This article will be continuously updated as more information becomes available.
Readers, yes, I am aware of, and familiar with – on a variety of levels – the situation regarding G3 Ministries leadership / Pray’s Mill Baptist Church elders anonymously accusing Pastor Tom Buck of plagiarism in his sermons, which became public Monday, August 17.
If you have no idea what I’m talking about and have never heard of G3 Ministries or Pastor Tom Buck, you may be excused and go about your life blessedly happy and unbothered by what follows. I am primarily writing this a) for those who have attended G3 events, have used G3’s resources or are familiar with Tom, and b) because I have participated in G3 events, linked to their resources, and recommended them to you, and because Tom is a personal friend and dear brother in Christ whom I’ve mentioned here and linked to from time to time.
The Scandal
The scandal itself is quite detailed and involved. This is a very brief, very general synopsis of the situation (adapted from an upcoming episode of A Word Fitly Spoken):
On August 17, a scandal broke involving G3 Ministries and its founding church, Pray’s Mill Baptist Church (PMBC) of Douglasville, Georgia. In March 2026, members of G3 leadership including, it was later revealed, the four elders of PMBC, Scott Aniol, Matt Sikes, Jon Norton, and Dylan Joyner, anonymously and underhandedly sent (and/or had knowledge of the sending of) largely baseless and exaggerated accusations of sermon plagiarism to the leadership of Pastor Tom Buckโs church, First Baptist Church of Lindale, Texas.
Tomโs church fully investigated the accusations, and they and Tom resolved the situation in a biblical way. But the outcome wasn’t satisfactory for these anonymous (at the time) accusers. When the situation wasnโt handled to their liking, they sent the accusations to former G3 conference speakers and other individuals and ministries outside of First Baptist, Lindale, urging them to look into the matter and make it public, all with the goal of ruining Tomโs ministry.
After these actions were exposed, three of the four elders were required by the deacons of PMBC to resign, and one (Dylan Joyner) voluntarily resigned. The elders wrote a letter of repentance from G3 Ministries to Tom and his church and publicized it on social media. There is credible circumstantial evidence that this letter was not genuine repentance.
G3 has now shut down the operation of its church network (where you can search for a G3-endorsed church), deleted its YouTube channel, and deactivated all of its social media accounts and the G3 website, which included the information and registration page for the G3 National Conference, scheduled for May of 2027.
There has been no apology or statement from G3 Ministries or the current leadership of Prays Mill Baptist Church to the public or G3’s thousands of followers and supporters.
Questions and Details Pertaining to the Scandal Itself
If you have questions or you’d like further details related to the scandal itself, I commend the following resources to you (and I would recommend that you read or watch them in the order in which they’re listed):
Questions Pertaining to the Fallout of the Scandal and the Shut Down of G3 Ministries
Because neither G3 nor the current leadership of PMBC have issued any sort of statement communicating with G3’s followers and participants, many things are unclear in the wake of the scandal.
Below are some questions I’ve been asked and information I have been provided by my followers, along with some educated guesses on my part. I am not in contact with anyone at G3 or PMBC and have no “behind the scenes” knowledge of what is actually going on.
(For anyone from G3 who might be reading this and is tempted to take me or any of your other followers to task for guessing, speculating, and surmising, don’t. If you want people to know what’s actually going on, do what you should have already done and issue a public statement explaining these things. You have no one to blame for the speculation but yourselves and the way you’ve poorly and unbiblically handled this situation.)
The National Conference
It has not been made clear, officially, whether or not the National Conference has been canceled or will still take place in May 2027 (though this seems unlikely). Both the G3 website and the conference site have been shut down.
It is also unclear as to how those who had already registered for the conference will receive or may request a refund.
I did receive a comment from one follower who said she had been sent an email from G3 saying that the conference has been canceled and that she would receive a refund. While I have no reason to doubt her, no one else has confirmed that such an email was sent out, nor have I been able to see or obtain a copy of this email.
Leadership Page at PMBC Still Lists Resigned Elders
As of September 1, the “Our Leaders” page of the PMBC website still lists all four elders who resigned as “Our Pastors”.
The situation with G3 has happened very fast and very chaotically, and I’m guessing that, in all the hullabaloo, someone simply hasn’t gotten the chance to update the website yet. It’s also possible that one of the elders who resigned was the webmaster and has the password, and the current PMBC leader who’s been tasked with updating the website has not yet been able to obtain the necessary information from that resigned elder to gain access to the website.
Again, I would urge patience. PMBC is understandably reeling after the blow they’ve been dealt, and in addition to the spiritual and emotional pain they’re trying to work their way through, they have to deal with the practical and mechanical aspects of employment termination paperwork for these four elders, updating the website, etc.
I would encourage you not to bother them right now, or in the near future, with questions about when the website will be updated. We know all four of the elders have resigned. That’s sufficient. They’ll get to the website when they get to it.
The G3 Church Network
The G3 Church Network was the first sector of G3 to be shut down. Member churches were sent the following email:
The link went to a post on G3’s (now deleted) X page, presumably the post sharing the letter of repentance sent to Tom Buck and First Baptist Church, Lindale. This email is the only communication I’m aware of from G3 since the scandal that offers an apology to anyone besides Tom and FBCL.
Living Heritage Homeschool Curriculum
A number of homeschoolers have contacted me with questions about the Living Heritage homeschool curriculum, created by Becky Aniol, wife of Scott Aniol, G3 president and now former PMBC elder.
As you might know, there was considerable overlap between G3 and Living Heritage (LH) in practice, even if not on paper. G3 promoted LH. Becky was frequently a breakout speaker on homeschooling at G3 events. I’ve been told there was some degree of overlap between LH’s digital platforms and G3’s digital platforms. And, as one LH homeschool mom told me:
“You mentioned in your post* that Scott might read and approve of any curriculum Becky writes, which I am sure is true, but he is far more involved than that. He oversees the Living Heritage Mighty Network group [communication app]. A number of his books are used in the curriculum. He and Becky co-host a podcast on homeschooling.
Additionally, Living Heritage was started as part of G3 by the leadership families of PMBC and G3. The team listed on the LH site consists of Becky Aniol and the wives of two other PMBC elders.
LH may be separate from G3/PMBC on paper, but in practice it is not. All three leadership teams consist of the same families.”
*I had previously mentioned this in an earlier edition of this article, but removed this statement when another LH homeschool mom informed me that LH is less a curriculum and more a list of books and reading plan. Because of this, I felt my statement was inaccurate and potentially confusing. I have only ever seen or heard of LH referred to as a “curriculum,” so I assumed that’s what it was.
Due to all of this overlap, the LH community understandably wants to know if LH is also shutting down, and, if not, how the delivery of their materials will be affected by the technology overlap.
I’ve never used or even looked at the LH curriculum, so my knowledge of it and the LH digital platforms are limited to what I’ve been told by my followers in the LH community.
I have been told that neither the admins of the LH Facebook group, nor the admins of the Mighty Network app/portal have openly made any sort of statement or given any sort of explanation to their communities regarding if, or how, the overlap (technological or otherwise) between G3 and LH will affect the LH community and the access to LH curricula and materials.
I’ve been told that even questions unrelated to the scandal itself, such as how LH’s digital platforms might be affected by the shut down of the G3 website, have been removed from the Facebook group by admins (though admins did answer privately), and that admins have ignored similar questions about LH’s continued operation in the Mighty Network app.
As one LH user who contacted me pointed out, these are paying customers – some who have spent hundreds of dollars on LH curricula and materials – and, thus far, no one at LH has had the common courtesy (or even the financial motivation to keep them as customers, it would seem) to tell them what’s going on and alleviate their concerns.
Apparently, some LH users have been told privately by admins that, because the G3+ app and G3 Press are being taken over by another, as yet unnamed, person or ministry (more on this below), the delivery of LH curricula and materials will continue seamlessly.
Eventually, Becky did make this information available to Mighty Network app users:
(Screenshot courtesy of a member of the LH Mighty Network app.)
The more common question I’ve been asked is, considering everything that’s happened, should we continue to support Scott Aniol and the vestige of G3 LH represents by continuing to use LH?
As much as I am inclined to simply tell you no, I can’t do that. Because (though heavily connected to G3) LH is a separate entity, this is an issue of Christian liberty and conscience. You must work through the decision-making process wisely, biblically, and prayerfully to arrive at the most godly decision possible for your individual family.
Here is the answer I’ve sent to followers asking if they should continue to use LH:
Hi _____,
It’s a tough spot they’ve put you in, isn’t it? Their [the elders’] sin forces you to make a difficult and confusing decision. I would take that into consideration.
I would also take into consideration…
that they’ve not addressed the scandal with their homeschooling community. And they should.
You and others had questions, and the admins hid or ignored them. Is this a Christian way to handle things, or is complete transparency, openness, and a posture of repentance the Christian way to handle things?
Make sure you read the latter part of [the article linked above] Exclusive: G3 Promised โCooperative, Not Competitive.โ The Anonymous Targeting Continued dealing with the theology of PMBC. Scott was heavily involved in shaping that theology. Becky is married to Scott, and is or was a member of PMBC. She has absorbed, and will continue to absorb that theology. Their theology will come out in any content they have created, or may decide to create for LH in the future.
Scott just lost his job, and he and Becky may be relying on LH as a source of income.
Will your conscience allow you to continue to support them financially?
There are plenty of other good curricula available out there that don’t carry this kind of baggage with them.
I would take all of these things into prayerful consideration, discuss them at length with your husband, and possibly get some counsel from your pastor or a trusted, older “Titus 2” woman or couple at your church. Then, leave the decision up to your husband and submit to his leadership.
I’m sorry the ripple effects of this grievous sin have reached your shore.โค๏ธ
Another Ministry Acquiring the G3+ App and G3 Press
The only information I have about another ministry acquiring G3 Press is:
Per what some have been told when inquiring about the Living Heritage homeschool curriculum (see above), the same (as yet unnamed) ministry is acquiring both the G3+ app and G3 Press, the publishing arm of G3.
Dave Jenkins and Darrell Harrison have publicly stated that they have requested that G3 return to them the rights to their works published through G3 Press. My guess is that other authors published through G3 Press have done the same.
I surmise (see below) that books and materials heretofore published by G3 Press will remain available through the G3+ app.
On Thursday, August 27, subscribers to the G3+ app were sent this email:
Many thanks to one of my followers, who is a G3+ subscriber, for providing the above screenshot.
There’s been much speculation as to which ministry will be acquiring the G3+ app and G3 Press. Again, I have no insider information on this from G3 or any “Ministry X” which might be acquiring it. Your guess is as good as mine. All I can say is that I would be very concerned if any or all of the four elders suddenly turned themselves into a “ministry,” or used an existing ministry they already owned to acquire these two platforms. These men are disqualified and do not need to be running any sort of ministry right now.
David Morrill, author of two of the Protestia articles linked above, shared some additional concerns here (or read the screenshots below):
Will “Ministry X” purchase the app and publishing platform, completely gut them, rebrand everything, and use these platforms for its own purposes and publications? I don’t think so because of what LH users have been told and what the email above says.
LH users have been told that the acquisition of these two platforms will not change LH’s connection to them, meaning LH users will still be able to access the same LH or G3 materials through the app that they previously accessed through G3+ or the G3 website. This means that at least some LH and/or G3 books and materials will remain at the app and in publication after the acquisition.
Additionally, the wording in the email could reasonably give us pause. The softer and more ambiguous “winding down” rather than the clearer and more final sounding “ending,” “closing,” or “shutting down”. The equally ambiguous “this work continues”. What or whose work will continue? The continuing writing, speaking, and creating work of one or more of the four elders? G3’s work? The new work of the acquiring ministry? Christian ministry in general?
I don’t have the answers to these questions. We will have to wait and see.
If you’re an author with G3 Press, you may want to consider doing what Darrell and Dave did and request the rights to your publications back. I don’t know all the ins and outs and legalities of whether or not this is a good idea for any particular individual, I’m just saying it’s worth considering.
If you subscribe to the G3+ app, and you’re unsure whether or not to cancel your subscription, I think the wisest course of action would be to wait a week or two to find out if the transition has been made, who is acquiring the app, and what, if any, involvement any of the four elders will continue to have with the app. Then make your decision once you’re informed.
At the time I’m posting this, because no statement has been issued by G3 or the current leadership of PMBC, it is unknown what, if any, plans anyone who’s still in some sort of leadership at G3 has for the future of the ministry. But with the public outcry against their ungodly actions and the aforementioned extent to which they have already shut down, it is unlikely there is any sort of future for G3. From all appearances, they would not be able to survive this tragic implosion even if they wanted to.
Nor should they.
From all appearances, G3 would not be able to survive this tragic implosion even if they wanted to. Nor should they.
As Phil Johnson said at the end of his article (above), “…frankly, it is time for G3 to dissolve and go away.” Permanently. Nobody from the outside needs to come in, take the helm of G3 Ministries, and try to raise and repair the Titanic. G3 does not need to lie fallow for a few years, then rebrand and make an embarrassing attempt at a comeback. G3 is dead, and no one ought to try to resurrect it.
G3 is dead, and no one ought to try to resurrect it.
It was just a little over a year ago that the very similar Josh Buice (then president of G3 and pastor of PMBC) scandal broke. Accusations, allegations, and criticism leveled from far away, under the shadows of anonymity, against faithful, doctrinally sound pastors and theologians… It’s as if today’s third grader copied the answers on his math test from a kid who flunked last year. The PMBC elders took a page out of Josh Buice’s book in the worst way possible. What would possess any Christian to do such a thing, and how in the world did Josh or the PMBC “gang of four” ever think they would go undiscovered forever? We may never know the true reasons in either of these cases.
It’s as if today’s third grader copied the answers on his math test from a kid who flunked last year. The PMBC elders took a page out of Josh Buice’s book in the worst way possible.
Obviously, I’m saddened and appalled by the despicable and ungodly acts committed by G3’s leadership/PMBC’s elders, and disappointed that I can no longer recommend G3 as helpful resource to you.
I’m righteously angry that these cowardly men disrupted the peace and unity of a good church and attempted to sabotage the stellar ministry and reputation of a faithful and discerning shepherd, a courageous Christian statesman, and my beloved brother in Christ, Tom.
I’m incredulous that God gave these four men the perfect example of how not to handle disagreements with others – gift wrapped with a bow on top, and placed right in their very hands only a year prior – and for inexplicable and unfathomable reasons and motives, they went right ahead and did almost the exact same thing anyway.
I’m frustrated, exasperated, and offended that G3 has so rudely jilted all of us who loved, recommended, and supported them with our time, energy, influence, and, collectively, hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years, without so much as a “Dear John” letter. We’ve been ghosted, y’all.
I’m frustrated, exasperated, and offended that G3 has so rudely jilted all of us who loved, recommended, and supported them, without so much as a “Dear John” letter. We’ve been ghosted, y’all.
Where do we go from here as followers of and participants in G3’s ministry events and resources?
Don’t support G3. In any way. Do not give them one more word of support, one more second of your time, one more cent of your money.
If you’ve already registered for the 2027 national conference, cancel your reservations.
Don’t order any more G3 books or materials.
If it turns out that one or more of the elders are “Ministry X” that is acquiring G3+, cancel your subscription.
Because Scott Aniol plays a major part, practically and theologically, in Living Heritage, you may wish to consider whether or not to continue using the LH curriculum.
And whatever you do, don’t feel sorry for or defend these seemingly unrepentant men. Supporting G3, or the elders responsible for this sin, in any way, is doing them a disservice. People who do not feel the pain of the consequences of sin do not repent. Paradoxically, if you want to help these men, stop supporting G3.
People who do not feel the pain of the consequences of sin do not repent. Paradoxically, if you want to help them, stop supporting G3.
Pray. Pray that the Lord would sustain and help Tom, his family, and his church to heal from this ordeal, and to come out on the other side stronger for it. Pray that if the four elders are not genuinely repentant, that God would make them so, and that they would bear fruit in keeping with repentance. Pray for their wives, children, and families who most likely didn’t know about any of this and didn’t ask for any of this. Pray for the staff members at G3 who were not involved in this scandal. They’ve almost certainly just lost their jobs with zero notice. Pray for the deacons and members of PMBC. Can you imagine your church suddenly and immediately losing your pastor and all of your elders to a sinful situation like this? Who’s going to lead the church? Who’s going to preach? What is going on? Why were we blindsided with all of this? Who can we trust now? Pray for yourself, that the Lord would help you think and respond biblically to this situation.
Don’t lose your sense of trust. Don’t allow this scandal to be a reason or an excuse for sinfully building a wall around yourself and deciding that no one in Christian leadership – including your pastor and church leadership – can be trusted. To believe that lie is to believe the same Devil that influenced the PMBC elders to sin.
Your ultimate trust should be in Christ. No human being should receive the trust God has given you that is reserved for Him alone. But there are trustworthy – not perfect – but blameless, upright, and trustworthy people in Christian ministry and leadership in the local church and in greater evangelicalism.
You can’t live your life refusing to trust anyone. God didn’t design us to function that way.
Don’t abandon the local church. In the same way that you can’t allow this scandal to convince you not to trust people, you can’t use it as a reason or an excuse to abandon the local church altogether. That is sinful, and, furthermore, it indicates that you aren’t genuinely saved.
(Sadly, in this day and age, you will probably have to leave a particular local church at some point due to its embrace of false teachers, unrepentant sin by the leadership, or some other legitimate biblical issue. Leaving a church for biblical reasons – after doing your best to work things out – and finding a new, doctrinally sound church is not the same thing as abandoning the idea of church altogether.)
Give your heart and your loyalty primarily to your local church. God’s plan for the teaching and preaching of the Word, for fellowship, for doing the “one anothers,” for serving, giving, counseling, discipleship, and your sanctification, is the local church, not parachurch ministries (incuding mine). Don’t pour your heart out promiscuously to any and every parachurch ministry that comes along, or even to one favorite ministry. Pour your heart, your love, your service, dedication, and loyalty into the church you’re a member of, and keep your focus there. That’s God’s plan and design for Christians.
Pour your heart, your love, your service, dedication, and loyalty into the church you’re a member of, and keep your focus there. That’s God’s plan and design for Christians.
Learn. David’s adultery. Noah’s drunkenness. Solomon’s idolatry. Judas’ betrayal. And G3’s scandal. One of the reasons God pulls back the curtain – in the Bible and today – and allows us to see people blowing their lives up with sin is to warn us of the consequences we’ll reap from our own sin, and so that we might learn not to repeat the sins of others. Take the free advice God gave the PMBC elders. They spurned it. You learn it. Or you just might be the next example God allows others to learn from.
Your sin will find you out. You might sin and get away with it or keep it a secret, but it’s unlikely. Most of us aren’t criminal masterminds when it comes to covering our tracks. You want to avoid the fallout these elders are experiencing? Don’t sin. And if you do sin, stop it immediately and repent. Forget about the earthly consequences with human beings – God knows what you did. And that should scare the living daylights out of you.
Repent rightly. As you’ve read in some of the articles above, the elders did not repent right. You must rightly understand and meditate on what Scripture says about your particular sin. Realize that your sin nailed Christ to the cross. He took the punishment you deserved for it. Stand broken, undone, and without excuse before God, confess everything without reservation, and ask Him to cleanse you. Then ask Him to give you the wisdom, courage, and love for Him and the people you’ve sinned against to thoroughly and rightly repent to them, ask their forgiveness, and make restitution, if possible. Do everything in your power to make things right with them.
As for me, I’m going to join you in doing all of the above. I’ll also be removing all G3 links from the blog. I’ve already removed the G3 Church Network from my list of church search engines at my church finder resource – the Searching for a new church? tab (in the blue menu bar at the top of this page).
If your church was listed at the G3 Church Network and would like to find a new place to list, I would be glad to consider it for inclusion on my list of recommended churches.
If your church was listed at the G3 Church Network and would like to find a new place to list, I would be glad to consider it for inclusion on my list of recommended churches.
Removing all the G3 links from the last 10-12 years of blogging is a daunting prospect, but it will have to be done, if for no other reason than the fact that the G3 website has been shut down and the links will only take you to a “404 error” page. I will have to remove links gradually, as I come across them, so thank you in advance for your patience. If you’re reading one of my articles and come across a link to a G3 resource (or any other problematic link, for that matter), I’d be most grateful if you’d drop me a comment, DM, or email alerting me to it so I can remove or replace it.
If the Lord permits, Amy and I will also be addressing the G3 scandal – from a biblical perspective, as always – on at least two upcoming episodes of A Word Fitly Spoken in the near future.
I’m tired, y’all. I’m powerful tired.
And I know you are, too.
But the Lord is good.
Steal away with Him and meditate on His goodness. Lose yourself in the wonder of His Word. Commune with Him in sweet hours of prayer. Throw your head back and sing to Him with all your might in worship.
And get a good night’s sleep.
Because another battle’s coming tomorrow.
Press on.
Brothers, I do not consider myself as having laid hold of it yet, but one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and reaching forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.
This is the last time I’m planning to run this article, since the Convention is next week. Follow me on Twitter for any imperative updates between now and then.
This article was last updated on May 26. Updates since that day include:
March:
Two Three Good Men to Right the Ship has been updated to include information on Javier Chavez for Recording Secretary and the website for the Ascol / Baucham / Chavez slate of candidates.
Blackmailing the Bucks has been updated to include information on SEBTS’ self investigation and exoneration, the Bucks’ refutation of SEBTS’ claims, and the bigger picture hypocrisy and partiality this situation typifies in the SBC at large.
May (These items have all been added to the existing SATF section in “May.”)
Tom Ascol’s and Voddie Baucham’s responses to the SATF / GS report.
The June 1 SATF recommendations likely to be voted on in Anaheim.
The June 8 modifications of the June 1 SATF recommendations likely to be voted on in Anaheim unless they change them again.
June:
Problematic speakers at ancillary convention events
GS publicly affirms perversion.
The 2021 annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention opened the eyes of a lot of Southern Baptists to the sin and corruption infecting our cooperative of churches.
The foremost question on the minds of many doctrinally sound and discerning Southern Baptist pastors and church members is whether or not the SBC is too corrupt to be saved. “Should we shake the dust off our feet and leave the SBC, or should we stay in and fight for fidelity to Scripture?”
If you and your church are choosing to stay in and fight, it is crucial that you be well-informed enough on the issues and the candidates to vote biblically when you attend the 2022 annual meeting in Anaheim. And that also means you’re going to need to know your Bible well enough to vote biblically on those issues.
Because what really hurt doctrinally sound Southern Baptists at the 2021 meeting (and previous years’ meetings) was not just those who were consciously pushing an unbiblical, liberal agenda, it was also the messengers who were ignorant of the issues and the candidates, and just voted according to whatever sounded good on the surface, or just blindly trusted whoever was on stage at the moment.
Representing your church (and millions of other Southern Baptists) as a messenger at the annual meeting is a grave responsibility and it should be treated as such. You’ve got to get informed. Your church and pastor have to get informed. The other churches in your association, and your associational leadership have to get informed.
That’s where this article comes in.
I know it’s hard to keep up with the issues when you’ve got a life you’re trying to live and responsibilities you’re trying to take care of. I want to try to make staying informed a little easier for you, your church, and your association, so please share this around.
This article (initially published in the summer of 2021 and subsequently updated) is a timeline of significant events in the SBC at the national level starting with the 2021 annual meeting and moving forward from there. I’ve tried to keep things brief, so you may need to take what you see here and do some more digging on your own if you want an in depth look at a particular issue.
I’ve also posted a few “Points of Order,” things that aren’t really a current event, but more along the lines of SBC polity or information you might need.
If you think I’ve left out something significant (I’m trying not to get bogged down in too much minutiae), please leave a comment and a link, if possible.
For a recap of the major decisions and happenings of the 2021 annual meeting, please read my article: SBC21: Aftermath, Thoughts, and Where Do We Go From Here? There are lots of informative links at the end of the article in the “Additional Resources” section.
June 2021
Point of Order: Financial Contributions
If you’re staying in the SBC, you might be concerned about your offerings being sent to the Cooperative Program to fund SBC entities which are operating unbiblically. This is a dilemma for doctrinally sound churches and individuals, because, until fairly recently, making a financial contribution to the SBC at the national level was a requirement for being “in friendly cooperation with the SBC.”
So how do we stay in the SBC to fight ungodliness by sending messengers to the annual meeting, yet maintain our financial contribution without funding ungodliness? [Now former – see “October” below] Executive Committee member Rod Martin explains:
I have been repeatedly asked how the formula works that determines how many messengers an SBC church may send to the Annual Meeting. Here’s the deal:
Under the recent constitutional amendment, every church now gets two messengers whether they give or not. Previously you had to give a minimum amount to get any messengers at all.
The previous maximum number of messengers was 10. That number is now 12.
You can get one additional messenger (up to the maximum) for every percentage point of additional giving out of undesignated receipts. That’s fair for every church: if you’re giving 5%, you get five more messengers. If you’re giving 10%, you get ten more messengers. The dollar amount doesn’t come into play.
That said, and I very much disagree with this, you can also get one additional messenger (up to the maximum) for each $6,000 in giving. That means megachurches can have 12 messengers by giving next to nothing as a percentage of their budgets. I think that was a big mistake. But the vast majority of SBC churches are small, so they greatly outnumber those churches, and also, the 12 messenger cap greatly limits the power of those giant churches on the floor.
The “giving” I just described can be through the Cooperative Program, but no longer has to be: it can be to any convention entity. So let’s say you wanted to give all of it to Lottie Moon, or give all of it through IMB but designated for certain specific missionaries: you could do that and get all ten additional messengers. There are many other possibilities as well.
I think this change to our system (which was part of GCR)was a giant mistake, as was GCR generally. However, while I know some people disagree, I don’t think it actually disadvantages smaller churches in practice, and it definitely creates a lot of flexibility for churches to give creatively while also maintaining their maximum possible messenger representation.
On June 16, the second day of the 2021 annual meeting, a messenger mentioned in a question from the floor that the “What We Believe” page of the church Ed Litton pastors (Redemption Church in Saraland, Alabama) contained a heretical view of the Trinity called partialism.
Photo courtesy of onenewsnow.com
Quietly, and almost immediately, the heretical wording was deleted from the website, as you can see in the “before and after” screenshots above.
It’s not just that the wording was heretical. Redemption Church’s statement of faith – the core of its identity as a church – was changed without a vote by the church body. Indeed, without even notifying or consulting the church body. How would that go over at your church?
To date, neither Litton nor Redemption Church has offered any official explanation regarding why a multi-SBC seminary degreed pastor would lead his church to codify a heretical statement of faith in the first place, nor how that statement of faith was able to be altered without input or permission from the church, nor why it took outside publicity to spur the change.
Unofficially, the explanation some claim Litton has given is that the original heretical wording was some sort of typographical error by the person who typed it into the website. (I want to stress that this is hearsay.)
About a week after the convention ended, starting during the week of June 20:
A side by side video surfaced of Ed Litton (Jan. 2020) and J.D. Greear (Jan. 2019) preaching the same (Greear’s) sermon on Romans 1.
The sermon was Greear’s infamous “The Bible whispers about sexual sin” sermon, so there was not only the plagiarism aspect, but, just as when Greear originally preached it, there was outrage over the bad theology contained in the sermon itself.
Greear and Litton each issued statements explaining, justifying, and excusing the plagiarism.
Litton removed 143 sermons from his church’s website and YouTube, leading most to surmise that these sermons probably also contained plagiarism, due to his explanation of his “sermon by committee” paradigm explained in his statement.
The secular news media began reporting on all of this.
Justin Peters posted a very thorough video biblically explaining and providing documentation for all of this:
Almost immediately, three more side by side sermon comparison videos of Litton and Greear surfaced showing even further plagiarism by Litton. Romans 8 sermonRomans 13 sermon* Romans 14 sermon* (The Justin Peters video above includes the Romans 1 sermon side by side video.)
*I am citing Reformation Charlotte for the purpose of these videos only. It is not a site I endorse.
Somewhat simultaneously, some of Litton’s scrubbed sermon videos begin reappearing on his church’s website and YouTube, and both he (in an interview with the Washington Times) and the leadership of his church (in a statement obtained by Baptist Press) issued statements about why the videos had been removed in the first place. The reasons given by Litton and his church leadership did not match.
For another timeline of these events with additional links, click here.
Further examples of Litton’s sermon plagiarism, some instances going back years, continue to surface.
With all the outcry against current SBC president, Ed Litton, and calls for his resignation, you might be surprised to learn that there is no mechanism in place for removing a sitting SBC president. For the office of president to be vacated, he has to resign, die, or be incapacitated.
The only official governing statement about replacing a sitting SBC president is this sentence from Article V of the SBC Constitution:
“In case of death or disability of the president, the vice presidents shall automatically succeed to the office of president in the order of their election.“
Maybe plagiarism and heresy don’t seem like that big of a deal to you. What’s going to happen when a sitting president commits adultery, steals SBC funds, comes out of the closet as a homosexual or transgender, or is discovered to be a child molester, and refuses to resign?
xxxxx
July 2021
EC SATF Named
Prior to the 2021 convention, allegations were made that the Executive Committee mishandled some charges of sexual abuse by SBC pastors / at SBC churches, which the EC vehemently denied. At the convention, a motion was made that President Ed Litton appoint a task force to investigate these allegations. That task force was named on July 9:
The purpose of the task force is to objectively examine whether the EC handled these charges of sexual abuse fairly and appropriately with regard to recommending whether or not the church should be disfellowshiped from the SBC.
You’ll notice many of the members and advisors work or volunteer in the field of victim advocacy. While it is good to have people with experience on the task force, that has to be balanced with their ability to be objective if this is to truly be an independent review.
For example, Rachael Denhollander has been a polarizing figure in victim advocacy because she has a reputation for never having met an accusation of abuse she didn’t believe, or “having an ax to grind” when it comes to allegations of abuse. If anything, she has a reputation for being biased in favor of alleged victims and unable to objectively assess when false charges have been levied.
When someone (such as some of the members of this task force) has made victim advocacy his career or life’s mission, that person is heavily invested in one side of the issue. It raises the question, “How objective can some of these task force members/advisors be?”.
I’m sorry, but there’s just no polite way to say this, and sometimes you have to call a spade a spade. Ed Litton has been caught in two obvious, public lies about the plagiarism fiasco and his wife co-preaching with him.
Kathy’s Co-Preaching:
This is an issue that came up prior to the 2021 convention so it is not included in this article, but I referred to it in this pre-convention article regarding Ed Litton’s wife Kathy:
This man who wants to be at the helm of your entire denomination, violates Scripture by allowing Kathy to “co-preach” the Sunday sermon at their Southern Baptist church here, and here, and several more sermons can be found at their church’s website.
If you try to click on the links above you’ll notice two of them yield no results. That’s because once Ed Litton was publicly taken to task for allowing his wife to preach, he deleted the sermon videos, which is covering up sin, rather than biblically repenting of it.
When first questioned about allowing his wife to preach, Litton explained that this was because it was a sermon series on marriage and family and he wanted Kathy to provide her perspective. (Scripture doesn’t allow for this, but some accepted this justification.)
It has now been discovered that Litton had Kathy co-preach at least one other sermon series in 2013 which had nothing to do with marriage and family.
(If you’re unclear about why this is a violation of Scripture, please click here, here, and here to read up.)
Plagiarism (see “June” above):
In a news interview with his local CBS affiliate, Litton clearly says the allegations of plagiarism came from “unnamed sources”.
(See 2:40 for the “unnamed sources” segment.)
This is patently untrue. Many SBC pastors and others have publicly sounded the alarm about the plagiarism issue, and all the ones I’m aware of have used their real names.
SWBTS/Greenway Provide Cover for Litton’s Non-Repentance
On September 14, during SWBTS’ chapel service, seminary president Adam Greenway interviewed Ed Litton on a variety of topics, first – and most notably – the plagiarism scandal (3:50). Once again, Litton finessed instead of repenting.
You can tell where Greenway stands as he prefaces his question to Litton by disparagingly referring to the “snark” he received from “anonymous social media accounts” when he announced that Litton had been invited. (“Anonymous”? What I saw when I commented on his Twitter announcement was, I’d estimate, well over 90% non-anonymous, concerned, yet frustrated Southern Baptists wanting the plagiarism issue addressed, and for Litton to resign.)
And, of course, you’ll notice that Litton doesn’t repent over this sin, and even characterizes those who exposed his sin as meaning evil against him in the Genesis 50:20 sense. (More here.)
“In a 44-31 vote Tuesday, Oct. 5, the Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee (SBC EC) opted to waive attorney-client privilege in connection with a third-party investigation of itself [see “July” above]. Ahead of the special called meeting, six committee members resigned, and Chairman Rolland Slade noted during the meeting an expectation that other resignations may soon follow with the passage of the widely-debated waiver of attorney-client privilege.” – SBC Executive Committee votes to waive attorney-client privilege in sexual abuse investigation at Conservative Baptist Network
Waiving ACP was not necessary in order for Guidepost Solutions (the firm retained by the SATF to investigate allegations of mishandling of abuse cases by the EC) or the SATF to investigate allegations of the EC’s mishandling of abuse cases. It put the SBC in jeopardy of losing its legal representation and insurance coverage, and left individual EC members vulnerable to lawsuits (thus, the aforementioned resignations). And since any compensation paid to abuse victims would have been covered by the insurance policy, it was a very foolish decision indeed.
Multiple EC Resignations
As a result of the EC voting to waive ACP, fourteen committee members resigned effective in late September and October – including President Ronnie Floyd and Rod Martin – due to personal legal vulnerability and frustration.
On October 11, Guenther, Jordan & Price, the Nashville firm which had provided legal representation for the SBC since 1966, terminated its relationship with the Southern Baptist Convention
“The Executive Committeeโs board of directors, by a majority vote, has acted to prospectively and preemptively waive the Executive Committeeโs attorney-client privilege without knowing the communications affected by the waiver and without knowing the effect it will have on the Executive Committee, the Convention, and those who have served as members or employees of the Executive Committee…For these reasons, we believe our commitment to a certain standard of professional conduct leaves us no choice but to advise you that we are withdrawing from our role as general counsel to the Southern Baptist Convention and the Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention.“
On October 28, the EC trustees met and retained Bradley Legal to provide legal services on an interim basis. (See “February” below for more information on Bradley Legal.)
November 2021
A Discussion of the Issues
On November 19, the Conservative Baptist Network hosted a panel discussion centering on problematic issues in the SBC. Led by SBC First Vice President, Dr. Lee Brand, participants included (L-R: Randy Adams, Tom Ascol, Russell Fuller, Rod Martin, and Allen Nelson)
There was a problem with the audio the night of the recording that caused the first 10-12 minutes of the video’s volume to be extremely low. It clears up after that.
UnMerritted Praise
On November 22, James Merritt – multi-seminary degreed pastor of Cross Point church (SBC) in Duluth, Georgia, former SBC president, chair of the 2021 Resolutions Committee, former chair of the EC, former president of the SBC Pastors’ Conference, visiting professor at SEBTS, etc. – posted this tweet regarding his son Jonathan’s sermon at his (Jonathan’s) “church” the day before. Jonathan is openly homosexual, and his “church” is homosexuality affirming, egalitarian, and universalist, among other anti-biblical beliefs:
Obviously, it should go without saying (especially to someone as biblically knowledgeable as a pastor, former SBC president, and SBC seminary professor should be) that a practicing homosexual is not saved and has, therefore, rejected the gospel. How could any sermon he preached be “faithful to the gospel”?
Naturally, his appalling statement received pushback from biblically faithful Christians, and James Merritt once again showed his baser nature by lashing out at those taking him to task.
Likely facing pressure behind the scenes, James Merritt resigned his position as visiting professor at SEBTS (but not his pastorate). For this, he was practically lauded as a hero by SEBTS president Danny Akin…
Someone gave reporter Liam Adams of the Tennesseean James Merritt’s binder from his tenure as 2021 Resolutions Committee chair. The binder contained private emails between Tom Ascol and James Merritt as well as other confidential Resolutions Committee communications and information, some of which was used in an article Adams wrote.
In this video, Justin Peters examines four incidents in recent SBC history that seem to demonstrate a gradual progression toward affirming homosexuality. Two of the incidents took place at First Baptist Church Orlando, pastored by David Uth (president of the 2020 Pastors’ Conference who was roundly criticized for inviting false teachers and a female “pastor” as speakers), one incident involved James Merritt, and another involved former SBC President J.D. Greear.
Following a tweet by pastor and EC member Adam Wyatt singing the praises of new interim legal team Bradley Legal, questions began to be raised about the many ties the firm has to the homosexual and woke agendas. From sponsoring Nashville Pride to a glowing report on Bradley’s “inclusivity” from the Human Rights Campaign, Bradley is proud of its “diversity”.
On February 28, in the middle of a self-aggrandizing video noting his past and anticipated accomplishments, and breaking with decades of tradition, Ed Litton briefly announced he would not seek or accept a second term as president of the Southern Baptist Convention.
Point of Order: The SBC President’s Term of Office
“The officers shall be elected annually and shall hold office until their successors are elected and qualified. The term of office for the president is limited to two (2) years, and a president shall not be eligible for re-election until as much as one (1) year has elapsed from the time a successor is named.”The Constitution of the Southern Baptist Convention, Article V, Point 2
In plain English: There is an election for SBC president (and other officers) every year at the SBC annual meeting, which means we could elect a new president every single year. However, the SBC Constitution allows the president to serve two consecutive one-year terms, and, in recent history, most SBC presidents and messengers have taken the Constitution up on that offer. The last single-term president was Adrian Rogers, who (though later elected to two consecutive terms in the mid-1980’s) served from 1979 to 1980, 43 years ago.
xxxxx
March 2022
Willy Run?
March 1, one day after Ed Litton announced he would not seek re-election for a second term as SBC president (see “February” above), Willy Rice, pastor of Calvary Church in Clearwater, Florida, announced that he would be nominated for SBC president at the annual meeting in June. (See “April” below)
Calvary follows the multi-site model with three locations in Florida. They also have an “online campus” which they seem to equate with the three physical locations. Though there’s nothing wrong with a church live streaming its worship service, leading people to believe that watching a video of a worship service is equal to being a faithful member of a local church and physically gathering with that church body for worship and fellowship is an unbiblical ecclesiology. The Greek word for โchurchโ in the New Testament is แผฮบฮบฮปฮทฯฮฏฮฑ, or ekklesia. It literally means a gathering or assembly. No gathering, no church. The Bible commands and assumes that we physically gather as the church.
On March 22, it was announced that Tom Ascol – pastor of Grace Baptist Church in Cape Coral, Florida, and president of Founders Ministries – would be nominated for SBC president, and Voddie Baucham – author, sought after conference speaker, and currently dean of theology at African Christian University in Zambia – for president of the Pastors’ Conference. Javier Chavez (announced March 30) – pastor of Amistad Cristiana Church in Gainesville, Georgia, and president of the missions organization, Amistad Cristiana International Inc. – will be nominated for Recording Secretary. (This is a key position that must be filled with a doctrinally sound man, because the Recording Secretary is also automatically a member of the Executive Committee.)
These men have an outstanding record of fidelity to Scripture, biblical ecclesiology, Christian ethics, and sound doctrine. They have spoken unashamedly against sexual sin, false teachers, Critical Race Theory and racialism, egalitarianism, and the social justice movement. They are dedicated to the bold proclamation of the mercy and grace of God in the biblical gospel rather than the watered down gospel of seeker sensitive easy believism.
There could be no better men than these to begin the hard task of turning the SBC back to faithfully believing and obeying God’s Word. If at all possible, my Southern Baptist sisters, I urge you to talk to your pastor about representing your church as a messenger at the SBC annual meeting in Anaheim in June (along with as many other messengers as your church qualifies for) and vote for Tom, Voddie, and Javier.
You can find more information on all three candidates, the issues, and the Convention at We Have a Book.
On March 23, a third candidate for the SBC presidency was announced. Former IMB missionary, Robin Hadaway. Hadaway served for many years as a missionary in Africa and South America. Following his time on the mission field he spent twenty years at Midwestern Baptist Theological seminary as a professor of missions and in several different administrative positions. He has also served in various offices and capacities in the Southern Baptist Convention.
In late March (spilling over into April, May, and June2), a situation began to unfold in which Tom Buck (and his wife, Jennifer), pastor of First Baptist Church, Lindale, Texas, who has battled valiantly against corruption in the SBC, was maligned, lied to, and threatened with blackmail. The situation involved not insignificant figures in SBC life, including SEBTS professor Karen Swallow Prior, SEBTS President Danny Akin, former 2022 SBC presidential nominee Willy Rice, and others.
This is the same type of “dirty tricks” move from the liberal contingent of the SBC we’ve come to expect over the last few years in the weeks immediately preceding the annual meeting, as they attempt to sully the reputations of those on the biblical side of the aisle in an attempt to influence, or even derail, the SBC presidential election.
The story is both heart wrenching and enraging, and provides insight into just how evil and corrupt the SBC has become at the highest levels. The story is somewhat lengthy and involved, and the timeline intricate, but I urge you to peruse the following pertinent documentation:
On June 8, SEBTS President, Danny Akin releasedStatements from Southeastern on Matters Surrounding the Buck Essay (signed on to by the SEBTS trustees) essentially saying SEBTS had investigated itself, found no wrongdoing on the part of the seminary or any of its employees, that some “anonymous couple” had come forward claiming responsibility for leaking the rough draft, and, therefore, SEBTS would not participate in the third party investigation they had already agreed to.
In response, on June 9, in collaboration with Christian journalist, Janet Mefferd, Tom and Jennifer released a rebuttal, Clarifying Matters: A Statement from Tom and Jennifer Buck, pointing out the blatant lies and hypocrisy of the SEBTS statement.
As I write this on the morning of June 9, Tom is posting further evidence and video clips on Twitter, and many are calling for a motion from the floor requiring SEBTS to submit to a third party investigation of this matter.
This situation is no longer limited in scope to the specific details of the Bucks’ case. This is about the systemic, institutional hypocrisy, partiality, and unequal weights and measures of lauding the SATF’s third party investigation of the EC’s handling of abuse cases via (third party) Guidepost Solutions, whose report itself recommends requiring individual churches accused of mishandling cases of abuse to submit to a third party investigation. But if it’s a victim with a track record of exposing and speaking out against the SBC ruling party’s liberal agenda, the entity that mishandled that victim’s case gets to investigate and exonerate itself? Would any of the churches disfellowshipped from the SBC for botching the way they handled abuse have been afforded that luxury, or is it only the “rich man entity,” so to speak, who is shown that favoritism?
Furthermore, is saying that the investigation of a “survivor’s” claims is a waste of “God’s money” (below) the type of “trauma-informed,” “handle with kid gloves” communication demanded of churches and entities by the SATF/GS report? Isn’t that re-abusing a “survivor”? And, why is it a waste of God’s money for one SBC entity, SEBTS, to submit to a third party investigation, but it apparently was not a waste of over $4 million of God’s money (Southern Baptists’ offering money, don’t forget) for third party Guidepost Solutions to investigate another SBC entity, the Executive Committee?
The sin, favoritism, and hypocrisy is simply too much to bear any longer. Something must be done.
2I have included all information on this situation, regardless of date, in this section for convenience of reading.
April 2022
Willy Run? Apparently Not.
On April 1, potential SBC presidential nominee, Willy Rice (see “March” above) announced that it was about to be made public that a deacon in his church had committed “sexual sin” in his past – prior to his salvation – “that could also be described as abusive” but which did not involve criminal charges. The deacon was removed from his position. (I would like to point out, for clarity, that the 2021 resolution Rice quotes from near the end of the video says that anyone who has committed sexual abuse is permanently disqualified from the office of pastor. The man in question was a deacon, not a pastor.)
On April 6 – likely under pressure from “progressive” SBC leadership because he was the progressive candidate, and abuse is a major plank in the progressive platform – Rice announced he was withdrawing his name as a candidate for SBC President.
On April 7, it was announced that pastor Bart Barber would be nominated for president of the SBC. Barber was appointed by current SBC president Ed Litton (see above) as chair of the Resolutions Committee, and will serve in that capacity at the 2022 annual meeting.
Though he may not consider himself progressive, Barber is the candidate most progressives will likely end up voting for, simply because a) he has greater name recognition than Robin Hadaway, and b) they want the least conservative candidate possible to win.
You can read about Barber’s positions on various issues at Bart Barber FAQs on his church’s website. You may find the following sections to be informative:
Critical Race Theory– in which Barber says it is problematic there is no agreed upon definition of CRT, yet conducts a Twitter poll (which any marginal statistician could tell you is hardly reliable) about this undefined concept of CRT, and uses those results to conclude that CRT is “far from being an urgent issue to address in your church or in the Southern Baptist Convention.”
(Barber also served on the 2021 resolutions committee which quashed a resolution condemning CRT as incompatible with the BFM signed by 1300+ Southern Baptists. Tom Ascol, on the other hand, at that same meeting, made a motion to rescind 2019’s Resolution 9. Read more here.)
Plagiarism– in which Barber asserts that, since the authors of Scripture, young pastors, and those newly converted on the mission field may not have access to advanced theological training, the internet, commentaries, methods of attribution, etc., and, thus, may repeat things they’ve been told by others with no attribution, this excuses someone like Ed Litton – who does have all of those advantages and should know better – from plagiarism. How does Ed telling JD Greear’s personal life experiences as though they were his own fit into that paradigm? It’s not readily clear.
You can read the rest of Barber’s defense of Litton – as well as his opposition to the CBN (Conservative Baptist Network) here. Tom Ascol was, at that same time, vocally decrying Litton’s sin of plagiarism.
Though the content of his interactions with her are benign, Barber seems to have a friendly Twitter relationship with false teacher Beth Moore (here, here).
In 2020, Barber invited Dwight McKissic to be a guest on his podcast, and recorded the episode in the sanctuary of his church. McKissic is an SBC “pastor” (he is biblically disqualified) who plays the race card in nearly every conversation, is a rabid egalitarian, and defends false teachers such as Beth Moore (McKissic suggested that she should be nominated as president of the SBC a few years ago) whenever he gets a chance.
On April 15, the resolutions portal opened for submitting a resolution to the 2022 Resolutions Committee. The 2022 resolution submission window closes May 30.
Resolutions are essentially position statements messengers may have the opportunity to vote on at the Convention. (Parliamentary procedure or committee action may preclude a vote.) I would love to publish the text of, or information regarding as many resolutions as possible so messengers can take the time to read, inform themselves, and especially pray about how they should vote that they may not have once at the convention site.
If you know someone who will be submitting a resolution at the Convention and would like to have it published here, please comment below or contact me as soon as possible.
Resolutions
This is the originaltext that will be submitted to the Committee on Resolutions. Please bear in mind, the Committee on Resolutions has the authority to โrewordโ these resolutions in any way they choose and then present the edited version to the Convention for a vote. (This was a major issue with Resolution 9 on CRT in 2019. The Committee โrewordedโ the original resolution so much that the edited version ended up saying basically the opposite of the original version.) The Committee also has the authority to decline to present a resolution for a vote. When you arrive at the Convention, please carefully read the versions of the resolutions you are given before voting on them, since they may have been altered.
A resolution has traditionally been defined as an expression of opinion or concern, as compared to a motion, which calls for action. A resolution is not used to direct an entity of the Southern Baptist Convention to specific action other than to communicate the opinion or concern expressed. Resolutions are passed during the annual Convention meeting.Resources in Resolutions at SBC.net
As I mentioned above, a resolution is akin to a position statement on anything from abortion to a war in another country to National Ice Cream Day if you like. Individual Southern Baptist church members write up resolutions and submit them to the Committee on Resolutions within the allotted time frame. The Committee on Resolutions processes each resolution. Most, they will decline to present for a vote. Some, they will tweak, re-word, edit, beef up, or water down, before presenting. Some, they will present as is. Sometimes, when several similar resolutions are submitted, they will write a new resolution, combining the ideas they like from each, and present a resolution from the committee for a vote. Messengers then have the opportunity to vote in agreement or disagreement with each resolution the Committee on Resolutions presents.
Resolutions are non-binding. This means neither you nor your church nor any other Southern Baptist individual or church has to abide by any resolution. Resolutions serve mainly to make a public statement: This is what the majority of Southern Baptists believe about this issue this year.
Each year, no later than 75 days prior to the SBC Annual Meeting, the SBC president, in conference with the vice presidents, appoints a Committee on Resolutions whose task is to consider and recommend appropriate resolutions to the messengers attending the annual meeting….Only members in good standing of churches entitled to send messengers to the next annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention may submit resolutions.
For more information on how to submit a resolution to the committee click here: Submit a Resolution
xxxxx
Change of Venue
On April 28, the Executive Committee voted to move the 2023 SBC annual meeting from Charlotte, North Carolina (the site approved by messengers in 2016), to New Orleans, Louisiana. Due to increased attendance over the past few years, it was anticipated that the Charlotte venue would be too small.
SATF Cost
Also on April 28, with regard to the Sexual Abuse Task Force:
EC members were informed that since Oct. 1, a total of $1,661,530 has been paid toward Guidepost Solutions [the independent investigating agency] and $17,478 toward Task Force travel and meetings.
In September, the EC voted to allocate up to $1.6 million toward the work by Guidepost Solutions. In February, they voted to increase the funds allocated to $2 million for the investigation or the โcoverage of any other direct expenses without further approval.โ
“Baptist Press recently released an interview that Jonathan Howe and Brandon Porter conducted with me…on April 5. Both they and I recorded the interview. They did so indicating that they would edit out the โums,โ โuhs,โ and โwells,โ etc. from the transcript in order to make the article flow well without losing the contextually understood meaning of my words.
In the interview that they posted, however…my responses were largely left unedited except for the exclusion of certain things I said…There are other misquotes throughout the article…in the interest of openness and transparency, I am making available the full audio below. In it you can hear a more complete and accurate version of the how the questions were phrased as well as my exact answers.”
Tom Ascol, Bart Barber, and Robin Hadaway participated in a panel discussion on issues facing the SBC at First Baptist Church, Keller, Texas, on May 4. The discussion was moderated by Joe Wooddell and Tony Richmondโboth of FBC Keller.
Denny Burk, Bart Barber and the ERLC: All Against Abolition
Please educate yourself on this issue if you’re attending the Convention in June.It is a topic likely to be included in votable items.
Just days after the leak of the draft of the SCOTUS majority opinion on the overturn of Roe, HB813, on the complete abolition of abortion in the state of Louisiana, arrived at the House of the Louisiana Legislature for a vote. And it was torpedoed, thanks in part to the ERLC.
Acting ERLC president, Brent Leatherwood (along with dozens of other heads of supposedly pro-life organizations), signed on to An Open Letter to State Lawmakers from Americaโs Leading Pro-Life Organizations, released May 12 – the same day the Louisiana bill came to the floor for a vote. The letter characterized women who murder their babies as “victims” – denying that they have any culpability for killing their children – and, in an ominous, strong-armed tone, staunchly opposed the bill, and any future similar abolition bills.
In short, if your church gives to the Cooperative Program (and most SBC churches do): your offerings paid for the ERLC to help kill legislation that would have outlawed abortion.
This SBC entity, which you fund with your offerings, ignored the will of the SBC messengers to whom they are answerable. You will recall that last year at the Convention, the 2021 Committee on Resolutions – of which Bart Barber was a member – refused to let an abolition resolution come to the floor for a vote. It was only after messengers demanded it be released from committee that it was brought to the floor and overwhelmingly passed. The SBC grassroots wants abortion abolished immediately.
After the killing of the Louisiana bill, Denny Burk, professor at SBTS’ Boyce College, and associate pastor at an SBC church, carpet bombed Twitter with numerous screeds against abolition (the immediate abolishing of all abortion) and in favor of pro-life incrementalism (gradually chipping away at abortion via legislative restrictions, AKA, the past 50 years of legalized abortion), publishing three blog articles in a week (here, here, and here) which misrepresented and denounced the abolitionist position (which, by the way, is growing rapidly in the SBC, due to Southern Baptists’ disillusionment with the inability of the pro-life movement to abolish abortion), and warning Southern Baptists of dire consequences should they support the abolitionist cause rather than the pro-life position.
Naturally, Southern Baptists wanted to know where the candidates for SBC president stand on the issue.
Bart Barber updated his campaign FAQ page with a number of misrepresentations of, and misinformation about the abolitionist position (which, if I’m not misunderstanding his Twitter feed, were corrected by several people before {and certainly since} he posted the misinformation on his web page), and placed himself squarely in the incrementalist pro-life camp.
Tom Ascolwants abortion abolished immediately. You can read his clear, biblical, and well-reasoned position, which addresses Burk’s points, the ERLC’s sabotage of the Louisiana bill, and the 2021 SBC abolition resolution in his excellent article Toward a Principled Pro-Life Ethic in Post-Roe America
To inform yourself on what abolition actually does and doesn’t espouse, I recommend these resources:
Please educate yourself on this issue if you’re attending the Convention in June.It is a topic which will almost certainly be included in votable items.
Guidepost Solutions, the firm hired by the SATF to investigate the EC for mishandling cases of abuse was required to submit its report to the SATF 30 days prior to the SBC annual meeting in Anaheim (June 14-15, 2022). The report was to be made public one week after receipt, along with the SATF’s recommendations on any action the SBC should take as a result of the report. This took place on Sunday, May 22.
On June 8, the SATF deleted the June 1 recommendations from their website (as you can see if you click the link above) and replaced them with Updated Task Force Challenges and Formal Recommendations intended to clarify issues of funding and polity, according to SATF member, Andrew Hebert. Read Andrew’s explanation of the changes here, or listen to a podcast discussion of the changes here. To see a side by side comparison of the June 1 and June 8 recommendations, click here.
The latest iteration of these recommendations contain the actual actionable items messengers will vote on at the Convention. Be aware that these may be modified again between now and the time you get to vote on them. Before voting, please carefully read or listen to the actual motion(s) presented at the Convention.
I strongly recommend that you make the time to read and understand both the GS report (the executive summary at the beginning, at the very least) and the SATF recommendations if you’re planning to serve as a messenger at the Convention in June, since you’ll be asked to vote on motions or resolutions related to it.
Please do not just blindly trust those on the platform to accurately represent the report, the recommendations, or anything else about the sexual abuse situation in the SBC. Do your homework.
As you read the GS report, do keep in mind that GS is not a Christian organization, therefore, they were unable to view the situation from a biblical perspective, nor were they able to propose biblical solutions to the problems they discovered. Their outlook and analysis of the abuse situation in the SBC, though professional and honest was, necessarily, worldly, and their recommendations based in worldly practicality, not Scripture. As Christians, we must take the information and recommendations GS has given us, and examine them under the microscope of Scripture. We must make decisions about what to do and how to move forward that submit to the authority of Scripture, not worldly “wisdom,” methods, and practicalities.
GS is a non-Christian firm seeking to guide Christians in handling very serious spiritual matters, and the SATF’s recommendations are based, nearly completely, on GS’s recommendations. In other words, instead of the SATF recommending that we look to, understand, and obey Scripture in addressing the sexual abuse issue, they recommend we look to a worldly (not to mention perversion-affirming – see “June”) group of fallen human beings.
Scripture is clear that this is not the way the church is to operate. Consider the applicable principles of 1 Corinthians 6:1-6:
When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints? 2 Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life! 4 So if you have such cases, why do you lay them before those who have no standing in the church? 5 I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to settle a dispute between the brothers, 6 but brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers?
Bart Barber shared his thoughts in a blog article entitled Response to the Sexual Abuse Task Force Report. While compassionate, it is extremely generalized and offers no specific, concrete suggestions as to how the SBC should respond.
1I know this is May, not June, but I thought it would be more convenient to keep all of the SATF report info together in one section.
McKissic’s Motion
On May 27, “Pastor” Dwight McKissic (see “April”) announced on Twitter that he would be making the following motion at the Convention. (Remember, a motion is actionable and different from a resolution {see “April”}, which is non-binding.)
Here is the motion I will be presenting at the annual meeting in Anaheim. Please join me in requesting that @albertmohler and the trustees of @SBTS respond in a way that honors Christ and His bride. pic.twitter.com/suVElvLWUf
In a nutshell, he’s making a motion for SBTS to “study” removing the name of anyone who owned slaves from its buildings, programs, etc. The findings of the study (plus any actions taken or recommendations from SBTS) will be reported at the 2023 Convention.
June 2022
GS Stands with LGBTQ
Guidepost is committed to strengthening diversity, equity and inclusion and strives to be an organization where our team can bring their authentic selves to work.
We celebrate our collective progress toward equality for all and are proud to be an ally to our LGBTQ+ community. pic.twitter.com/i6DKiX36nm
— Guidepost Solutions (@GuidepostGlobal) June 6, 2022
While Guidepost Solutions’ position on perversion was already a matter of public record, this tweet for “Pride Month” drew the ire of many Southern Baptists. Your offering money paid for this, folks.
Every year at the Convention, there are special interest events ancillary to the actual annual meeting: a luncheon by this organization, a dinner by that group, workshops, panel discussions, seminary alumni gatherings, and so on. And every year at the Convention there’s the recurring issue of false teachers and biblically problematic speakers headlining these events.
Last year, I devoted an entire article to alerting you to these speakers. This year, there are not only fewer ancillary events, meaning fewer problematic speakers, but many of this year’s speakers are the same people I alerted you to last year. You can find all 2022 events listed here.
So, briefly, here are a few of those biblically problematic speakers of note with whom I’m familiar and/or for whom “spot check” type information was quickly and easily available:
Brent Leatherwood (see Denny Burk, Bart Barber and the ERLC: All Against Abolition in “May”)
Missie Branch (not much online info available, but she seems to frequently appear alongside those in the “progressive” camp in the SBC, here, last year, etc.)
This event is sponsored by the ERLC, whose controversial and storied history of leaning liberal on social and political issues (most recently, ironically for this event, helping to kill an abortion abolition bill – see “May”) has led many SBC churches to stop giving to the Cooperative Program and re-designate their funds so their offering money won’t be used to further ungodly social and political ideologies and agendas.
I would urge you to exercise extreme caution and discernment should you choose to attend this event or stop by their booth at the pastors’ conference. The fact that this is being sponsored and promoted by SBC Voices should be enough to give anyone familiar with them pause. Other red flags:
One of the major components of the event will be hearing victims’ stories. While we certainly want to give the benefit of the doubt that these stories will all be truthful, bear Proverbs 18:17 in mind, especially if you are easily swayed by emotion. You will only be hearing one side of the story about how these victims’ cases were handled.
“Trauma-informed / trauma-responsive” has come to be code speak for employing worldly psychological means and methods instead of looking to and obeying Scripture as our authority for addressing issues of abuse. The “trauma-informed” perspective is essentially that the Bible, pastoral and biblical counseling, and Titus 2 discipleship are inadequate and insufficient for shepherding and soul care, and these are rejected in favor of non-Christian “experts” in the field of abuse. Where does the Bible tell us to handle any spiritual issue, such as healing from abuse, by looking outside the church and the Bible to non-Christians?
You’ll be given a teal ribbon to wear around the Convention to “show your support” for abuse victims during this time of extreme contention in the SBC revolving around abuse, while others won’t be wearing one. This is, in effect, virtue signaling. The biblical word for this is “pride,” and those sponsoring this event are making provision for that sin. Consider these passages.
The breakout session will be led by Rachael Denhollander, Dave Pittman, and Todd Benkert. I’m not familiar with Dave, but Rachael has a reputation for never having heard a report of abuse she didn’t believe, and Todd was caught lying during the Tom and Jennifer Buck situation (see links in Blackmailing the Bucks under “March’) when he would have considered anyone else in Jennifer’s situation to be a “survivor”.
There may be some helpful resources presented at this breakout session, but be on your guard and be a good Berean. Keep a couple of questions at the front of your mind:
Is what I’m hearing me pointing me to God and His Word as my authority, or to fallen, sinful human beings, worldly methods, or non-Christian organizations as my authority?
This article was last updated on April 29. Updates since that day include:
May:
The ineptitude or sabotage (it’s unclear which) of Baptist Press’ interview with Tom Ascol
The video of the SBC presidential candidate forum
Denny Burk, Bart Barber, and the ERLC publicly decry abolition
The SATF / Guidepost report and recommendations
A proposed motion from Dwight McKissic
I’m still collecting proposed resolutions for SBC 2022. I invite anyone submitting a resolution to send it to me for inclusion in this article. (More under “April”)
The 2021 annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention opened the eyes of a lot of Southern Baptists to the sin and corruption infecting our cooperative of churches.
The foremost question on the minds of many doctrinally sound and discerning Southern Baptist pastors and church members is whether or not the SBC is too corrupt to be saved. “Should we shake the dust off our feet and leave the SBC, or should we stay in and fight for fidelity to Scripture?”
If you and your church are choosing to stay in and fight, it is crucial that you be well-informed enough on the issues and the candidates to vote biblically when you attend the 2022 annual meeting in Anaheim. And that also means you’re going to need to know your Bible well enough to vote biblically on those issues.
Because what really hurt doctrinally sound Southern Baptists at the 2021 meeting (and previous years’ meetings) was not just those who were consciously pushing an unbiblical, liberal agenda, it was also the messengers who were ignorant of the issues and the candidates, and just voted according to whatever sounded good on the surface, or just blindly trusted whoever was on stage at the moment.
Representing your church (and millions of other Southern Baptists) as a messenger at the annual meeting is a grave responsibility and it should be treated as such. You’ve got to get informed. Your church and pastor have to get informed. The other churches in your association, and your associational leadership have to get informed.
That’s where this article comes in.
I know it’s hard to keep up with the issues when you’ve got a life you’re trying to live and responsibilities you’re trying to take care of. I want to try to make staying informed a little easier for you, your church, and your association, so please share this around.
This article (initially published in the summer of 2021 and subsequently updated) is a timeline of significant events in the SBC at the national level starting with the 2021 annual meeting and moving forward from there. I’ve tried to keep things brief, so you may need to take what you see here and do some more digging on your own if you want an in depth look at a particular issue.
I’ve also posted a few “Points of Order,” things that aren’t really a current event, but more along the lines of SBC polity or information you might need.
If you think I’ve left out something significant (I’m trying not to get bogged down in too much minutiae), please leave a comment and a link, if possible.
For a recap of the major decisions and happenings of the 2021 annual meeting, please read my article: SBC21: Aftermath, Thoughts, and Where Do We Go From Here? There are lots of informative links at the end of the article in the “Additional Resources” section.
June 2021
Point of Order: Financial Contributions
If you’re staying in the SBC, you might be concerned about your offerings being sent to the Cooperative Program to fund SBC entities which are operating unbiblically. This is a dilemma for doctrinally sound churches and individuals, because, until fairly recently, making a financial contribution to the SBC at the national level was a requirement for being “in friendly cooperation with the SBC.”
So how do we stay in the SBC to fight ungodliness by sending messengers to the annual meeting, yet maintain our financial contribution without funding ungodliness? [Now former – see “October” below] Executive Committee member Rod Martin explains:
I have been repeatedly asked how the formula works that determines how many messengers an SBC church may send to the Annual Meeting. Here’s the deal:
Under the recent constitutional amendment, every church now gets two messengers whether they give or not. Previously you had to give a minimum amount to get any messengers at all.
The previous maximum number of messengers was 10. That number is now 12.
You can get one additional messenger (up to the maximum) for every percentage point of additional giving out of undesignated receipts. That’s fair for every church: if you’re giving 5%, you get five more messengers. If you’re giving 10%, you get ten more messengers. The dollar amount doesn’t come into play.
That said, and I very much disagree with this, you can also get one additional messenger (up to the maximum) for each $6,000 in giving. That means megachurches can have 12 messengers by giving next to nothing as a percentage of their budgets. I think that was a big mistake. But the vast majority of SBC churches are small, so they greatly outnumber those churches, and also, the 12 messenger cap greatly limits the power of those giant churches on the floor.
The “giving” I just described can be through the Cooperative Program, but no longer has to be: it can be to any convention entity. So let’s say you wanted to give all of it to Lottie Moon, or give all of it through IMB but designated for certain specific missionaries: you could do that and get all ten additional messengers. There are many other possibilities as well.
I think this change to our system (which was part of GCR)was a giant mistake, as was GCR generally. However, while I know some people disagree, I don’t think it actually disadvantages smaller churches in practice, and it definitely creates a lot of flexibility for churches to give creatively while also maintaining their maximum possible messenger representation.
On June 16, the second day of the 2021 annual meeting, a messenger mentioned in a question from the floor that the “What We Believe” page of the church Ed Litton pastors (Redemption Church in Saraland, Alabama) contained a heretical view of the Trinity called partialism.
Photo courtesy of onenewsnow.com
Quietly, and almost immediately, the heretical wording was deleted from the website, as you can see in the “before and after” screenshots above.
It’s not just that the wording was heretical. Redemption Church’s statement of faith – the core of its identity as a church – was changed without a vote by the church body. Indeed, without even notifying or consulting the church body. How would that go over at your church?
To date, neither Litton nor Redemption Church has offered any official explanation regarding why a multi-SBC seminary degreed pastor would lead his church to codify a heretical statement of faith in the first place, nor how that statement of faith was able to be altered without input or permission from the church, nor why it took outside publicity to spur the change.
Unofficially, the explanation some claim Litton has given is that the original heretical wording was some sort of typographical error by the person who typed it into the website. (I want to stress that this is hearsay.)
About a week after the convention ended, starting during the week of June 20:
A side by side video surfaced of Ed Litton (Jan. 2020) and J.D. Greear (Jan. 2019) preaching the same (Greear’s) sermon on Romans 1.
The sermon was Greear’s infamous “The Bible whispers about sexual sin” sermon, so there was not only the plagiarism aspect, but, just as when Greear originally preached it, there was outrage over the bad theology contained in the sermon itself.
Greear and Litton each issued statements explaining, justifying, and excusing the plagiarism.
Litton removed 143 sermons from his church’s website and YouTube, leading most to surmise that these sermons probably also contained plagiarism, due to his explanation of his “sermon by committee” paradigm explained in his statement.
The secular news media began reporting on all of this.
Justin Peters posted a very thorough video biblically explaining and providing documentation for all of this:
Almost immediately, three more side by side sermon comparison videos of Litton and Greear surfaced showing even further plagiarism by Litton. Romans 8 sermonRomans 13 sermon* Romans 14 sermon* (The Justin Peters video above includes the Romans 1 sermon side by side video.)
*I am citing Reformation Charlotte for the purpose of these videos only. It is not a site I endorse.
Somewhat simultaneously, some of Litton’s scrubbed sermon videos begin reappearing on his church’s website and YouTube, and both he (in an interview with the Washington Times) and the leadership of his church (in a statement obtained by Baptist Press) issued statements about why the videos had been removed in the first place. The reasons given by Litton and his church leadership did not match.
For another timeline of these events with additional links, click here.
Further examples of Litton’s sermon plagiarism, some instances going back years, continue to surface.
With all the outcry against current SBC president, Ed Litton, and calls for his resignation, you might be surprised to learn that there is no mechanism in place for removing a sitting SBC president. For the office of president to be vacated, he has to resign, die, or be incapacitated.
The only official governing statement about replacing a sitting SBC president is this sentence from Article V of the SBC Constitution:
“In case of death or disability of the president, the vice presidents shall automatically succeed to the office of president in the order of their election.“
Maybe plagiarism and heresy don’t seem like that big of a deal to you. What’s going to happen when a sitting president commits adultery, steals SBC funds, comes out of the closet as a homosexual or transgender, or is discovered to be a child molester, and refuses to resign?
xxxxx
July 2021
EC SATF Named
Prior to the 2021 convention, allegations were made that the Executive Committee mishandled some charges of sexual abuse by SBC pastors / at SBC churches, which the EC vehemently denied. At the convention, a motion was made that President Ed Litton appoint a task force to investigate these allegations. That task force was named on July 9:
The purpose of the task force is to objectively examine whether the EC handled these charges of sexual abuse fairly and appropriately with regard to recommending whether or not the church should be disfellowshiped from the SBC.
You’ll notice many of the members and advisors work or volunteer in the field of victim advocacy. While it is good to have people with experience on the task force, that has to be balanced with their ability to be objective if this is to truly be an independent review.
For example, Rachael Denhollander has been a polarizing figure in victim advocacy because she has a reputation for never having met an accusation of abuse she didn’t believe, or “having an ax to grind” when it comes to allegations of abuse. If anything, she has a reputation for being biased in favor of alleged victims and unable to objectively assess when false charges have been levied.
When someone (such as some of the members of this task force) has made victim advocacy his career or life’s mission, that person is heavily invested in one side of the issue. It raises the question, “How objective can some of these task force members/advisors be?”.
I’m sorry, but there’s just no polite way to say this, and sometimes you have to call a spade a spade. Ed Litton has been caught in two obvious, public lies about the plagiarism fiasco and his wife co-preaching with him.
Kathy’s Co-Preaching:
This is an issue that came up prior to the 2021 convention so it is not included in this article, but I referred to it in this pre-convention article regarding Ed Litton’s wife Kathy:
This man who wants to be at the helm of your entire denomination, violates Scripture by allowing Kathy to “co-preach” the Sunday sermon at their Southern Baptist church here, and here, and several more sermons can be found at their church’s website.
If you try to click on the links above you’ll notice two of them yield no results. That’s because once Ed Litton was publicly taken to task for allowing his wife to preach, he deleted the sermon videos, which is covering up sin, rather than biblically repenting of it.
When first questioned about allowing his wife to preach, Litton explained that this was because it was a sermon series on marriage and family and he wanted Kathy to provide her perspective. (Scripture doesn’t allow for this, but some accepted this justification.)
It has now been discovered that Litton had Kathy co-preach at least one other sermon series in 2013 which had nothing to do with marriage and family.
(If you’re unclear about why this is a violation of Scripture, please click here, here, and here to read up.)
Plagiarism (see “June” above):
In a news interview with his local CBS affiliate, Litton clearly says the allegations of plagiarism came from “unnamed sources”.
(See 2:40 for the “unnamed sources” segment.)
This is patently untrue. Many SBC pastors and others have publicly sounded the alarm about the plagiarism issue, and all the ones I’m aware of have used their real names.
SWBTS/Greenway Provide Cover for Litton’s Non-Repentance
On September 14, during SWBTS’ chapel service, seminary president Adam Greenway interviewed Ed Litton on a variety of topics, first – and most notably – the plagiarism scandal (3:50). Once again, Litton finessed instead of repenting.
You can tell where Greenway stands as he prefaces his question to Litton by disparagingly referring to the “snark” he received from “anonymous social media accounts” when he announced that Litton had been invited. (“Anonymous”? What I saw when I commented on his Twitter announcement was, I’d estimate, well over 90% non-anonymous, concerned, yet frustrated Southern Baptists wanting the plagiarism issue addressed, and for Litton to resign.)
And, of course, you’ll notice that Litton doesn’t repent over this sin, and even characterizes those who exposed his sin as meaning evil against him in the Genesis 50:20 sense. (More here.)
“In a 44-31 vote Tuesday, Oct. 5, the Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee (SBC EC) opted to waive attorney-client privilege in connection with a third-party investigation of itself [see “July” above]. Ahead of the special called meeting, six committee members resigned, and Chairman Rolland Slade noted during the meeting an expectation that other resignations may soon follow with the passage of the widely-debated waiver of attorney-client privilege.” – SBC Executive Committee votes to waive attorney-client privilege in sexual abuse investigation at Conservative Baptist Network
Waiving ACP was not necessary in order for Guidepost Solutions (the firm retained by the SATF to investigate allegations of mishandling of abuse cases by the EC) or the SATF to investigate allegations of the EC’s mishandling of abuse cases. It put the SBC in jeopardy of losing its legal representation and insurance coverage, and left individual EC members vulnerable to lawsuits (thus, the aforementioned resignations). And since any compensation paid to abuse victims would have been covered by the insurance policy, it was a very foolish decision indeed.
Multiple EC Resignations
As a result of the EC voting to waive ACP, fourteen committee members resigned effective in late September and October – including President Ronnie Floyd and Rod Martin – due to personal legal vulnerability and frustration.
On October 11, Guenther, Jordan & Price, the Nashville firm which had provided legal representation for the SBC since 1966, terminated its relationship with the Southern Baptist Convention
“The Executive Committeeโs board of directors, by a majority vote, has acted to prospectively and preemptively waive the Executive Committeeโs attorney-client privilege without knowing the communications affected by the waiver and without knowing the effect it will have on the Executive Committee, the Convention, and those who have served as members or employees of the Executive Committee…For these reasons, we believe our commitment to a certain standard of professional conduct leaves us no choice but to advise you that we are withdrawing from our role as general counsel to the Southern Baptist Convention and the Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention.“
On October 28, the EC trustees met and retained Bradley Legal to provide legal services on an interim basis. (See “February” below for more information on Bradley Legal.)
November 2021
A Discussion of the Issues
On November 19, the Conservative Baptist Network hosted a panel discussion centering on problematic issues in the SBC. Led by SBC First Vice President, Dr. Lee Brand, participants included (L-R: Randy Adams, Tom Ascol, Russell Fuller, Rod Martin, and Allen Nelson)
There was a problem with the audio the night of the recording that caused the first 10-12 minutes of the video’s volume to be extremely low. It clears up after that.
UnMerritted Praise
On November 22, James Merritt – multi-seminary degreed pastor of Cross Point church (SBC) in Duluth, Georgia, former SBC president, chair of the 2021 Resolutions Committee, former chair of the EC, former president of the SBC Pastors’ Conference, visiting professor at SEBTS, etc. – posted this tweet regarding his son Jonathan’s sermon at his (Jonathan’s) “church” the day before. Jonathan is openly homosexual, and his “church” is homosexuality affirming, egalitarian, and universalist, among other anti-biblical beliefs:
Obviously, it should go without saying (especially to someone as biblically knowledgeable as a pastor, former SBC president, and SBC seminary professor should be) that a practicing homosexual is not saved and has, therefore, rejected the gospel. How could any sermon he preached be “faithful to the gospel”?
Naturally, his appalling statement received pushback from biblically faithful Christians, and James Merritt once again showed his baser nature by lashing out at those taking him to task.
Likely facing pressure behind the scenes, James Merritt resigned his position as visiting professor at SEBTS (but not his pastorate). For this, he was practically lauded as a hero by SEBTS president Danny Akin…
Someone gave reporter Liam Adams of the Tennesseean James Merritt’s binder from his tenure as 2021 Resolutions Committee chair. The binder contained private emails between Tom Ascol and James Merritt as well as other confidential Resolutions Committee communications and information, some of which was used in an article Adams wrote.
In this video, Justin Peters examines four incidents in recent SBC history that seem to demonstrate a gradual progression toward affirming homosexuality. Two of the incidents took place at First Baptist Church Orlando, pastored by David Uth (president of the 2020 Pastors’ Conference who was roundly criticized for inviting false teachers and a female “pastor” as speakers), one incident involved James Merritt, and another involved former SBC President J.D. Greear.
Following a tweet by pastor and EC member Adam Wyatt singing the praises of new interim legal team Bradley Legal, questions began to be raised about the many ties the firm has to the homosexual and woke agendas. From sponsoring Nashville Pride to a glowing report on Bradley’s “inclusivity” from the Human Rights Campaign, Bradley is proud of its “diversity”.
On February 28, in the middle of a self-aggrandizing video noting his past and anticipated accomplishments, and breaking with decades of tradition, Ed Litton briefly announced he would not seek or accept a second term as president of the Southern Baptist Convention.
Point of Order: The SBC President’s Term of Office
“The officers shall be elected annually and shall hold office until their successors are elected and qualified. The term of office for the president is limited to two (2) years, and a president shall not be eligible for re-election until as much as one (1) year has elapsed from the time a successor is named.”The Constitution of the Southern Baptist Convention, Article V, Point 2
In plain English: There is an election for SBC president (and other officers) every year at the SBC annual meeting, which means we could elect a new president every single year. However, the SBC Constitution allows the president to serve two consecutive one-year terms, and, in recent history, most SBC presidents and messengers have taken the Constitution up on that offer. The last single-term president was Adrian Rogers, who (though later elected to two consecutive terms in the mid-1980’s) served from 1979 to 1980, 43 years ago.
xxxxx
March 2022
Willy Run?
March 1, one day after Ed Litton announced he would not seek re-election for a second term as SBC president (see “February” above), Willy Rice, pastor of Calvary Church in Clearwater, Florida, announced that he would be nominated for SBC president at the annual meeting in June. (See “April” below)
Calvary follows the multi-site model with three locations in Florida. They also have an “online campus” which they seem to equate with the three physical locations. Though there’s nothing wrong with a church live streaming its worship service, leading people to believe that watching a video of a worship service is equal to being a faithful member of a local church and physically gathering with that church body for worship and fellowship is an unbiblical ecclesiology. The Greek word for โchurchโ in the New Testament is แผฮบฮบฮปฮทฯฮฏฮฑ, or ekklesia. It literally means a gathering or assembly. No gathering, no church. The Bible commands and assumes that we physically gather as the church.
On March 22, it was announced that Tom Ascol – pastor of Grace Baptist Church in Cape Coral, Florida, and president of Founders Ministries – would be nominated for SBC president, and Voddie Baucham – author, sought after conference speaker, and currently dean of theology at African Christian University in Zambia – for president of the Pastors’ Conference.
Both men have an outstanding record of fidelity to Scripture, biblical ecclesiology, Christian ethics, and sound doctrine. Both have spoken unashamedly against sexual sin, false teachers, Critical Race Theory and racialism, egalitarianism, and the social justice movement. Both are dedicated to the bold proclamation of the mercy and grace of God in the biblical gospel rather than the watered down gospel of seeker sensitive easy believism.
There could be no two better men than these to begin the hard task of turning the SBC back to faithfully believing and obeying God’s Word. If at all possible, my Southern Baptist sisters, I urge you to talk to your pastor about representing your church as a messenger at the SBC annual meeting in Anaheim in June (along with as many other messengers as your church qualifies for) and vote for Tom and Voddie.
On March 23, a third candidate for the SBC presidency was announced. Former IMB missionary, Robin Hadaway. Hadaway served for many years as a missionary in Africa and South America. Following his time on the mission field he spent twenty years at Midwestern Baptist Theological seminary as a professor of missions and in several different administrative positions. He has also served in various offices and capacities in the Southern Baptist Convention.
In late March (spilling over into April), a situation began to unfold in which Tom Buck (and his wife, Jennifer), pastor of First Baptist Church, Lindale, Texas, who has battled valiantly against corruption in the SBC, was maligned, lied to, and threatened with blackmail. The situation involved not insignificant figures in SBC life, including SEBTS professor Karen Swallow Prior, SEBTS President Danny Akin, former 2022 SBC presidential nominee Willy Rice, and others.
This is the same type of “dirty tricks” move from the liberal contingent of the SBC we’ve come to expect over the last few years in the weeks immediately preceding the annual meeting, as they attempt to sully the reputations of those on the biblical side of the aisle in an attempt to influence, or even derail, the SBC presidential election.
The story is both heart wrenching and enraging, and provides insight into just how evil and corrupt the SBC has become at the highest levels. The story is somewhat lengthy and involved, and the timeline intricate, but I urge you to peruse the following pertinent documentation:
On April 1, potential SBC presidential nominee, Willy Rice (see “March” above) announced that it was about to be made public that a deacon in his church had committed “sexual sin” in his past – prior to his salvation – “that could also be described as abusive” but which did not involve criminal charges. The deacon was removed from his position. (I would like to point out, for clarity, that the 2021 resolution Rice quotes from near the end of the video says that anyone who has committed sexual abuse is permanently disqualified from the office of pastor. The man in question was a deacon, not a pastor.)
On April 6 – likely under pressure from “progressive” SBC leadership because he was the progressive candidate, and abuse is a major plank in the progressive platform – Rice announced he was withdrawing his name as a candidate for SBC President.
On April 7, it was announced that pastor Bart Barber would be nominated for president of the SBC. Barber was appointed by current SBC president Ed Litton (see above) as chair of the Resolutions Committee, and will serve in that capacity at the 2022 annual meeting.
Though he may not consider himself progressive, Barber is the candidate most progressives will likely end up voting for, simply because a) he has greater name recognition than Robin Hadaway, and b) they want the least conservative candidate possible to win.
You can read about Barber’s positions on various issues at Bart Barber FAQs on his church’s website. You may find the following sections to be informative:
Critical Race Theory– in which Barber says it is problematic there is no agreed upon definition of CRT, yet conducts a Twitter poll (which any marginal statistician could tell you is hardly reliable) about this undefined concept of CRT, and uses those results to conclude that CRT is “far from being an urgent issue to address in your church or in the Southern Baptist Convention.”
(Barber also served on the 2021 resolutions committee which quashed a resolution condemning CRT as incompatible with the BFM signed by 1300+ Southern Baptists. Tom Ascol, on the other hand, at that same meeting, made a motion to rescind 2019’s Resolution 9. Read more here.)
Plagiarism– in which Barber asserts that, since the authors of Scripture, young pastors, and those newly converted on the mission field may not have access to advanced theological training, the internet, commentaries, methods of attribution, etc., and, thus, may repeat things they’ve been told by others with no attribution, this excuses someone like Ed Litton – who does have all of those advantages and should know better – from plagiarism. How does Ed telling JD Greear’s personal life experiences as though they were his own fit into that paradigm? It’s not readily clear.
You can read the rest of Barber’s defense of Litton – as well as his opposition to the CBN (Conservative Baptist Network) here. Tom Ascol was, at that same time, vocally decrying Litton’s sin of plagiarism.
Though the content of his interactions with her are benign, Barber seems to have a friendly Twitter relationship with false teacher Beth Moore (here, here).
In 2020, Barber invited Dwight McKissic to be a guest on his podcast, and recorded the episode in the sanctuary of his church. McKissic is an SBC “pastor” (he is biblically disqualified) who plays the race card in nearly every conversation, is a rabid egalitarian, and defends false teachers such as Beth Moore (McKissic suggested that she should be nominated as president of the SBC a few years ago) whenever he gets a chance.
On April 15, the resolutions portal opened for submitting a resolution to the 2022 Resolutions Committee. The 2022 resolution submission window closes May 30.
Resolutions are essentially position statements messengers may have the opportunity to vote on at the Convention. (Parliamentary procedure or committee action may preclude a vote.) I would love to publish the text of, or information regarding as many resolutions as possible so messengers can take the time to read, inform themselves, and especially pray about how they should vote that they may not have once at the convention site.
If you know someone who will be submitting a resolution at the Convention and would like to have it published here, please comment below or contact me as soon as possible.
Resolutions
This is the originaltext that will be submitted to the Committee on Resolutions. Please bear in mind, the Committee on Resolutions has the authority to โrewordโ these resolutions in any way they choose and then present the edited version to the Convention for a vote. (This was a major issue with Resolution 9 on CRT in 2019. The Committee โrewordedโ the original resolution so much that the edited version ended up saying basically the opposite of the original version.) The Committee also has the authority to decline to present a resolution for a vote. When you arrive at the Convention, please carefully read the versions of the resolutions you are given before voting on them, since they may have been altered.
A resolution has traditionally been defined as an expression of opinion or concern, as compared to a motion, which calls for action. A resolution is not used to direct an entity of the Southern Baptist Convention to specific action other than to communicate the opinion or concern expressed. Resolutions are passed during the annual Convention meeting.Resources in Resolutions at SBC.net
As I mentioned above, a resolution is akin to a position statement on anything from abortion to a war in another country to National Ice Cream Day if you like. Individual Southern Baptist church members write up resolutions and submit them to the Committee on Resolutions within the allotted time frame. The Committee on Resolutions processes each resolution. Most, they will decline to present for a vote. Some, they will tweak, re-word, edit, beef up, or water down, before presenting. Some, they will present as is. Sometimes, when several similar resolutions are submitted, they will write a new resolution, combining the ideas they like from each, and present a resolution from the committee for a vote. Messengers then have the opportunity to vote in agreement or disagreement with each resolution the Committee on Resolutions presents.
Resolutions are non-binding. This means neither you nor your church nor any other Southern Baptist individual or church has to abide by any resolution. Resolutions serve mainly to make a public statement: This is what the majority of Southern Baptists believe about this issue this year.
Each year, no later than 75 days prior to the SBC Annual Meeting, the SBC president, in conference with the vice presidents, appoints a Committee on Resolutions whose task is to consider and recommend appropriate resolutions to the messengers attending the annual meeting….Only members in good standing of churches entitled to send messengers to the next annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention may submit resolutions.
For more information on how to submit a resolution to the committee click here: Submit a Resolution
xxxxx
Change of Venue
On April 28, the Executive Committee voted to move the 2023 SBC annual meeting from Charlotte, North Carolina (the site approved by messengers in 2016), to New Orleans, Louisiana. Due to increased attendance over the past few years, it was anticipated that the Charlotte venue would be too small.
SATF Cost
Also on April 28, with regard to the Sexual Abuse Task Force:
EC members were informed that since Oct. 1, a total of $1,661,530 has been paid toward Guidepost Solutions [the independent investigating agency] and $17,478 toward Task Force travel and meetings.
In September, the EC voted to allocate up to $1.6 million toward the work by Guidepost Solutions. In February, they voted to increase the funds allocated to $2 million for the investigation or the โcoverage of any other direct expenses without further approval.โ
“Baptist Press recently released an interview that Jonathan Howe and Brandon Porter conducted with me…on April 5. Both they and I recorded the interview. They did so indicating that they would edit out the โums,โ โuhs,โ and โwells,โ etc. from the transcript in order to make the article flow well without losing the contextually understood meaning of my words.
In the interview that they posted, however…my responses were largely left unedited except for the exclusion of certain things I said…There are other misquotes throughout the article…in the interest of openness and transparency, I am making available the full audio below. In it you can hear a more complete and accurate version of the how the questions were phrased as well as my exact answers.”
Tom Ascol, Bart Barber, and Robin Hadaway participated in a panel discussion on issues facing the SBC at First Baptist Church, Keller, Texas, on May 4. The discussion was moderated by Joe Wooddell and Tony Richmondโboth of FBC Keller.
Denny Burk, Bart Barber and the ERLC: All Against Abolition
Please educate yourself on this issue if you’re attending the Convention in June.It is a topic likely to be included in votable items.
Just days after the leak of the draft of the SCOTUS majority opinion on the overturn of Roe, HB813, on the complete abolition of abortion in the state of Louisiana, arrived at the House of the Louisiana Legislature for a vote. And it was torpedoed, thanks in part to the ERLC.
Acting ERLC president, Brent Leatherwood (along with dozens of other heads of supposedly pro-life organizations), signed on to An Open Letter to State Lawmakers from Americaโs Leading Pro-Life Organizations, released May 12 – the same day the Louisiana bill came to the floor for a vote. The letter characterized women who murder their babies as “victims” – denying that they have any culpability for killing their children – and, in an ominous, strong-armed tone, staunchly opposed the bill, and any future similar abolition bills.
In short, if your church gives to the Cooperative Program (and most SBC churches do): your offerings paid for the ERLC to help kill legislation that would have outlawed abortion.
This SBC entity, which you fund with your offerings, ignored the will of the SBC messengers to whom they are answerable. You will recall that last year at the Convention, the 2021 Committee on Resolutions – of which Bart Barber was a member – refused to let an abolition resolution come to the floor for a vote. It was only after messengers demanded it be released from committee that it was brought to the floor and overwhelmingly passed. The SBC grassroots wants abortion abolished immediately.
After the killing of the Louisiana bill, Denny Burk, professor at SBTS’ Boyce College, and associate pastor at an SBC church, carpet bombed Twitter with numerous screeds against abolition (the immediate abolishing of all abortion) and in favor of pro-life incrementalism (gradually chipping away at abortion via legislative restrictions, AKA, the past 50 years of legalized abortion), publishing three blog articles in a week (here, here, and here) which misrepresented and denounced the abolitionist position (which, by the way, is growing rapidly in the SBC, due to Southern Baptists’ disillusionment with the inability of the pro-life movement to abolish abortion), and warning Southern Baptists of dire consequences should they support the abolitionist cause rather than the pro-life position.
Naturally, Southern Baptists wanted to know where the candidates for SBC president stand on the issue.
Bart Barber updated his campaign FAQ page with a number of misrepresentations of, and misinformation about the abolitionist position (which, if I’m not misunderstanding his Twitter feed, were corrected by several people before {and certainly since} he posted the misinformation on his web page), and placed himself squarely in the incrementalist pro-life camp.
Tom Ascolwants abortion abolished immediately. You can read his clear, biblical, and well-reasoned position, which addresses Burk’s points, the ERLC’s sabotage of the Louisiana bill, and the 2021 SBC abolition resolution in his excellent article Toward a Principled Pro-Life Ethic in Post-Roe America
To inform yourself on what abolition actually does and doesn’t espouse, I recommend these resources:
Please educate yourself on this issue if you’re attending the Convention in June.It is a topic which will almost certainly be included in votable items.
Guidepost Solutions, the firm hired by the SATF to investigate the EC for mishandling cases of abuse was to submit its report to the SATF 30 days prior to the SBC annual meeting in Anaheim (June 14-15, 2022). The report was to be made public one week after receipt, along with the SATF’s recommendations on any action the SBC should take as a result of the report. This took place on Sunday, May 22.
The GS report is nearly 300 pages long, so as I’m posting this today, most people who would offer a substantive commentary on it are still reading it. When pertinent substantive commentary becomes available, I will post links to it here.
Bart Barber shared his thoughts in a blog article entitled Response to the Sexual Abuse Task Force Report. While compassionate, it is extremely generalized and offers no specific, concrete suggestions as to how the SBC should respond.
I strongly recommend that you make the time to read and understand both the GS report (the executive summary at the beginning, at the very least) and the SATF recommendations if you’re planning to serve as a messenger at the Convention in June, as you’ll almost certainly be asked to vote on motions or resolutions related to it.
Please do not just blindly trust those on the platform to accurately represent the report, the recommendations, or anything else about the sexual abuse situation in the SBC. Do your homework.
As you read the GS report, do keep in mind that GS is not a Christian organization, therefore, they were unable to view the situation from a biblical perspective, nor were they able to propose biblical solutions to the problems they discovered. Their outlook and analysis of the abuse situation in the SBC, though professional and honest was, necessarily, worldly, and their recommendations based in worldly practicality, not Scripture. As Christians, we must take the information and recommendations GS has given us, and examine them under the microscope of Scripture. We must make decisions about what to do and how to move forward that submit to the authority of Scripture, not worldly “wisdom,” methods, and practicalities.
On May 27, “Pastor” Dwight McKissic (see “April”) announced on Twitter that he would be making the following motion at the Convention. (Remember, a motion is actionable and different from a resolution {see “April”}, which is non-binding.)
Here is the motion I will be presenting at the annual meeting in Anaheim. Please join me in requesting that @albertmohler and the trustees of @SBTS respond in a way that honors Christ and His bride. pic.twitter.com/suVElvLWUf
In a nutshell, he’s making a motion for SBTS to “study” removing the name of anyone who owned slaves from its buildings, programs, etc. The findings of the study (plus any actions taken or recommendations from SBTS) will be reported at the 2023 Convention.
This article was last updated on April 29. Today’s (May 5) updates include:
May:
The ineptitude or sabotage (it’s unclear which) of Baptist Press’ interview with Tom Ascol
The video of the SBC presidential candidate forum
I’m still collecting proposed resolutions for SBC 2022. I invite anyone submitting a resolution to send it to me for inclusion in this article. (More under “April”)
The 2021 annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention opened the eyes of a lot of Southern Baptists to the sin and corruption infecting our cooperative of churches.
The foremost question on the minds of many doctrinally sound and discerning Southern Baptist pastors and church members is whether or not the SBC is too corrupt to be saved. “Should we shake the dust off our feet and leave the SBC, or should we stay in and fight for fidelity to Scripture?”
If you and your church are choosing to stay in and fight, it is crucial that you be well-informed enough on the issues and the candidates to vote biblically when you attend the 2022 annual meeting in Anaheim. And that also means you’re going to need to know your Bible well enough to vote biblically on those issues.
Because what really hurt doctrinally sound Southern Baptists at the 2021 meeting (and previous years’ meetings) was not just those who were consciously pushing an unbiblical, liberal agenda, it was also the messengers who were ignorant of the issues and the candidates, and just voted according to whatever sounded good on the surface, or just blindly trusted whoever was on stage at the moment.
Representing your church (and millions of other Southern Baptists) as a messenger at the annual meeting is a grave responsibility and it should be treated as such. You’ve got to get informed. Your church and pastor have to get informed. The other churches in your association, and your associational leadership have to get informed.
That’s where this article comes in.
I know it’s hard to keep up with the issues when you’ve got a life you’re trying to live and responsibilities you’re trying to take care of. I want to try to make staying informed a little easier for you, your church, and your association, so please share this around.
This article (initially published in the summer of 2021 and subsequently updated) is a timeline of significant events in the SBC at the national level starting with the 2021 annual meeting and moving forward from there. I’ve tried to keep things brief, so you may need to take what you see here and do some more digging on your own if you want an in depth look at a particular issue.
I’ve also posted a few “Points of Order,” things that aren’t really a current event, but more along the lines of SBC polity or information you might need.
If you think I’ve left out something significant (I’m trying not to get bogged down in too much minutiae), please leave a comment and a link, if possible.
For a recap of the major decisions and happenings of the 2021 annual meeting, please read my article: SBC21: Aftermath, Thoughts, and Where Do We Go From Here? There are lots of informative links at the end of the article in the “Additional Resources” section.
June 2021
Point of Order: Financial Contributions
If you’re staying in the SBC, you might be concerned about your offerings being sent to the Cooperative Program to fund SBC entities which are operating unbiblically. This is a dilemma for doctrinally sound churches and individuals, because, until fairly recently, making a financial contribution to the SBC at the national level was a requirement for being “in friendly cooperation with the SBC.”
So how do we stay in the SBC to fight ungodliness by sending messengers to the annual meeting, yet maintain our financial contribution without funding ungodliness? [Now former – see “October” below] Executive Committee member Rod Martin explains:
I have been repeatedly asked how the formula works that determines how many messengers an SBC church may send to the Annual Meeting. Here’s the deal:
Under the recent constitutional amendment, every church now gets two messengers whether they give or not. Previously you had to give a minimum amount to get any messengers at all.
The previous maximum number of messengers was 10. That number is now 12.
You can get one additional messenger (up to the maximum) for every percentage point of additional giving out of undesignated receipts. That’s fair for every church: if you’re giving 5%, you get five more messengers. If you’re giving 10%, you get ten more messengers. The dollar amount doesn’t come into play.
That said, and I very much disagree with this, you can also get one additional messenger (up to the maximum) for each $6,000 in giving. That means megachurches can have 12 messengers by giving next to nothing as a percentage of their budgets. I think that was a big mistake. But the vast majority of SBC churches are small, so they greatly outnumber those churches, and also, the 12 messenger cap greatly limits the power of those giant churches on the floor.
The “giving” I just described can be through the Cooperative Program, but no longer has to be: it can be to any convention entity. So let’s say you wanted to give all of it to Lottie Moon, or give all of it through IMB but designated for certain specific missionaries: you could do that and get all ten additional messengers. There are many other possibilities as well.
I think this change to our system (which was part of GCR)was a giant mistake, as was GCR generally. However, while I know some people disagree, I don’t think it actually disadvantages smaller churches in practice, and it definitely creates a lot of flexibility for churches to give creatively while also maintaining their maximum possible messenger representation.
On June 16, the second day of the 2021 annual meeting, a messenger mentioned in a question from the floor that the “What We Believe” page of the church Ed Litton pastors (Redemption Church in Saraland, Alabama) contained a heretical view of the Trinity called partialism.
Photo courtesy of onenewsnow.com
Quietly, and almost immediately, the heretical wording was deleted from the website, as you can see in the “before and after” screenshots above.
It’s not just that the wording was heretical. Redemption Church’s statement of faith – the core of its identity as a church – was changed without a vote by the church body. Indeed, without even notifying or consulting the church body. How would that go over at your church?
To date, neither Litton nor Redemption Church has offered any official explanation regarding why a multi-SBC seminary degreed pastor would lead his church to codify a heretical statement of faith in the first place, nor how that statement of faith was able to be altered without input or permission from the church, nor why it took outside publicity to spur the change.
Unofficially, the explanation some claim Litton has given is that the original heretical wording was some sort of typographical error by the person who typed it into the website. (I want to stress that this is hearsay.)
About a week after the convention ended, starting during the week of June 20:
A side by side video surfaced of Ed Litton (Jan. 2020) and J.D. Greear (Jan. 2019) preaching the same (Greear’s) sermon on Romans 1.
The sermon was Greear’s infamous “The Bible whispers about sexual sin” sermon, so there was not only the plagiarism aspect, but, just as when Greear originally preached it, there was outrage over the bad theology contained in the sermon itself.
Greear and Litton each issued statements explaining, justifying, and excusing the plagiarism.
Litton removed 143 sermons from his church’s website and YouTube, leading most to surmise that these sermons probably also contained plagiarism, due to his explanation of his “sermon by committee” paradigm explained in his statement.
The secular news media began reporting on all of this.
Justin Peters posted a very thorough video biblically explaining and providing documentation for all of this:
Almost immediately, three more side by side sermon comparison videos of Litton and Greear surfaced showing even further plagiarism by Litton. Romans 8 sermonRomans 13 sermon* Romans 14 sermon* (The Justin Peters video above includes the Romans 1 sermon side by side video.)
*I am citing Reformation Charlotte for the purpose of these videos only. It is not a site I endorse.
Somewhat simultaneously, some of Litton’s scrubbed sermon videos begin reappearing on his church’s website and YouTube, and both he (in an interview with the Washington Times) and the leadership of his church (in a statement obtained by Baptist Press) issued statements about why the videos had been removed in the first place. The reasons given by Litton and his church leadership did not match.
For another timeline of these events with additional links, click here.
Further examples of Litton’s sermon plagiarism, some instances going back years, continue to surface.
With all the outcry against current SBC president, Ed Litton, and calls for his resignation, you might be surprised to learn that there is no mechanism in place for removing a sitting SBC president. For the office of president to be vacated, he has to resign, die, or be incapacitated.
The only official governing statement about replacing a sitting SBC president is this sentence from Article V of the SBC Constitution:
“In case of death or disability of the president, the vice presidents shall automatically succeed to the office of president in the order of their election.“
Maybe plagiarism and heresy don’t seem like that big of a deal to you. What’s going to happen when a sitting president commits adultery, steals SBC funds, comes out of the closet as a homosexual or transgender, or is discovered to be a child molester, and refuses to resign?
xxxxx
July 2021
EC SATF Named
Prior to the 2021 convention, allegations were made that the Executive Committee mishandled some charges of sexual abuse by SBC pastors / at SBC churches, which the EC vehemently denied. At the convention, a motion was made that President Ed Litton appoint a task force to investigate these allegations. That task force was named on July 9:
The purpose of the task force is to objectively examine whether the EC handled these charges of sexual abuse fairly and appropriately with regard to recommending whether or not the church should be disfellowshiped from the SBC.
You’ll notice many of the members and advisors work or volunteer in the field of victim advocacy. While it is good to have people with experience on the task force, that has to be balanced with their ability to be objective if this is to truly be an independent review.
For example, Rachael Denhollander has been a polarizing figure in victim advocacy because she has a reputation for never having met an accusation of abuse she didn’t believe, or “having an ax to grind” when it comes to allegations of abuse. If anything, she has a reputation for being biased in favor of alleged victims and unable to objectively assess when false charges have been levied.
When someone (such as some of the members of this task force) has made victim advocacy his career or life’s mission, that person is heavily invested in one side of the issue. It raises the question, “How objective can some of these task force members/advisors be?”.
I’m sorry, but there’s just no polite way to say this, and sometimes you have to call a spade a spade. Ed Litton has been caught in two obvious, public lies about the plagiarism fiasco and his wife co-preaching with him.
Kathy’s Co-Preaching:
This is an issue that came up prior to the 2021 convention so it is not included in this article, but I referred to it in this pre-convention article regarding Ed Litton’s wife Kathy:
This man who wants to be at the helm of your entire denomination, violates Scripture by allowing Kathy to “co-preach” the Sunday sermon at their Southern Baptist church here, and here, and several more sermons can be found at their church’s website.
If you try to click on the links above you’ll notice two of them yield no results. That’s because once Ed Litton was publicly taken to task for allowing his wife to preach, he deleted the sermon videos, which is covering up sin, rather than biblically repenting of it.
When first questioned about allowing his wife to preach, Litton explained that this was because it was a sermon series on marriage and family and he wanted Kathy to provide her perspective. (Scripture doesn’t allow for this, but some accepted this justification.)
It has now been discovered that Litton had Kathy co-preach at least one other sermon series in 2013 which had nothing to do with marriage and family.
(If you’re unclear about why this is a violation of Scripture, please click here, here, and here to read up.)
Plagiarism (see “June” above):
In a news interview with his local CBS affiliate, Litton clearly says the allegations of plagiarism came from “unnamed sources”.
(See 2:40 for the “unnamed sources” segment.)
This is patently untrue. Many SBC pastors and others have publicly sounded the alarm about the plagiarism issue, and all the ones I’m aware of have used their real names.
SWBTS/Greenway Provide Cover for Litton’s Non-Repentance
On September 14, during SWBTS’ chapel service, seminary president Adam Greenway interviewed Ed Litton on a variety of topics, first – and most notably – the plagiarism scandal (3:50). Once again, Litton finessed instead of repenting.
You can tell where Greenway stands as he prefaces his question to Litton by disparagingly referring to the “snark” he received from “anonymous social media accounts” when he announced that Litton had been invited. (“Anonymous”? What I saw when I commented on his Twitter announcement was, I’d estimate, well over 90% non-anonymous, concerned, yet frustrated Southern Baptists wanting the plagiarism issue addressed, and for Litton to resign.)
And, of course, you’ll notice that Litton doesn’t repent over this sin, and even characterizes those who exposed his sin as meaning evil against him in the Genesis 50:20 sense. (More here.)
“In a 44-31 vote Tuesday, Oct. 5, the Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee (SBC EC) opted to waive attorney-client privilege in connection with a third-party investigation of itself [see “July” above]. Ahead of the special called meeting, six committee members resigned, and Chairman Rolland Slade noted during the meeting an expectation that other resignations may soon follow with the passage of the widely-debated waiver of attorney-client privilege.” – SBC Executive Committee votes to waive attorney-client privilege in sexual abuse investigation at Conservative Baptist Network
Waiving ACP was not necessary in order for Guidepost Solutions (the firm retained by the SATF to investigate allegations of mishandling of abuse cases by the EC) or the SATF to investigate allegations of the EC’s mishandling of abuse cases. It put the SBC in jeopardy of losing its legal representation and insurance coverage, and left individual EC members vulnerable to lawsuits (thus, the aforementioned resignations). And since any compensation paid to abuse victims would have been covered by the insurance policy, it was a very foolish decision indeed.
Multiple EC Resignations
As a result of the EC voting to waive ACP, fourteen committee members resigned effective in late September and October – including President Ronnie Floyd and Rod Martin – due to personal legal vulnerability and frustration.
On October 11, Guenther, Jordan & Price, the Nashville firm which had provided legal representation for the SBC since 1966, terminated its relationship with the Southern Baptist Convention
“The Executive Committeeโs board of directors, by a majority vote, has acted to prospectively and preemptively waive the Executive Committeeโs attorney-client privilege without knowing the communications affected by the waiver and without knowing the effect it will have on the Executive Committee, the Convention, and those who have served as members or employees of the Executive Committee…For these reasons, we believe our commitment to a certain standard of professional conduct leaves us no choice but to advise you that we are withdrawing from our role as general counsel to the Southern Baptist Convention and the Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention.“
On October 28, the EC trustees met and retained Bradley Legal to provide legal services on an interim basis. (See “February” below for more information on Bradley Legal.)
November 2021
A Discussion of the Issues
On November 19, the Conservative Baptist Network hosted a panel discussion centering on problematic issues in the SBC. Led by SBC First Vice President, Dr. Lee Brand, participants included (L-R: Randy Adams, Tom Ascol, Russell Fuller, Rod Martin, and Allen Nelson)
There was a problem with the audio the night of the recording that caused the first 10-12 minutes of the video’s volume to be extremely low. It clears up after that.
UnMerritted Praise
On November 22, James Merritt – multi-seminary degreed pastor of Cross Point church (SBC) in Duluth, Georgia, former SBC president, chair of the 2021 Resolutions Committee, former chair of the EC, former president of the SBC Pastors’ Conference, visiting professor at SEBTS, etc. – posted this tweet regarding his son Jonathan’s sermon at his (Jonathan’s) “church” the day before. Jonathan is openly homosexual, and his “church” is homosexuality affirming, egalitarian, and universalist, among other anti-biblical beliefs:
Obviously, it should go without saying (especially to someone as biblically knowledgeable as a pastor, former SBC president, and SBC seminary professor should be) that a practicing homosexual is not saved and has, therefore, rejected the gospel. How could any sermon he preached be “faithful to the gospel”?
Naturally, his appalling statement received pushback from biblically faithful Christians, and James Merritt once again showed his baser nature by lashing out at those taking him to task.
Likely facing pressure behind the scenes, James Merritt resigned his position as visiting professor at SEBTS (but not his pastorate). For this, he was practically lauded as a hero by SEBTS president Danny Akin…
Someone gave reporter Liam Adams of the Tennesseean James Merritt’s binder from his tenure as 2021 Resolutions Committee chair. The binder contained private emails between Tom Ascol and James Merritt as well as other confidential Resolutions Committee communications and information, some of which was used in an article Adams wrote.
In this video, Justin Peters examines four incidents in recent SBC history that seem to demonstrate a gradual progression toward affirming homosexuality. Two of the incidents took place at First Baptist Church Orlando, pastored by David Uth (president of the 2020 Pastors’ Conference who was roundly criticized for inviting false teachers and a female “pastor” as speakers), one incident involved James Merritt, and another involved former SBC President J.D. Greear.
Following a tweet by pastor and EC member Adam Wyatt singing the praises of new interim legal team Bradley Legal, questions began to be raised about the many ties the firm has to the homosexual and woke agendas. From sponsoring Nashville Pride to a glowing report on Bradley’s “inclusivity” from the Human Rights Campaign, Bradley is proud of its “diversity”.
On February 28, in the middle of a self-aggrandizing video noting his past and anticipated accomplishments, and breaking with decades of tradition, Ed Litton briefly announced he would not seek or accept a second term as president of the Southern Baptist Convention.
Point of Order: The SBC President’s Term of Office
“The officers shall be elected annually and shall hold office until their successors are elected and qualified. The term of office for the president is limited to two (2) years, and a president shall not be eligible for re-election until as much as one (1) year has elapsed from the time a successor is named.”The Constitution of the Southern Baptist Convention, Article V, Point 2
In plain English: There is an election for SBC president (and other officers) every year at the SBC annual meeting, which means we could elect a new president every single year. However, the SBC Constitution allows the president to serve two consecutive one-year terms, and, in recent history, most SBC presidents and messengers have taken the Constitution up on that offer. The last single-term president was Adrian Rogers, who (though later elected to two consecutive terms in the mid-1980’s) served from 1979 to 1980, 43 years ago.
xxxxx
March 2022
Willy Run?
March 1, one day after Ed Litton announced he would not seek re-election for a second term as SBC president (see “February” above), Willy Rice, pastor of Calvary Church in Clearwater, Florida, announced that he would be nominated for SBC president at the annual meeting in June. (See “April” below)
Calvary follows the multi-site model with three locations in Florida. They also have an “online campus” which they seem to equate with the three physical locations. Though there’s nothing wrong with a church live streaming its worship service, leading people to believe that watching a video of a worship service is equal to being a faithful member of a local church and physically gathering with that church body for worship and fellowship is an unbiblical ecclesiology. The Greek word for โchurchโ in the New Testament is แผฮบฮบฮปฮทฯฮฏฮฑ, or ekklesia. It literally means a gathering or assembly. No gathering, no church. The Bible commands and assumes that we physically gather as the church.
On March 22, it was announced that Tom Ascol – pastor of Grace Baptist Church in Cape Coral, Florida, and president of Founders Ministries – would be nominated for SBC president, and Voddie Baucham – author, sought after conference speaker, and currently dean of theology at African Christian University in Zambia – for president of the Pastors’ Conference.
Both men have an outstanding record of fidelity to Scripture, biblical ecclesiology, Christian ethics, and sound doctrine. Both have spoken unashamedly against sexual sin, false teachers, Critical Race Theory and racialism, egalitarianism, and the social justice movement. Both are dedicated to the bold proclamation of the mercy and grace of God in the biblical gospel rather than the watered down gospel of seeker sensitive easy believism.
There could be no two better men than these to begin the hard task of turning the SBC back to faithfully believing and obeying God’s Word. If at all possible, my Southern Baptist sisters, I urge you to talk to your pastor about representing your church as a messenger at the SBC annual meeting in Anaheim in June (along with as many other messengers as your church qualifies for) and vote for Tom and Voddie.
On March 23, a third candidate for the SBC presidency was announced. Former IMB missionary, Robin Hadaway. Hadaway served for many years as a missionary in Africa and South America. Following his time on the mission field he spent twenty years at Midwestern Baptist Theological seminary as a professor of missions and in several different administrative positions. He has also served in various offices and capacities in the Southern Baptist Convention.
In late March (spilling over into April), a situation began to unfold in which Tom Buck (and his wife, Jennifer), pastor of First Baptist Church, Lindale, Texas, who has battled valiantly against corruption in the SBC, was maligned, lied to, and threatened with blackmail. The situation involved not insignificant figures in SBC life, including SEBTS professor Karen Swallow Prior, SEBTS President Danny Akin, former 2022 SBC presidential nominee Willy Rice, and others.
This is the same type of “dirty tricks” move from the liberal contingent of the SBC we’ve come to expect over the last few years in the weeks immediately preceding the annual meeting, as they attempt to sully the reputations of those on the biblical side of the aisle in an attempt to influence, or even derail, the SBC presidential election.
The story is both heart wrenching and enraging, and provides insight into just how evil and corrupt the SBC has become at the highest levels. The story is somewhat lengthy and involved, and the timeline intricate, but I urge you to peruse the following pertinent documentation:
On April 1, potential SBC presidential nominee, Willy Rice (see “March” above) announced that it was about to be made public that a deacon in his church had committed “sexual sin” in his past – prior to his salvation – “that could also be described as abusive” but which did not involve criminal charges. The deacon was removed from his position. (I would like to point out, for clarity, that the 2021 resolution Rice quotes from near the end of the video says that anyone who has committed sexual abuse is permanently disqualified from the office of pastor. The man in question was a deacon, not a pastor.)
On April 6 – likely under pressure from “progressive” SBC leadership because he was the progressive candidate, and abuse is a major plank in the progressive platform – Rice announced he was withdrawing his name as a candidate for SBC President.
On April 7, it was announced that pastor Bart Barber would be nominated for president of the SBC. Barber was appointed by current SBC president Ed Litton (see above) as chair of the Resolutions Committee, and will serve in that capacity at the 2022 annual meeting.
Though he may not consider himself progressive, Barber is the candidate most progressives will likely end up voting for, simply because a) he has greater name recognition than Robin Hadaway, and b) they want the least conservative candidate possible to win.
You can read about Barber’s positions on various issues at Bart Barber FAQs on his church’s website. You may find the following sections to be informative:
Critical Race Theory– in which Barber says it is problematic there is no agreed upon definition of CRT, yet conducts a Twitter poll (which any marginal statistician could tell you is hardly reliable) about this undefined concept of CRT, and uses those results to conclude that CRT is “far from being an urgent issue to address in your church or in the Southern Baptist Convention.”
(Barber also served on the 2021 resolutions committee which quashed a resolution condemning CRT as incompatible with the BFM signed by 1300+ Southern Baptists. Tom Ascol, on the other hand, at that same meeting, made a motion to rescind 2019’s Resolution 9. Read more here.)
Plagiarism– in which Barber asserts that, since the authors of Scripture, young pastors, and those newly converted on the mission field may not have access to advanced theological training, the internet, commentaries, methods of attribution, etc., and, thus, may repeat things they’ve been told by others with no attribution, this excuses someone like Ed Litton – who does have all of those advantages and should know better – from plagiarism. How does Ed telling JD Greear’s personal life experiences as though they were his own fit into that paradigm? It’s not readily clear.
You can read the rest of Barber’s defense of Litton – as well as his opposition to the CBN (Conservative Baptist Network) here. Tom Ascol was, at that same time, vocally decrying Litton’s sin of plagiarism.
Though the content of his interactions with her are benign, Barber seems to have a friendly Twitter relationship with false teacher Beth Moore (here, here).
In 2020, Barber invited Dwight McKissic to be a guest on his podcast, and recorded the episode in the sanctuary of his church. McKissic is an SBC “pastor” (he is biblically disqualified) who plays the race card in nearly every conversation, is a rabid egalitarian, and defends false teachers such as Beth Moore (McKissic suggested that she should be nominated as president of the SBC a few years ago) whenever he gets a chance.
On April 15, the resolutions portal opened for submitting a resolution to the 2022 Resolutions Committee. The 2022 resolution submission window closes May 30.
Resolutions are essentially position statements messengers may have the opportunity to vote on at the Convention. (Parliamentary procedure or committee action may preclude a vote.) I would love to publish the text of, or information regarding as many resolutions as possible so messengers can take the time to read, inform themselves, and especially pray about how they should vote that they may not have once at the convention site.
If you know someone who will be submitting a resolution at the Convention and would like to have it published here, please comment below or contact me as soon as possible.
Resolutions
This is the originaltext that will be submitted to the Committee on Resolutions. Please bear in mind, the Committee on Resolutions has the authority to โrewordโ these resolutions in any way they choose and then present the edited version to the Convention for a vote. (This was a major issue with Resolution 9 on CRT in 2019. The Committee โrewordedโ the original resolution so much that the edited version ended up saying basically the opposite of the original version.) The Committee also has the authority to decline to present a resolution for a vote. When you arrive at the Convention, please carefully read the versions of the resolutions you are given before voting on them, since they may have been altered.
A resolution has traditionally been defined as an expression of opinion or concern, as compared to a motion, which calls for action. A resolution is not used to direct an entity of the Southern Baptist Convention to specific action other than to communicate the opinion or concern expressed. Resolutions are passed during the annual Convention meeting.Resources in Resolutions at SBC.net
As I mentioned above, a resolution is akin to a position statement on anything from abortion to a war in another country to National Ice Cream Day if you like. Individual Southern Baptist church members write up resolutions and submit them to the Committee on Resolutions within the allotted time frame. The Committee on Resolutions processes each resolution. Most, they will decline to present for a vote. Some, they will tweak, re-word, edit, beef up, or water down, before presenting. Some, they will present as is. Sometimes, when several similar resolutions are submitted, they will write a new resolution, combining the ideas they like from each, and present a resolution from the committee for a vote. Messengers then have the opportunity to vote in agreement or disagreement with each resolution the Committee on Resolutions presents.
Resolutions are non-binding. This means neither you nor your church nor any other Southern Baptist individual or church has to abide by any resolution. Resolutions serve mainly to make a public statement: This is what the majority of Southern Baptists believe about this issue this year.
Each year, no later than 75 days prior to the SBC Annual Meeting, the SBC president, in conference with the vice presidents, appoints a Committee on Resolutions whose task is to consider and recommend appropriate resolutions to the messengers attending the annual meeting….Only members in good standing of churches entitled to send messengers to the next annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention may submit resolutions.
For more information on how to submit a resolution to the committee click here: Submit a Resolution
xxxxx
Change of Venue
On April 28, the Executive Committee voted to move the 2023 SBC annual meeting from Charlotte, North Carolina (the site approved by messengers in 2016), to New Orleans, Louisiana. Due to increased attendance over the past few years, it was anticipated that the Charlotte venue would be too small.
SATF Cost
Also on April 28, with regard to the Sexual Abuse Task Force:
EC members were informed that since Oct. 1, a total of $1,661,530 has been paid toward Guidepost Solutions [the independent investigating agency] and $17,478 toward Task Force travel and meetings.
In September, the EC voted to allocate up to $1.6 million toward the work by Guidepost Solutions. In February, they voted to increase the funds allocated to $2 million for the investigation or the โcoverage of any other direct expenses without further approval.โ
“Baptist Press recently released an interview that Jonathan Howe and Brandon Porter conducted with me…on April 5. Both they and I recorded the interview. They did so indicating that they would edit out the โums,โ โuhs,โ and โwells,โ etc. from the transcript in order to make the article flow well without losing the contextually understood meaning of my words.
In the interview that they posted, however…my responses were largely left unedited except for the exclusion of certain things I said…There are other misquotes throughout the article…in the interest of openness and transparency, I am making available the full audio below. In it you can hear a more complete and accurate version of the how the questions were phrased as well as my exact answers.”
Tom Ascol, Bart Barber, and Robin Hadaway participated in a panel discussion on issues facing the SBC at First Baptist Church, Keller, Texas, on May 4. The discussion was moderated by Joe Wooddell and Tony Richmondโboth of FBC Keller.
SATF Report and Recommendations
Guidestone Solutions, the firm hired by the SATF to investigate the EC for mishandling cases of abuse is to submit its report to the SATF 30 days prior to the SBC annual meeting in Anaheim (June 14-15, 2022). The report is to be made public one week after receipt, along with the SATF’s recommendations on any action the SBC should take as a result of the report.
Welcome to another โpotpourriโ edition of The Mailbag, where I give short(er) answers to several questions rather than a long answer to one question.
Or maybe I answered your question already? Check out my article The Mailbag: Top 10 FAQs to see if your question has been answered and to get some helpful resources.
Biblically speaking, what would be the appropriate Christian response to Ed Littonโs plagiarism? More precisely, what should that response be among the masses who will never have access to Litton or those closest to him?
It’s a great question with an answer that will leave most of us Southern Baptists frustrated, I’m afraid.
To quickly catch up readers who aren’t in the know: Newly elected president of the Southern Baptist Convention, Ed Litton, has been caught in numerous instances of preaching plagiarized sermons going back several years. Many have called upon him to repent and step down as president. As far as I’m aware, to date, he has neither biblically repented nor commented on stepping down. There is no mechanism in place in SBC governing documents for removing a sitting president from office. (For more details, see the “June” and “July” sections of my article What’s Going On in the Southern Baptist Convention?)
There are several responses that could be appropriate in this situation for the average Southern Baptists who doesn’t know or have personal access to Ed Litton:
Pray. It is always appropriate to pray for someone who is sinning to repent. Additionally, if this situation is to be resolved biblically, God is the only One powerful enough to resolve it and wise enough to know the best way to resolve it. You also need to pray for your pastor as he guides your church to decide whether to stay in or leave the SBC, and you and your family need to pray together about your pastor’s decision and whether or not you can abide by it.
Inform. If you and your church are going to remain in the SBC for now, you have to stay informed on the major issues, and this is one of them. (That’s why I wrote the “What’s going on…” article linked above, to help you stay informed.) Keep yourself informed, keep your pastor informed, and keep your Sunday School class, circle of friends, and any other appropriate people at church informed. Ask your pastor how things stand with your local SBC association, and whether or not, and how, it might be appropriate for you or someone else to keep the association informed.
Connect. I would strongly suggest joining, following on social media, subscribing to the newsletter/email list, etc. of both the Conservative Baptist Network and Founders Ministries. If any action is taken on the plagiarism issue or any other problematic issue in the SBC, it will likely spring from one or both of these groups, and you and your church will want to consider joining forces with them.
Take action(?). There are a few ways to take action in this situation as an individual, such as sending Litton a (kindly worded, non-harassing) email urging him to repent and step down, expressing your concerns to the appropriate SBC leadership, or possibly starting a petition of some sort, but I would really suggest getting some advice from your pastor first.
Honestly, I can pretty much guarantee any effort like that from an individual is going to be ignored. If the Resolutions Committee can refuse to allow a vote on a resolution proffered by 1300+ Southern Baptists, they’re not going to pay an ounce of attention to an email or a petition. Bluntly, you and I aren’t important enough to matter to those in SBC leadership. Your pastor probably isn’t either, nor the director of your association, nor even the head of your state convention. Maybe if somebody with enough power, position, and platform made enough noise about Litton stepping down (or any of these other issues) maybe, something might get done. But at this point, I’m not even sure who that might be.
All of which brings us full circle to our first and most effective response: pray. This is a mess that only God can clean up.
My husband and I were talking about women teaching/preaching to men, and he brought up an interesting question: what about when your church has a marriage conference and there is a husband/wife team who comes and they both teach?
Thanks for asking this question, because this seems to be a common teaching model for marriage and family conferences. It seems like a complicated situation to us, but it’s not to God. He said what He said in Scripture, and He means it, regardless of the circumstances.
A Christian conference is a gathering of the church body for the purpose of biblical instruction. That is a context in which Scripture’s prohibition of women instructing men in the Scriptures applies (see #7 here). So whenever the husband/wife team are addressing the co-ed audience, they just need to make sure that the wife is not giving biblical instruction to the group at large. That should fall to the husband.
That doesn’t mean that the wife can’t open her mouth at all in front of the group. It would be fine for her to…
give her personal testimony
offer practical advice (ex: “Joe and I have found it really helpful in our marriage to start the day off in prayer and a discussion of that day’s schedule.” “Guys, we ladies really like foot massages!”, etc.)
speak directly to the women in the audience about their role, behavior, or attitude in marriage as needed (Ex: “Ladies, Ephesians 5 is clear that we are to submit to our husbands.”)
answer any questions during a Q&A time that don’t require her to exposit Scripture to a male questioner
ask a question or make a brief, non-exhortational comment after her husband gives the biblical instruction portion of the session (ex: “Honey, I’m thinking some people might need a little clarification on what ‘depriving one another’ means in 1 Corinthians 7. Can you explain that to us a little more?” “Yes, 1 Peter 3:1-6 has always been so helpful to me as I strive to be a godly wife. And verse 7 has some good instruction for husbands, right, Joe?”)
And, of course, the conference can be structured so there are times of co-ed instruction and times when the wife teaches the women and the husband teaches the men.
For a husband and wife team who are doctrinally sound, spiritually mature, and committed to obeying Scripture, it shouldn’t be that difficult to lead a conference like this in a biblical way.
As far as whether or not to attend a marriage conference in which a husband and wife team will be speaking to a co-ed audience, you’ll have to do your homework to find out how committed they are to obeying Scripture in this regard. Listen to some of their previous conferences, if they’re coming to your church, ask your pastor about it, or you could try emailing the couple and asking them.
I know that some of the false teachers we see on TV are delusional and really think they create things on the same level as God, but are some people genuinely confused and simply don’t understand that what they are teaching and believing is false? Are the ones who are just confused still heretics and false teachers?
Let’s take that last question first. If you teach false doctrine or heresy, you’re a false teacher or a heretic, regardless of your motive. Whether you think what you’re teaching is right, or you know it’s wrong and you teach it anyway, the end result is the same: you’re teaching error.
Now let’s clarify the first part of your question a bit, because you bring an interesting point to the table with the word “delusional”. “Delusional” is really mental health terminology rather than biblical terminology. Is it possible some of these folks are truly mentally unbalanced? Yes. But you know what else looks a lot like mental illness in some cases? Demon possession. And I’m convinced that at least a few of these heretics are demon possessed.
But I do think the truly possessed are in the minority, and the majority are simply deceived. They are of their father the devil, so they speak his language and their will is to do his desires:
Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies…Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.โ
John 8:43-44, 47
And this holds true whether we perceive the false teacher to be a conniving, greedy charlatan, or a “good guy” who’s just “honestly mistaken”. It’s also true whether or not he’s made a conscious decision to proactively serve Satan by knowingly teaching false doctrine. There are only two potential masters in a person’s life, Christ or Satan, and if you’re not a slave of Christ, you’re enslaved to Satan. There’s no middle ground for lost “nice people”. The “honestly mistaken” guy who’s teaching false doctrine is still doing his master’s bidding, he’s just deceived into thinking his master is Christ.
But when it comes to how we’re to regard and handle false teachers, it doesn’t really matter whether it’s delusion, deception, or demon possession, because God doesn’t require us to know what’s going on in their hearts and minds to be able to biblically evaluate them.
Our job is to evaluate what weย canย see โ the personโs behavior, writings, sermons, teachings, and conversation โ and determine whether or not it aligns with Scripture. If it doesnโt โย regardless of what we think of the teacher’s motives or mental stateย โย those teachings, and the person who teaches them, have no place in our churches or personal study materials.
The condition of the teacher’s heart and mind? That’s above our pay grade. We leave that to God.
I am looking for a Biblically sound womenโs study on healthy eating habits and am hoping you can point me In the right direction?ย
I think I’ve mentioned before that the top two questions readers ask me are, “Is _____ a false / sound teacher?” and “Can you recommend a Bible study on / for _____?”
I love the heart behind both of those questions because it tells me that the person asking wants biblical teaching, and nothing could make me happier. Truly.
But, no, I can’t point you in the direction of a doctrinally sound study on healthy eating habits for two reasons:
First, as a matter of principle, I don’t recommend what I call “canned” studies (books, workbooks, DVDs, etc.), even doctrinally sound ones, at all. I recommend women study (and teach) straight from the text of Scripture. You can read more about why I hold this position and how you can learn to study/teach straight from the Bible itself at the Bible Studies tab in the blue menu bar at the top of this page.
The second reason I can’t recommend such a study is that such a study does not exist. Here’s why. Doctrinally sound studies start with a passage of Scripture and teach you what it says. And other than condemning gluttony, and making a few general statements about using your body to glorify God rather than to sin, the Bible says nothing about healthy eating habits (at least not in the way we use that phrase in 21st century America). And any study that says it does is mishandling Scripture and taking it out of context, and, therefore, isn’t doctrinally sound.
A perfect example of this is false teacher Rick Warren’s book The Daniel Diet, which is based on a mishandling of Daniel 1:8-16. (Daniel didn’t refuse the king’s food because it was unhealthy or to lose weight, but to obey God’s law and to avoid making himself unclean. Also, you’ll notice v.15 says that after ten days on this “diet” Daniel and the boys were actually “fatter”.) I would also warn you away from Lysa TerKeurst’sMade to Crave since she is a false teacher as well. And, it would not surprise me to learn that a number of other false teachers have written health and diet “Bible studies”.
The truth is, you don’t need a Bible study, you need a new paradigm. The paradigm you and many, many Christian women are currently operating under, probably without even realizing it is, “I have an issue. A book or Bible study will give me the solution for it.”. That’s not necessarily a bad or sinful paradigm (in fact, like I said, it’s very good and right that your instinct is to turn to Scripture), it’s just that there’s a better, more biblical, more helpful paradigm which, in a nutshell is, “Pursue Christ and trust Him with your issues.”
As you go about pursuing Christ, you can certainly study any biblical passages that relate to your particular issues of healthy eating. Are you failing to exercise self-control? Failing to be content? Is it an issue of laziness? Do you have an unbiblical view of your body itself? Maybe you have a particular medical condition that requires a new diet. You’ll have to prayerfully determine exactly what your issue is, then study (in context and rightly handled) the passages that pertain to that issue1, repent of any sin you might be committing, and trust, believe, and obey God’s Word.
Pray, pray, pray. Ask God to help you with what you’re studying in His Word, to help you lose weight, to see your body the way He sees it, etc.
Make an appointment with your doctor and ask what he recommends.
Get some godly counsel. Is there a godly older woman in your church who could disciple you through this? Or maybe there’s a nutritionist or dietitian who goes to your church2? If you’re not sure, ask your pastor.
And, truly, this is what I would recommend to most of the women who write and ask me if I can recommend a Bible study or book on a very specific, personal life issue. Because it’s not necessarily about finding the “solution” to whatever your issue is. Often, it’s God giving you an issue to grow you, to move you to cry out to Him, and to lead you to depend on Him to carry you through whatever it is.
1If you’re not sure where to find those passages, ask your pastor or a godly friend for help. You can also Google “Bible verses about _____” and probably get some good lists of verses, but it’s imperative that you look those verses up and read them in context so you’ll know whether or not they actually apply.
2Don’t expect free advice or help just because it’s a church friend. Ask if you can make an appointment, and plan to pay the full fee just like you would if this person were a stranger.
If you have a question about: a Bible passage, an aspect of theology, a current issue in Christianity, or how to biblically handle a family, life, or church situation, comment below (Iโll hold all questions in queue {unpublished} for a future edition of The Mailbag) or send me an e-mail or private message. If your question is chosen for publication, your anonymity will be protected.
