I met people from Ireland, Thailand, Jamaica, Haiti, and other places as we travelled to restaurants. Amazing!


1. The heat and the crowds.

2. People acting like they’d just won the lottery when the GCR report passed by a 70 to 30% vote…after it was tweaked. If it had not been tweaked, then component #3 might have been voted down. But, some of the people I was sitting near acted like the Lord Jesus had just appeared when it passed. One young man leaped up and shouted and took off running just like someone at an old, Tennessee revival meeting. I couldn’t help but laugh at him, and at the attitude of some of the people around me. Wow! I sure do hope this GCR report does everything great and good that these people apparently think it will.

3. Some of the sermons we heard. They were nothing more than topical, philosophical thoughts and feelings of the speaker. Or, they were lectures on stats, and some were nothing more than GCR propaganda. I’d rather hear the Bible taught, and Jesus lifted up.

4. Dr. Tom Rainer’s weak explanation of why the Shack and TD Jakes books were being sold at Lifeway. I used to be able to tell my people that buying something at Lifeway was good. You could trust that their stuff was good and sound. Not anymore. Not when heretical books are allowed to be sold at OUR Lifeway stores. We might as well start selling Joel Osteen’s and Schuler’s books again. Why not? Apparently, making money is the main consideration now.

5. The prices of food and drinks inside the convention center. Ripoff. I would’ve felt better buying them, if the people selling the food and drinks were wearing masks and holding a gun.

6. $11 per time you parked at the convention center. For commentary, see number 5 above.

7. The attitude of a few of the people at the convention. Let’s just say that jerk comes to mind. Also, the arrogant air of some of them. The ones, who strut around like the King and Queen of the land.

8. The rapping and the motion made by the young man, who thought he was being so cute, as he asked the SBC to appreciate Acts 29.

What were some of the highs and lows for you?

Leave a Comment:

All fields with “*” are required

 characters available

Bill Pfister

High… Seeing old friends and making new ones

Low… Johnny Hunt’s sermon when he called those who vote against GCR “infidels” from Joshua, whose carcasses would liter the desert. What a classy move…

Joe Blackmon

Dr. Tom Rainer’s weak explanation of why the Shack and TD Jakes books were being sold at Lifeway.

AFter they decided to carry that book, I wrote them off like a bad debt. Any person who doesn’t see that book for what it is, much less shamefully invite the author to “preach” at their church, is either blind or stupid or both.

Matt Svoboda


What exactly about the “rapping motion” did you not like?

I’m not sure why he thought to rap it, but I appreciated the motion to appreciate a network that so willingly works alongside us to plant gospel-centered churches, despite being treated poorly by many in our SBC.

Mike Bergman

“Dr. Tom Rainer’s weak explanation of why the Shack and TD Jakes books were being sold at Lifeway”

So what was his explanation?


Prophetic sermons by David Platt and Johnny Hunt;
Passage of the GCR — I wasn’t running the ailes, but was definitely thanking God for this forward-thinking move by the SBC
The NAMB report;
Chuck Kelley: “who dat?”

Morris Chapman’s report: he’s got every right to his opinion on a very difficult issue, but missed his opportunity to be the Southern Baptist statesman he is;
Francis Chan’s message: missed last hear but heard how amazing it was. This year’s didn’t make much sense at all. A rather rambling collection of cool thoughts;

Interesting how perspectives differ, isn’t it? I’m with you on the heat, humidity, and prices, though…

Joe Blackmon

I know that question wasn’t directed at me but I’ll bet you a Hardee’s thickburgr and a milkshake that even though he’s not man enough to admit it, the reason they’re sold in the stores is that he is more concerned with money than with the gospel.

Tweets that mention Highs and Lows of the SBC :: SBC Today -- Topsy.com

[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by SBC Today, Andrew Dyer. Andrew Dyer said: I don't think this guy was at the same SBC I was. I could just about flip-flop my bests & worsts (@sbctoday) http://ow.ly/17Nkie […]

Les Puryear


I agree about the Lifeway response. It was weak. It appears Lifeway is putting profit over biblical integrity.

Also, I agree about Acts 29. They are more reformed than they are baptist. Nothing wrong with it but I don’t think SBC dollars need to go to those church plants.



Highs — not reading junk blogs like this one

Lows — reading junk blogs like this one

Darby Livingston

“Also, I agree about Acts 29. They are more reformed than they are baptist. Nothing wrong with it but I don’t think SBC dollars need to go to those church plants.”

So SBC dollars can only be used to start Arminian churches? That’s funny.

I agree that Rainer’s answer was weak, but I think he was caught off guard. However, when one makes himself a target by carrying peddling garbage, he should be ready for the question. I too think it’s all about money.

Stan Stepleton

High – being able to watch nearly all meeting online
Low – not being able to participate in any way


You gotta explain what you didn’t like about the rapping A29 motion. If it’s just that you don’t like A29 fine, but the motion brought some much needed levity and was, indeed, cute.

Gosh, if we can’t even have a sense of humor together, why cooperate?

Rick Patrick

Add me to the list of those who found the rapped motion offensive both in content and in style. I view Acts 29 as an encroaching denomination more than a ministry partner. I know our church would not want our CP dollars used to plant churches with their theology and methodology.

As to the matter of style, my sense of humor is as good as the next guy’s, but I found this display to be the kind of indulgent and attention seeking behavior that will make it a hit on YouTube. I don’t believe it was appropriate for the dignity of the occasion. In fact, it almost mocks the serious and sober discussion of God’s work. I only hope it doesn’t happen every year now or we will have found our new Wiley Drake.

David Worley


I agree. Johnny Hunt’s sermon really did seem to be calling anyone, who didnt vote for the GCR, a bunch of faithless, negative Israelites…the kind that will wonder around in the wilderness for 40 years. I just wish that he would’ve preached Jesus. He’s good at preaching Jesus. I would’ve loved to hear him preach on Jesus.


David Worley


I didnt think the rapping was “cute.” I think that he thought he was being really “cute.” I really didn’t like his motion. I do not want us affirming, nor appreciating, any network that promotes Elder rule, drinking alcohol as ok, and a few other things. Les is right. Acts 29 is more of a Presbyterian organization than a Southern Baptist one…or so it seems to a lot of us out here.

I do not hate Acts 29. I do pray the best for them. But, I dont want the SBC to go that direction. Thus….


David Worley


Dr. Rainer’s explanation was along the lines of him trusting his staff to pick out good stuff, and if they didnt sell anything that someone complained about, then they’d have no books on the shelves at all to sell. But, the Shack and TD Jakes books go beyond minor points of doctrinal differences. They go beyond just not liking someones view on minor theological views. These books are heretical.

Dr. Patterson and Dr. Mohler both said that the Shack was heresy. I concur. Dr. Ronnie Floyd said that it was full of severe theological errors. I concur again.

So, basically that’s the way it went.


David Worley


I’m so glad that you enjoy reading SBC Today. God bless you.


David Worley


We’re not talking about the SBC starting Arminian churches. Maybe you dont know that Les is a five point Calvinist!!! I’m not Arminian, and I would not be for any dollars going to start Arminian churches, either.

So, your point is not well taken.


David Worley

BTW, Ryan, were at the SBC? Did I run into in the hallway somewhere?


David Worley


I enjoy humor as much as anyone…when its really funny. You can ask anyone about me. I love humor. I love to laugh. I did get a little chuckle out of the Dude rapping a motion…but, I was not laughing with him, if you know what I mean.


Les Puryear


One can be Calvinist and not Reformed. Check out my post on this next week.


Darby Livingston

Les (and David),

Thanks for the clarification. I agree with you about there being a difference between being reformed and believing the doctrines of grace. I am uneasy about calling baptists reformed because of the theological baggage. I just don’t think of a29 as being as reformed as presby’s or Christian reformed. I look forward to reading your post, Les, as I do all your posts.

Thomas R

I agree with you on Rainer’s terrible response to the question on why they sell the Shack, and another question on how they determine what books to offer. Knowing he is going to be asked that question, he was incredibly ill-prepared. I can’t believe that he can’t have a 2 minute explanation as to why they offer the Shack, or how they select material. TERRIBLE answer. He seemed put off by the question and the questioner.

Contrast that to how Danny Akin responded to the question about Mark Driscoll. Akin answered it respectfully, and very completely, and I was encouraged by his response that they seek to expose the students to different ministry methods than just those the admin agrees with. Great answer.


Just curious David, are you happy that the GCR passed? If not why?

David Worley


I think Driscoll gets invited to speak at Southeastern due to it being more than just exposing the students to many points of view. I really dont think that he should be a model of how to do church.

Now, if a class on dealing with Muslims wants to invite a Muslim Imam to speak to a class about Islam, then yea. Good. Or, if a class is learning about the evangelical world today, and Driscoll is invited to share about what his church is doing. Then, fine. But, to ask someone to preach in chapel, or to be a part of a conference at the school. No. That is putting your stamp of approval on the man and his message and his methodolgy. I would never want an athiest to be invited to speak at a conference, or in chapel, to speak in an authoritative way to the students….just as I would never want a Mormon, nor an athiest, nor a JW to preach from my pulpit at my church.

Would you? Thus, I didnt think that Dr. Akins answer was a very good one. I looked at it as a way to excuse them before the eyes of the SBC for having Driscoll on the campus to preach. It was a way of sweeping this very controversial thing under the ole rug, so the SBC wouldnt be upset…very upset…at him and Southeastern.


David Worley


IF the GCR gets more money to the mission field, then wonderful.

IF the GCR results in more good, sound, Baptist churches being started across the USA, then wonderful.

IF the GCR helps to get Southern Baptists more focused on evangelism and missions and planting churches, then excellent.

But, Jeremiah, I really cant see this doing just a whole, whole lot. You do realize that the GCR will just be recommended to all the SBC entities, and state conventions, etc? The GCR does not make anyone do anything. It is in all reality asking these groups to implement these things. I also have concerns about it taking away from the CP. I hope it doesnt. I hope it doesnt result in more designated giving. But, I really think it will. So, was I happy that it passed? No, not really. Was I mad that it passed? No, not really. I voted for it after they changed the wording around on CP giving and Great Commission Giving. I voted for it…hoping that it might lead to some good changes…as in getting more CP dollars to the mission field and starting good, sound, Baptist churches. I sincerely hope it will encourage this. I really do.

I guess time will tell if it really did any good, or not.




Lots of good thoughts.

I would add to the good stuff, the Baptist 21 luncheon. Over 1700 people attended.

Also, the 9 marks meeting, especially the second night, was excellent.

I found something good in every sermon I heard and something weak or something I disagreed with, as well. For example, Andy Stanley’s sermon was incredibly weak on any scriptural basis. But the questions he asked about being “better” vs. “bigger” is a really good question. And, also, the issue of being willing to confront changes that need to be made in an organization is a real world question. The guys I was with really panned the sermon. I can see why. There was no scripture at all in it, except to prove a point from the corporate world. The same can be said of Morris’ sermon, however.

But I think it is fine for us to have different types of presentations. Some of them will hit us, and some will not. Some will be expository and others will not be. For me, that’s o.k.

I agree with you about the task force report. I believe it was good to adopt it. As one member of the task force told me the next day, he said that the task force had lots of discussions about #3, and eventually one member who had been opposed to “Great Commission Giving” finally said, “You know, I have concluded that it would be better for us to stop lecturing churches on how they give to Southern Baptist work, and to start celebrating what churches do give and their level of participation, whatever it is.” I believe that is a wise statement.

I could say a lot about what I think the convention and the churches in it need to consider. For example, the statement was made that we are reaching fewer and fewer teenagers. But the talk and the task force report actually encourages churches and Christians to become more involved in home schooling and Christian schooling. I understand the reasons for that desire, but there is a disconnect between that and a desire to reach more kids. My church, for example, has lots of Christian and home school families. When the youth pastor asks the home school kids in particular about their non-Christian friends – they don’t have any. Their lives are so organized around family and church, the only non-Christians they may really know are extended family from other places.

Again, I understand the educational issues that cause us to push home school and Christian school. But one has to realize if we go down that path, there has to be a thought through strategy for reaching kids and families that aren’t doing that. I actually fear that we are becoming in grown and not part of the larger culture.

The independent Baptist movement invested heavily in Christian schools. It’s o.k. to do that. But you had better keep your kids in your church or you will lose substantial influence in one generation. That is what has happened, in my opinion, to independent Baptists.

At any rate, I could go on. I agree that the task force report is not the cure of all ills. But at least it has the chance of encouraging all types of churches in the convention.




I was thinking about the interest in Christian education.
I’m wondering if it is possible for Southern Baptist Churches to all start their own schools? If a family belongs and contributes to the Church, the tuition charged could be a bit less than for children whose families do not belong or do not contribute to the offerings regularly.

Our Family has educated its children in parochial schools for generations. Goodness, money was problem, yes. My grandmother who came from Canada, worked at the convent scrubbing clothes and ironing in order to enable my father and his sisters to attend school. My father said that her fingers used to crack and bleed from all the detergents and bleaches. (sad memory for him)

The thing is, Louis, people will do that which is most important to them. And if the Christian education of their children is a priority, they will find a way to give that opportunity to their children. For us, it was ‘the right thing to do’. Affordable? No way. Did we do it? We did. I guess people need to weigh their priorities and pray about it. Christian formation starts at birth and lasts a life time. A good Christian education, consistent with Church and home religious training, can make a big difference for a child.

Thomas R

David – I really don’t know the extent to which SEBTS gives Driscoll a platform to speak or share his views on ministry. I don’t care one way or the other if they invite him or not, but I was just commenting on the respectful way Akin gave the answer. We might not like his answer, but I think it was a complete, honest answer, unlike Rainer’s terrible answers to the questions on the Shack and how books are chosen by Lifeway.


Re: Akin and Driscoll – While I 100% disagree with David’s view on the issue, his perception is 100% correct. Akin has Driscoll speak at SEBTS because he believes, correctly in my view, that Driscoll’s church is a great model for SBC churches. Heck, his church is a model for many SBC planters, me included. If Akin gave the impression that he was just having Driscoll there as “another viewpoint” that is a bit disingenuous. The leadership at SEBTS thinks their graduates can learn a lot from a29, and I honestly don’t see how we could argue any other way – just look at SEBTS track record the last few years.

I stumbled on this blog doing some reading on the GCR issue. I’m an SBC church planter that also swims in the a29 stream. I’m a baptist because Scripture directs me that way, and I’m glad to be in the SBC.

I’m pretty surprised about the Driscoll/a29 stuff I see on here. What a divide between this and the other SBC circles I run in. If this is what other crowds commonly think we are a little bit divided, aren’t we. Not sure what the future holds with that. I know A LOT of 20s and 30s SBC planters and we all love a29, even if we aren’t dually aligned (which I bet half of us are).

Mars Hill is pretty much a baptist church, and Vintage Church is pretty much a book on baptist ecclesiology. Driscoll goes to a baptist seminary. I’m sure the debate over him has been hashed over a million times, so really I just wanted to express my surprise. I’m not gonna touch the alcohol thing, but aren’t lots of SBC churches elder-led? ALL the planters I know are planning on elder-led churches, even non-reformed leaning ones. Also to address that from above, I certainly don’t consider myself “reformed” but that is a loaded word. I’d rather say I’m a calvinistic-leaning baptist. I’ll be interested to see Les’s post. I know a29 says they are “reformed” but I really think that is a semantics issue with them, they are MUCH more like calvinistic baptist than “reformed.” Sometimes we get hung up too much on words.

I did want to add this. While of course I support the GCR, I do think from a denominational standpoint the whole thing was not handled well. These are important changes, but the way it was introduced it became an issue where if it had not passed it would quite literally have killed the SBC (not immediately, but slowly), and that is very foolish. I think that’s why the rhetoric became so brash about it from the supporters. The task force put themselves in a position where the GCR had to pass, and they knew it. The younger guys like myself would have taken a negative vote as a very bad sign, due to all the grandstanding leading up to it. Essentially we (younger planters/leaders) were led to believe if the GCR doesn’t pass, the SBC is a dead denomination and we should all go a29-only. That’s not a good way for these needed changes to be handled.

Dave Miller

I thought that David Platt’s message was a highlight.



Great thoughts. Baptists have traditionally been big public school supporters, but as the public schools continue in the direction they have gone, many are looking for other options. I totally support that.

What I was commenting on was the disconnect between not having many teenage baptisms and the push for home schooling.

Catholics, in my opinion, are less likely to withdraw from the culture than independent and other Baptist groups.

Dave Miller, Platt’s message was the best one I heard. You should have heard the 9 Marks discussion about it with Dever and Mohler.

Nate, great to see you on the discussion. I helped plant a church 18 years ago. We have elders and it is great. The church is completely de-politicized. Not one fight in 18 years. Baptist churches are elder led. The pastor is the elder in most models. But the people can fire the elder? We have a plurality of elders, the pastor and 8 others. It works very well. First Jacksonville had a plurality of elders under Lindsay and Vines, but they did not have the title of elder.

I have seen some people argue that the church staff act as the elders. I cannot see that in any way.

The great thing about the SBC is that each church is autonomous. So different churches will do things differently.

I believe that is a strength, not a weakness.

David Worley

Another low was the statement about “personnel discussions” that took place in the GCR meetings that needed to be kept quiet for 15 years. That’s right. That’s what the man said about why the GCR meetings neede to be kept quiet and secretive. What in the world was that all about? Why would they be discussing personnel issues?
That was not their job. And, what were these discussions about? Who gets to be the next Pres. of whatever? Who needs to be the next Exec. Dir. of whatever? What in the world did that statement mean? I guess…unless a journalist with an inside source leaks the info….I’ll be 63 years old before I’ll be able to have that question answered. But, I thought that was a little bizarre and troublesome. I mean, were they talking about getting someone fired, who’s in the way of some agenda? Were they talking about getting someone on..in a place of leadership? Or, what? And, that’s the problem with keeping it quiet and secretive, aint it? There will now be speculation and skepticism in the future over that statement… especially if some of the people start getting positions in SBC leadership places…or if their good buddies get placed in places of authority in the SBC. Why have all the SBC wondering and speculating and being skeptical and such?

I really see the statement about personnel issues were discussed that people dont need to hear, and the “keep it quiet for 15 years” thing to cause a lot of trouble in the future. Or, it could.




You wrote this:
“Catholics, in my opinion, are less likely to withdraw from the culture than independent and other Baptist groups.”

I was reminded of that this morning. The word ‘mass’ means ‘you are sent forth . . . . to love and serve the Lord’.
We get ‘sent’ out of Church into the maelstrom that is today’s broken world, warts and all, to bring honor to Our Lord in the service of those whom He places in our paths. I smile when I think about how quickly the Good Lord manages to find ways for us to be of use. :)

David Campbell


You guys should run out of church with squirt guns filled with holy water and baptize everyone so they can goto heaven.


Tim Rogers

Brother Nate,

First, allow me to say that I appreciate your honesty. It is refreshing in a time when people blog and do so just to have a “gotcha” statement.

Second, your position as a Baptist is also refreshing and I would like to point something out to you. The Acts 29 position is not consistent with a baptist position. They have a take it or leave it mentality when it comes to baptism. Take a look at their documents and you will see it.

Third, your position concerning the younger pastors leaving the SBC all together is not well received. Please understand why I say this. Dr. JD Greerar was in an Independent Baptist church when he came to Campbell University. Southern Baptist supplemented his education at Campbell and he saw where it was a great position of placing funds together in order to accomplish more. However, Brother JD had no investment in the education he was receiving. He went from there to SEBTS on another supplementation of educational funds. There he received, not only a supplement from CP, but also the Keesee Fund which is a fund set up by SB from Virginia allocated to assist in the education of SB ministers. Brother JD decides that God has called him to missions and he once again receives the benefit of the CP through his training and pay for his missions work. Brother JD openly admits that he received his education and ministry involvement from the goodness of SB giving to the CP. What does he do as a result? He leads the SB church he is called to, to consistently lower their CP giving. Brother Nate, I do not know what you lead your church plant to give to the CP, but I presume it isn’t much as you are committed to give 10%, partially (1%) to the Acts 29 network and partially (9%) to plant an Acts 29 church. Thus, we have some issues that we have before us. We are threatened by those giving in this matter that they will leave the convention if the GCR did not go the way they believe it should. Well, let me ask a question, that I do not believe the leaders concerned themselves. What would happen if the churches giving to the CP stopped giving the way that the convention is accustomed?


Chris Johnson

Brother Vol,

1. I did enjoy the worship time with Casting Crowns. There lyrics are well thought out with solid doctrine.
2. I enjoyed meeting most of the SBCToday group. There was a lot said….and,they were all fairly tall except for a couple of folks (even the SBCimpact guys seemed tall to me).
3. Chapman’s thoughts were good. The only thing was,…he used the wrong metaphors, ….which actually sank his theme. The SBC is not the Titanic, but she has had the tendency to move away from the philosophical moorings of the cooperative program. Chapman rang that bell,..but used the wrong metaphors.
4. Spending time with the seminary representatives and GuideStone was productive. We are working with these resources to continue to extend specific education and support to our overseers as they aspire within congregation, so as not to have them uproot from their families, churches and cities. Those were productive conversations.
5. My conversations with NAMB and the IMB were very productive as well. They will be very helpful with the three church plants we are working in currently.
6. David Platt, Matt Chandler, Al Mohler, Russell Moore and the Lady that call for the point of order on floor… did a very good job this year. I thought our President did an excellent job of moderating as well.

1. The rapper was silly; and selfish.
2. The sense of opulence; the SBC is such a rich and lavish convention
3. The Pastor’s conference being geared as a GCRTF cheerleading venue.
4. LifeWay triage of materials is always an issue. I did buy some things from them though that will be helpful in my study.
5. Tony Nolan’s performance and entrapment kinda reminded me of reading articles on Charles Finney and his activities, which was almost enough to make me walk out….but I stayed to join with Casting Crowns in praise with their last song, which was excellent and solid.
6. I wasn’t sure if Chan was about to have a breakdown or if he was just sad because he has been given this new found fame. It did seem he wanted a return to Christ,…so he ended positively.


Dave Miller

Chris, we probably talked about this – but I thought the same thing. It seemed like Chan was working out some emotional issues or something. I thought it was strange – kept wondering what was going on.

I am a little disturbed that “stream-of-consciousness” talks seem to be replacing expositional preaching.

David Worley

I appreciated Francis Chan’s call to Pastors to fall in love with Jesus again…afresh and anew. To get back to the main thing, which is our relationship with the Lord; rather than to be professional Pastors.

I enjoyed Tony Nolan’s testimony. I wasnt crazy about his invitation.

Dave, I agree with you about the preaching this year. There was waaaaay too much topical, philosophical thoughts and statistics type sermons. I want to hear the Bible preached and Jesus uplifted. I’m really not interested in hearing sermons about a person’s philosophy of ministry, or 5 or 6 Steps to Church Growth, or a promotion of an agenda(GCR) type stuff. I want to hear the Bible. I want to hear about Jesus.

Nate, in the circle of friends that you run with, you might be hearing a lot of younger preachers talking about leaving the SBC. But, I also know a lot of younger preachers, and I dont hear them talking that way. So, maybe its the people that you’re hanging with.




Nowhere in my note did I say anything about leaving the SBC nor have I heard that talk. What I was trying to make a point about was the general tone in which the GCR was presented by its supporters. This is obviously just my perception, but by and large the GCR was presented as “Hey younger people, we’re going to do this to show that we’re serious about the Gospel and church planting, and if it gets voted down that is a very bad sign for the SBC.” And I’m saying that was a foolish approach, resulting in a very real must-win situation for the GCRTF and thus all the grandstanding leading up to the vote and the overboard rhetoric. It should never have been presented like that; the discussion wasn’t fair. And I’m saying that even though I think it was a good thing.

joe white

What? I get home from Disney and find no mention of my soon to be B.H. Carroll length beard in the SBC Today highlights? LOL

My list of highs…

1) The overwhelming pasage of the GCRTF Report.
2) The NAMB report was great.
3) Hunt’s and Platt’s sermons were prophetic.
4) The free t-shirt and books (thank you 9 Marks and B21)
5) Good fellowship.

My list of lows…

1) Walking 1.3 miles from my hotel room which was supposedly “right beside” the convention center.
2) Paying almost $10 for a $3 burger and $3 for a 75 cent bottle of water.
3) Persevering through Morris Chapman’s “report” and bewilderment at “What’s wrong with the CP?”
4) Getting a bag of Salt and Vinegar chips with my B21 lunch (who comes up with such a thing?).
5) Standing in line everyday to register for an IPad and not winning.

Chris Johnson

Brother Vol,

I did enjoy listening to Tony’s testimony as well. He’s easy to listen to and kinda funny as well.


Robert I Masters

On the Shack response from Tom Rainer,

The answer he gave is the pre-packaged answer that he made for everyone at Lifeway corporation.

He gave that exact same script to all the lifeway emmployees here in Nashville and they in turn parrot it to others. Change them on the C.S.Lewis analogy and they lose it.

John Kramp is an elder at my Church and he used the exact same script when I asked him personally.
Does not the Bible hold the elders responsible for correct doctrine and would this not include the doctrine(or heresy) promoted by a corporation that an elder is an executive officer of that corporation.

Tom Rainer attends Brentwood Baptist and they have the Shack displayed first thing as you walk into the Lifeway bookstore.

Lifeway will only listen to the message of the bottomline….

I have been trying to come up with creative ways to get the message across to Lifeway suits

here are some ideas……some serious others not real!

1.Tell the DebbieKaufman crowd that “the Shack” is really Ergun Caners repentance statement in print then they will trash Lifeway instead of Liberty.

2.Rent a helicopter and repeal off the Lifeway building with a “Shack is heresy” banner.

3. set up a burning of the Shack in front of the Lifeway building. good for media publicity.

4.set-up a webpage that encourages all Christians but especially SBCers to boycott Lifeway.

Seriously I would like to know if anyone would be interested in this option….would you boycott them. Adrian Rogers gave a good description for the rationally of boycotts ….I think it could work well.Let me know what you think please

David Worley


1. lol…classic…lol

2. I might get hurt. Mabye Wiley Drake would do it? :)

3. I’d have to think on that one. lol

4. Wiley Drake would do this one! :)

I’m really not into boycotts anymore. But, I’m really, really disappointed that our Lifeway would sell the Shack and TD Jakes books.

David Worley

Another HIGH:

From what I understand, 50 something people made professions of faith Wed. night after Tony Nolan shared his testimony. Hallelujah! I wasnt crazy about the way he gave the invitation, but 50 people responding to the call of the Gospel….great!

Joe T

I have enjoyed stumbling on to this site.

The reason the shack is for sale is that some Baptists don’t have a problem with what they find in the book. Not as they accept the things in it as fact but they see through the imagery and understand it is trying to make a point.

I view it as a dangerous book for immature believers. I wouldn’t recommend it but I don’t have a problem with it being sold.

As for TD Jakes I haven’t read his stuff. I have heard him preach a couple times. Once he was dead on and his message was quite powerful. What is the issue with his books?

David Worley


A book about heresy is always dangerous and bad. It should absolutely not be sold, just as books by Mormons and JW’s and the Armstrongs should not be sold. Lifeway should be about selling good, sound material that will help bring lost people to Christ, and that will help Christians grow in their faith.

TD Jakes belongs to a group that does not believe in the Trinity. That’s huge…not to mention the other things that arent so good.

Joe, did you know that Lifeway does not sell books by Joel Osteen? Benny Hinn? Kenneth Copeland? and some others in the that crowd? I’m glad they dont. They shouldnt sell them, no matter how many books would sell. So, why are they selling the Shack and TD Jakes stuff?

Robert I Masters


When was the last time you went into a bar and had a alcoholic drink? drink?

It would appear to me that you boycott some things all the time.

The question in my mind is do we love the truth more than we love our “christian Resources”.

P.S I hear my Presbyterian brothers like R.C.Sproul do not sell this trash.so really its evidence of the weakness of Baptist doctrine.

Robert I Masters

Joe T,

Funny how your arguments sound a lot like points that Louis has made in the past.

Even the cadence is the same

nice politics!!!!!

cb scott

“A good Christian education, consistent with Church and home religious training, can make a big difference for a child.”

Yeah Ls,

It made a “big difference” in many of your Priests and the children they later “taught.”

Joe Blackmon

Now, CB, you know the Catholic church has a list. If the SBC would just make a list, they oculd be pedophile free just like the Catholics are.

Joe T


I question if you can find any book other than the Bible which is without theological errors. I wouldn’t call the shack heretical but I would say that it was not an accurate portrayal of God if taken directly. It isn’t a book I would care for and wouldn’t encourage others to read however I do think it sits on the edge of acceptable and not acceptable so I give it a pass.

As for TD Jakes are his books about his disbelief in the trinity? If not I think those should get a pass.

Yes, I was aware that lifeway doesn’t sell Joel Osteen and wouldn’t think they would sell Benny Hinn. Doesn’t that confirm that they aren’t just out for $$$. How many books have those two sold. A bunch.

P.S. I hate writing this as it makes me feel like a liberal.

P.S.S. Three cheers for USA beating Algeria in the World cup! USA! USA! USA!

Robert I Masters

Joe T,
I think of 1000s of books that dont have heresies in them

the Shack is Damnable literature.

funny how I cant find a lot of books on the Puritans but Lifeway continues to sell this garbage.

The Christian community must condemn these apostate leaders at Lifeway.

David Worley


I’m not saying that we should never have books that we dont agree with, and I’m not saying that any books are error free. But, the Shack goes beyond theological error. It’s full of heresy. It’s goes way beyond the line of just errors, or short sightedness in doctrine, or disagreeing on minor points of theology. It absolutely should not be sold at Lifeway, and I’m disappointed that it is.

Joe Tuttle

Thanks for sharing. I will come back and visit often and look forward to reading more.

Ron Hale

Highs – the overall tone and tenor of the meeting. I can remember the larger Convention meetings back in the 80’s (Dallas with 50,000 messengers) and I still feel the chill of anger in the air.

The Orlando meeting revealed some major differences … but for the most part, there was a good spirit.

cb scott

Dallas was a war of young men.

Orlando was a dividing of the spoils by old men.

Ron Hale


I don’t want to “read into” your comments; care to explain? Blessings!

Paul Kullman

Yes, I too would like to hear your thoughts on #57. Never thought the “good fight” (cf. 2 Tim. 4:7) was generational only. The “spoils” should only be compared in light of salvation decisions, not size of buildings/seminaries/books written, etc. The same battles fought in A.D. 64 continue today and will until Jesus comes back. Just curious as I was unable to attend Orlando.

stephen fox

SBC Plodder blog has good insight and comment line on the Ken Ezell Appointment to the NAMB.
I hope some of you will google it up and follow the comment line there.
Wondering what Louis in particular is thinking about the matter and the new participation policies at SBC voices

Leave a Comment:

All fields with “*” are required

 characters available