Mailbag

The Mailbag: Potpourri (Benny repents?, Brother Lawrence, Why the Calvinist label?…)

Welcome to another “potpourri” edition of The Mailbag, where I give short(er) answers to several questions rather than a long answer to one question. I also like to take the opportunity in these potpourri editions to let new readers know about my comments/e-mail/messages policy. I’m not able to respond individually to most e-mails and messages, so here are some helpful hints for getting your questions answered more quickly. Remember, the search bar can be a helpful tool!

In these potpourri editions of The Mailbag, I’d also like to address the three questions I’m most commonly asked:

“Do you know anything about [Christian pastor/teacher/author] or his/her materials? Is he/she doctrinally sound?”

Try these links: 
Popular False Teachers /
 Recommended Bible Teachers / search bar
Is She a False Teacher? 7 Steps to Figuring It Out on Your Own
(Do keep bringing me names, though. If I get enough questions about a particular teacher, I’ll probably write an article on her.)

“Can you recommend a good women’s Bible study?”

No. Here’s why:
The Mailbag: Can you recommend a good Bible study for women/teens/kids?
The Mailbag: “We need to stop relying on canned studies,” doesn’t mean, “We need to rely on doctrinally sound canned studies.”.

“You shouldn’t be warning against [popular false teacher] for [X,Y,Z] reason!”

Answering the Opposition- Responses to the Most Frequently Raised Discernment Objections


I saw this video making the rounds on social media. It appears as though Benny Hinn is repenting of teaching the prosperity gospel. Is this true, or too good to be true?

Briefly, it is not true, and his behavior and teaching bears this out. He has made similar claims in the past and continues to teach the same old lies from the same old pit of Hell. The YouTube video making the rounds is 4½ minutes long. What it doesn’t show is that for an hour and a half prior to this 4½ minute snippet Benny conducted one of his regular “healing” services. Furthermore, prosperity teaching is not the only heretical aspect of Benny’s theology, so even if he had repented of teaching the prosperity gospel, he would remain a heretic to avoid.

Repentance doesn’t just mean a blase admission that something is wrong. Repentance is a total change of lifestyle. If Benny were to repent, what we would see would be genuine, long lasting grief over his sin. He would step down from, and dismantle his “ministry,” cancel all of his tours, crusades, and speaking engagements, take all of his books out of print, shut down all of his online platforms and do everything in his power to scrub the internet of his false teaching (at the moment, he has said he’s planning to keep his “most popular” teachings available online for those who want them), return the money he has scammed from people, and park himself in a solid church so he can learn the gospel, be saved, and be discipled in sound doctrine.

If you’d like to believe Benny has repented, OK. Check back up on him in about six months and see if he has done any of the things above to “bear fruit in keeping with repentance.”

For the longer version of the answer to this question, see the resources below.

Benny Hinn and the Fruit of True Repentance at A Word Fitly Spoken

(Be sure to get and read both of Costi’s books if you haven’t already.)

WWUTT 1030 Q&A Benny Hinn, Couples Studies, Christian Fiction? at WWUTT

No, Benny Hinn Has Not Repented by Gabe Hughes

Benny Hinn’s nephew ‘encouraged’ by uncle’s rejection of prosperity gospel, calls for ‘genuine repentance’ at The Christian Post

Benny Hinn and the Fruit of True Repentance at Voice of Reason Radio

Benny Hinn Renounces His Selling of God’s Blessings. Critics Want More. at Christianity Today


[In your “Welcome” tab,] you describe yourself as…….A genuinely regenerated Protestant, Southern Baptist, Calvinist/Reformed Baptist…I am just getting in on the Reformed Baptist conversation. As a Southern Baptist, why do I need to add all the other titles. Why or what did you reform? I am confused. Why can’t you just be Southern Baptist?

You don’t need to use a bunch of labels if you don’t want to, I just want to be specific and clear to my readers what my theology is in case they’d like to know, and so they will know what to expect when they read my articles.

Reformed Baptist theology is different from Arminian (or what Southern Baptists like to call “Traditionalist” theology). If you are Southern Baptist and unfamiliar with Calvinism, you are most likely in a Traditionalist church (you may want to ask your pastor). I think you’ll find the answers to many of your questions in this article (be sure to read the additional resources at the end, too.) I’d also encourage you to read the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith.

(Just a reminder to my regular readers, I don’t engage in or allow Calvinism/Arminianism debates and arguments in the comments sections of my articles or on social media. Please review my comment parameters at the “Welcome” tab at the top of this page before commenting.)


I am, for now, the choir director at my church. I lead the choir and my husband leads the congregational hymn singing. In one question I read [on your blog], I should not be doing that- the answer to the question of whether woman should serve as worship leaders or music ministers was a simple “no”. It would help a great deal to have an extended answer, and then I’ll know whether to tender my resignation and find another way to serve. I can happily go back to just singing in the choir. Thank you for your insight.

It’s so encouraging when I hear from women who want to do the biblical thing! I’m not sure which of my articles you were reading where I simply said “no” to the question of whether or not women should serve as worship leaders, but I have addressed that question in greater length in this article (see #4).

Of course, this article doesn’t address a woman only directing the choir, but rather, serving as the minister of music. I can see some situations in which it might be biblically OK for a woman to only direct the choir.

For example, if it’s an emergency situation like the minister of music getting sick at the last moment on Sunday morning and he has been the one to lead the choir through rehearsals, explain the text of the music to them, etc., and the only person capable of stepping in and directing the choir that morning (just the choir, not the congregation) is a woman, I don’t think that would be a problem. Another example: At my church, the choir occasionally does anthems that center around a tenor solo, which our minister of music (who directs the choir) will sometimes sing. He will step up to the pulpit to sing the solo, and a lady in the choir will direct the choir part of the anthem. I don’t think that’s problematic, either.

Of course, you will need to pray about it and talk it over with your husband and pastor, but, for what it’s worth, my thought on your situation is that if your husband is Scripturally qualified (as well as musically qualified) to step into the pastoral role of minister of music (because men should not hold positions of leadership they’re not biblically qualified for either), and he is overseeing the choir – selecting the music, leading rehearsals, etc. (all the pastoral type things mentioned in the article), then it would not be a problem for you to simply direct them on Sunday morning. Especially if, as it sounds like might be the case, the two of you are temporarily filling in until a permanent minister of music can be found and hired. But, really, the best case scenario would be for your husband (and/or another biblically qualified man to) lead the congregation and the choir. And it would probably be a load off your shoulders!


I have a question that I haven’t been able to find a clear answer to including in your blog. Can women teach men in Bible study say on a Thursday night?

The 1 Tim 2:12-13 Scripture points to Adam being created first then Eve therefore, therefore I would deduct that women should not teach or exercise authority over a man whether it be in church, Sunday School or in a Thursday night Bible study. Am I wrong?

DING! DING! DING! You are absolutely RIGHT! Tell her what she’s won, Johnny! :0)

Yes, you’re correct. You’ll notice in 1 Timothy 2:11-15 that there’s no exception for any day of the week. The prohibition against women teaching men is for any day ending in a Y.

And, you didn’t say where this Thursday night Bible study is meeting, but those types of gatherings of the Body often meet in homes, and there’s no exception for meeting in a home (or anywhere else) versus meeting inside the four walls of a church building, either. When 1 Timothy was written, there were no church buildings. The church was largely meeting in people’s homes. I say “the church was meeting,” because the church is the gathering of Believers, not the building in which they meet. So it’s not OK for women to teach Scripture or preach to a co-ed gathered body of Believers, whether that’s in a church building during worship service or a smaller class or group, or at a Christian conference, retreat, parachurch event, or at a Bible study at someone’s home on a Thursday night.

You’re also correct that I’ve never addressed this specific question directly, but I have touched on it here, here (2nd question), and here (#7 – I just hopped over to this article and added home, workplace, and coffee shop Bible studies to question 7). So let me grab the salient points from those articles and put them together in a more helpful way:

“Teaching” includes any situation in the gathering of the body of Christ in which women would be giving instruction to men in the Scriptures and/or on spiritual matters (which, in a biblical church gathering, would necessarily include Scripture), whether in an official position of teacher (pastor, teaching elder, Sunday School/Bible study teacher, or other leadership position) or any other situation requiring exhorting, teaching, or explaining of the Scriptures.

We need to remember what the definition of “church” is. The church is not a building, it is a body of born again believers gathered for the purpose of worship, prayer, the ordinances, and/or the study of God’s word. Those things can take place in a church building, a home (as with the first century churches in Acts), in a campus or office building, outdoors, in a conference center, in a sports arena, or anywhere else. So, when a body of believers comes together for these purposes, regardless of the building in which they meet, or whether you call it “church” or not, they are the church, and the biblical parameters about women teaching and holding authority over men applies.

I don’t mean this to sound facetious or anything, but sin is sin no matter what time of day or day of the week it takes place on.


Today, I came across a book I had purchased in the past – Practicing the Presence of God from Brother Lawrence. Taking a quick look at the book, I’m inclined to throw it away. It reminds me of Buddhist thinking or New Age garbage. As a monk, Brother Lawrence’s Catholic theology conflicts with biblical Christianity.

Before I became a Christian, I was into New Age thinking and practices. Just reading bits and pieces of this book makes me think New Age thinking instead of what I know from the Bible. I’m going to throw it away…I don’t see any redeeming Christian theology in it thus far. I don’t want to expose anyone else to wrong theology. Just wondered if you have any thoughts on this book?

Unlike the vast majority of books I’m asked about, I have actually read this one. However, it has probably been ten years ago or more since I read it. All I remember is that it was fairly short (which is probably why I read it), and that one of his main points was keeping our thoughts focused on God at all times. And I mean all times. Every waking moment of the day, we are to be consciously, actively thinking about God or we’re not pleasing Him. I remember trying to put that into practice. Even while doing something as mindless as washing the dishes, it was impossible and exhausting. (It did, however demonstrate to me how much of the time our brains are on auto-pilot.)

You’re correct in your assessment of the theology of the book. Brother Lawrence was a Roman Catholic mystic. Roman Catholic doctrine – as it is laid out in their own documents – is patently unbiblical, as is mysticism. Christians should not receive any sort of spiritual teaching from someone with that theological pedigree.

Thank you for throwing the book out instead of passing bad theology on to others.


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 (I’ll 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.

Mailbag, Southern Baptist/SBC

The Mailbag: SBC Resolution 9- On Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality

 

What are your thoughts on Resolution 9 that recently passed at the 2019 annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention?

It seems like every year there’s that one controversial resolution that everybody’s talking about. This year, it’s Resolution 9: On Critical Race Theory And Intersectionality. 

If you don’t know what CRT and intersectionality are, you’re not alone. Far from it, in fact. There’s no way I can fully explain each of them, so I would encourage you to Google the terms and get ready for some heavy duty academic reading, some of which is going to conflict with itself depending on who and what you read. Also, see the “Additional Resources” section below.

Briefly and uber-broadly, what you see playing out in race relations in the U.S. right now is basically the end result of CRT: Privilege. Reparations. Oppression. Repent of and renounce your whiteness. White people’s racism is so deep seated we’re not even conscious of it. White power and privilege are inextricably embedded in politics, education, religion, economics- every single system in existence. It is a paradigm through which social justice issues are viewed and addressed.

Intersectionality is almost like saying: “On a scale of 1-10, how oppressed are you?” The fewer minority groups you fit into, the less oppressed you are, and vice versa. A white, male, heterosexual, educated, middle class, Christian would be on the “privileged” end of the scale. A poor, black, female, homosexual, transgender, Muslim would be on the “oppressed” end of the scale. The more oppressed you are, the more you are to be heard and taken seriously on the social issues of the day.

(People are going to say those are over-generalizations. I agree. Like I said, Google it and study the issue more thoroughly.)

In the Southern Baptist Convention, any messenger (a church member representing her church at the convention) can propose a resolution about almost anything (It’s actually pretty interesting to go back as far as 1845 and read past resolutions.). If her resolution is approved by the Committee on Resolutions, it’s voted on by everybody else in attendance (why, in 2019, we haven’t come up with some method of distance voting online is beyond me, but that’s for another article). Because of SBC polity and the autonomy of each local church, resolutions are non-binding. Generally speaking, no SBC church or church member is required to abide by a resolution that passes, and resolutions are often a merely an encouragement for SBC churches/members to affirm something biblical or to repudiate something that’s unbiblical anyway.

Such was the case with Resolution 9, which called on Southern Baptists to – in a nutshell – recognize that CRT and intersectionality are unbiblical ways of addressing “social justice” issues and that they are creeping in to SBC churches and entities, repudiate CRT/intersectionality, and affirm that the Bible is authoritative and sufficient for dealing with these and all other issues.

At least, that’s what the original resolution authored by Pastor Stephen Feinstein of Sovereign Way Christian Church called on Southern Baptists to do. But that’s not the resolution SBC messengers got to vote on.

You see, when a messenger submits a resolution to the Committee on Resolutions for approval, “The SBC Committee on Resolutions is vested with the authority to…reword submitted resolutions…”. And reword, they did. Not just the format, but the content. So much so that the revised resolution bears so little resemblance to the original that had I authored any resolution altered to this extent, I would have ended up voting against my own resolution. The committee’s rewording changed the meaning of the resolution from “The CRT/intersectionality paradigm is sinful at its foundation. We need to repudiate it altogether, keep it out of our churches and entities, and address these issues biblically,” to “Some people have used the CRT/intersectionality paradigm unwisely, but we can learn some things by using it, so as long as it doesn’t override Scripture, it’s fine,” and the revised version of the resolution passed.

So that’s the quick recap of the issues at play (as I have read about them – I was not able to attend the convention this year). What are my thoughts?

•My first reaction to both versions of the resolution and the passage of the revised version was that most of the messengers likely did not understand what they were voting on for two reasons:

First, the format and wording of SBC resolutions tends to be somewhat formal and stilted. That’s not a bad thing in and of itself, and I’m certainly not saying any of my SBC brethren are unintelligent (I struggle to slog through them myself sometimes), but I look at the wording and format of both resolutions and I compare them to simply worded and formatted social media posts, blog articles, etc., that many people seem to have trouble understanding, and I have to think it would be helpful to begin each resolution with a simply worded four or five sentence summary of its main points so people have a better shot at knowing what they’re voting about.

Second, the vast majority of Southern Baptists (and probably Christians in general) do not keep up with current events in evangelicalism and probably have never heard of CRT or intersectionality – which are relatively new terms and concepts anyway – much less know what those terms mean well enough to make an informed decision on which way to vote. (I don’t blame them. It’s impossible to keep up with everything going on in the world of evangelicalism.) Neither version of the resolution offered much of an explanation as to what CRT and intersectionality are. They both seemed to carry the assumption that those reading the resolution would already know. My guess is that most did not.

I later discovered that my friend, Pastor Tom Buck had a similar takeaway. I thoroughly agree with him.

•Tom also spoke against the revised resolution from the floor, and Tom Ascol, president of Founders Ministries, offered some clarifying amendments (which, unfortunately did not pass) to the revised resolution. I thought both were very helpful, and I wish the messengers had taken their remarks to heart.

•I am shocked and appalled at the changes the Committee on Resolutions made to Pastor Feinstein’s resolution. I realize that the committee has the right to “reword” resolutions, but I don’t think they ought to have the right to water down or change the meaning of the content of a resolution. Grammar, format, correcting objectively incorrect facts, eliminating redundancies – all fine. But for a revised version of a resolution to be so dramatically different from the original – no.

•I can only speculate as to why the revised version of the resolution differed so greatly – mainly in that the language seemed softened and the urgency and danger of the issue seemed watered down. Either the members of the Committee on Resolutions aren’t very familiar with CRT and intersectionality and the dangers they pose and watered down the language in order not to offend or alarm anyone, or the members of the committee are knowledgeable of, and at least somewhat favorably disposed to, CRT and intersectionality and are trying to fly them into the SBC under the radar.

As I said, this is only speculation and I am not making any accusations or casting aspersions. With the exception of Trevin Wax, I am not familiar with any of the members of the committee, but I will say this: I would be very surprised to encounter anyone on faculty or staff at an institution of higher learning (such as a seminary) that isn’t at least acquainted with the basics of CRT and intersectionality. I suppose it’s not impossible, but it would be very surprising to me.

•Big picture short term: Very few of the millions of Southern Baptists in the U.S. and around the globe will even know about this resolution since, proportionally, very few Southern Baptists attend the convention or keep up with convention business. Even most of those who were present and voted to approve the resolution will probably have forgotten about it within a month or so since it has no enforceability at the church or individual level and since many voters likely did not fully understand what they were voting about in the first place. While the adoption of the resolution is not a good sign, I don’t expect there to be an en masse mad rush of Southern Baptists into full blown CRT and intersectionality tomorrow.

•Big picture long term: Barring direct intervention from God Himself in the form of revival, the SBC will eventually go down the same path of theological liberalism as all the other major denominations. Doctrinally sound churches will split off and either form their own denomination or remain independent, autonomous churches. This resolution is only one of the the first steps down that road.

•It is my hope that some good will come from this resolution in the form of awareness. That average people in the pew will hear the words “Critical Race Theory” and “intersectionality” and wonder what they mean and how they connect to the SBC. That they will study and research and be moved by a holy zeal, not only cry out to God to keep these and other unbiblical ideas out of the SBC, but to stand up and act – to contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints.

Additional Resources

SBC19 – Resolution 9, Women in Mission, Mature Manhood & Critical Race Theory on The Sword and the Trowel

The Woke Tools of the SBC: A Review of Resolution 9 on Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality by Josh Buice

The Briefing (6-14-19) with Albert Mohler (Click on, or scroll down to, “Part III”)

Resolution 9 and the Southern Baptist Convention 2019 at Founders Ministries

Tom Buck on SBC 2019 on The Dividing Line (start at 32:30ish for Resolution 9 info.)

Gabriel Hughes on Resolution 9 (start at 20:47 for Resolution 9 info.)

What’s Up with Critical Theory at Sheologians

Whiteness at Just Thinking

Critical Theory at Alpha and Omega Ministries


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 (I’ll 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.

Church

It’s Time for a Reformation in the SBC – 3 Issues We Need to Set Right

I’m taking a short summer break this week. I hope you’ll enjoy this article from the archives. The annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention is also taking place this week. Will you please pray that God will bring conviction of sin, repentance, and obedience to God’s Word?


Originally published May 25, 2018

I don’t know the brother who said it, but I saw a remark the other day from a Presbyterian gentleman who said something to the effect of, “It’s time for all doctrinally sound Southern Baptists to leave the SBC.”

I get that.

When you have an organization as large, open, and widespread as the Southern Baptist Convention, problems – even major ones – are inevitable. At this point, there are many things the SBC is still getting right, biblically speaking…

There are many good and praiseworthy things going on in SBC life. We have hundreds of doctrinally sound pastors faithfully preaching the gospel week in and week out. Discernment and biblical literacy among Southern Baptist church members is slowly but steadily growing. The SBC takes a public, biblical stand on abortion and homosexuality while many other denominations do not. Our organizational structure for funding and sending out missionaries, while sometimes flawed in its execution, is without peer. Southern Baptist Disaster Relief is one of the finest relief organizations in the world. And there’s so much more. Find a godly Kingdom effort going on somewhere, and you’ll probably find a Southern Baptist involved in it. By the grace of God, while we’re far from perfect, we’re getting a lot of things right

…But for some individual Southern Baptists and Southern Baptist churches, the biblical error and other problems pervading the SBC have become too much to bear, and they have deemed it time to walk away from what they see as a system damaged beyond repair, seeking refuge in ARBCA, Bible, Independent, or non-denominational churches and networks instead.

Like I said, I get that, and I don’t blame them one little bit. Believe me, I’ve had leaving on my mind more than once. And if the SBC continues its downward spiral, it’s an inevitability for nearly all of us who hold to sound doctrine.

But there are still plenty of us crazy, “glass half full” doctrinally sound optimists out there who, like Luther, don’t want to abandon the SBC to the rubbish heap if it can be avoided, but would rather see it reformed (little “r”), renewed, and restored to the glory of God.

If you’ve ever labored through the entirety of the Old Testament (and if you haven’t, stop denying yourself that blessing, and study it), you know that God exercised patience with Israel through centuries of idolatry, rebellion, and paganism of the vilest sorts, sending them prophet after prophet, warning after warning, discipline after discipline, lovingly calling, urging, and commanding them to repent and be reconciled to Him before finally executing judgment on them.

I’m just not sure we’re quite at the point of exiling the SBC… yet. I think maybe these are the days of Elijah. And Jeremiah. And Isaiah. And even Luther. A time for godly Southern Baptist men and women to stand firmly on the written Word of God and speak prophetically, chapter and verse, into their beloved churches and denomination, “Thus saith the Lord.”

And in that same spirit of the prophets of old, we don’t speak from a position of “I’m right and I’m here to prove it,” or because we’re haters, or because we’re power-hungry. It’s because we’re cut to the heart over the sin and idolatry we see among our brothers and sisters. We’re grieved that those things dishonor our precious Savior and bring His judgment and discipline upon those who participate in and propagate them. We deeply desire that our denomination and our churches experience the joy that comes with being spiritually healthy and biblically submitted to Christ.

So, while there are probably at least ninety-five theses that could be nailed to the doors of the Executive Committee in Nashville, here are three that would be a good start.

1.
The Authority and Sufficiency of Scripture

Nearly forty years ago, Southern Baptist movers and shakers in the conservative resurgence went to war for the inerrancy of Scripture. It was a long, hard battle, but they won. Now it’s time to fight for the authority and sufficiency of Scripture in the SBC.

The Bible is our authority as Christians, not the ideas, opinions, and traditions of denominational leaders, SBC celebrities, pastors, or any other person. The Bible. If the Bible commands us to do something, we do it. If the Bible commands us not to do something, we don’t do it. We don’t formulate our own programs and methods and try to squish the Bible in to make it fit. We start with the Bible. We stay with the Bible. We end with the Bible.

Because the SBC does not always submit to the authority of the Bible, we have leaders, celebrities, and pastors looking to, and promoting, sources outside the Bible for direction instead of simply trusting and obeying God’s written Word. We have influential “Bible” teachers who stand on stages in front of thousands and dare to proclaim, “God told me…”, functionally denying the sufficiency of Scripture by relying on supposed extra-biblical revelation (and teaching their followers to do the same). We have pastors and denominational leaders who look to polls and surveys to decide how to conduct their worship services or which social issues need to be addressed and how to address them. We have church growth gurus teaching our pastors to adopt all manner of worldliness that “works” to get sinners in the doors of their churches.

If the Southern Baptist Convention is to survive as an entity of biblical Christianity, the authority and sufficiency of Scripture is the number one issue that must be dealt with.  If this issue is properly addressed and corrected, it will alleviate or minimize nearly all other problems facing the SBC. We must submit to God’s written Word and give Scripture its proper place – first place – in our denomination, our individual churches, and our personal lives.

Basic Training: The Bible Is Our Authority

Basic Training: The Bible Is Sufficient

2.
False Doctrine and False Teachers

If the SBC truly regarded the Bible as authoritative and sufficient, the cancer of false doctrine and false teachers that is slowly killing us would be cured or in remission. Indeed, the aforementioned false teaching of extra-biblical (God told me, showed me in a dream, spoke to me, etc.) revelation is probably the most pervasive false doctrine accepted among Southern Baptists.

When Hilkiah found the Book of the Law in the temple (Imagine a house of God in such a shambles of idolatry that people had to dig and search for the actual Scriptures. Selah.), and Shaphan read it to Josiah, Josiah tore his clothes in grief and began to set God’s house and God’s people in order. After covenanting together with the people to obey God’s Word, the very first thing Josiah did was to have the altars and vessels of false gods carried out of God’s house and destroyed. If the SBC would follow in Josiah’s footsteps we would see things like:

LifeWay would immediately remove and destroy any and all materials by Beth Moore, Andy Stanley, Priscilla Shirer, TD Jakes, Lysa TerKeurst, Sarah Young, Christine Caine, Bethel Music, Jesus Culture, Hillsong, and all other false teachers and promulgators of false doctrine.

There would be no more conferences, simulcasts, or leadership training seminars featuring false teachers, and false teachers would certainly not be invited to speak in any capacity at the annual Southern Baptist Convention.

Pastors, authors, and speakers who attempted to build a career inside the SBC by teaching false doctrine would be subject to church discipline for their sin, not turned into celebrities or appointed or elected to denominational leadership positions.

Messenger voting privileges at the Convention would be revoked for churches which habitually and unrepentantly welcome false teachers.

If the Bible were to become our sufficient authority for both orthodoxy and orthopraxy, our eyes would quickly be opened to the enormity of the hold false doctrine has on our denomination, churches, and individuals, and we would act accordingly and biblically.

A Naked Emperor in the Southern Baptist Convention

10 Things I Wish Southern Baptists Knew About Southern Baptists

The Peterson Predicament and LifeWay’s Peculiar Policies

3.
Disfellowshipping Errant Churches

Earlier this week, the Southern Baptist Convention severed ties with the District of Columbia Baptist Convention (DCBC- an association of Southern Baptist churches in the Washington, D.C. area) for refusing to disfellowship one of its member churches, Calvary Baptist, which had called a legally “married” lesbian couple to serve as its co-“pastors” over a year ago.

It was absolutely the right thing to do (the SBC has disfellowshipped several churches that embrace homosexuality), and I’m glad that this standard remains in tact, but…lesbian co-pastors…? That’s how bad it has to get before the SBC can, or will, act to remove a church? What about churches that are embracing sins other than homosexuality?

There are plenty of apostate Southern Baptist churches, and we have no mechanism in place for kicking them out of the SBC.

This is a verbatim quote from the FAQ section (5th question from the top) of the SBC’s web site:

“According to our constitution, if a church no longer makes a bona fide contribution to the Convention’s work, or if it acts to ‘affirm, approve, or endorse homosexual behavior,’ it no longer complies with the Constitution of the Southern Baptist Convention and is not permitted to send messengers to the annual meeting. These, however, are the only explicitly stated instances in which the SBC has the prerogative to take action.”

What does that mean? As long as your church doesn’t affirm homosexuality and gives to the Cooperative Program, you’re in. Never mind if your pastor twists God’s word until it’s unrecognizable. Or lets women and false teachers get behind the pulpit like Steven Furtick does. Or plays AC/DC’s “Highway to Hell” on Easter Sunday and says he probably wouldn’t have strippers on stage like Perry Noble does. Or any of the other ridiculous and blasphemous shenanigans so many of the seeker sensitive types in our denomination pull. Nope, as long as you give your money and stand on the right side of homosexuality, you’re good to go.² ³

I’ll be the first to admit, it would be a difficult standard to set and implement, but look at the standards the New Testament required of churches. We’ve got to set the bar higher than a homosexuality litmus test and an offering for a church to be in good standing with the SBC. Doctrine and practices simply have to be a factor.

 

Can there be another conservative resurgence that brings reform to the SBC? I believe there can.

The Bible says “nothing will be impossible with God.” I believe that. I believe that the God who spoke the universe into existence from nothing, who opened sealed tombs and barren wombs, who parted seas and walked on water and turned water into wine can change the hearts of Southern Baptists and the trajectory of the Southern Baptist Convention.

By His grace. For His glory. For our good.


¹A Naked Emperor in the Southern Baptist Convention
²10 Things I Wish Southern Baptists Knew About Southern Baptists
³This verbiage has been removed from the FAQ section of the SBC website. See “Susan’s” comments and my replies in the comments section for more info.

Complementarianism, Movies

Movie Tuesday: Battle for the Minds

 

Ladies- did you read yesterday’s Mailbag article, Counter Arguments to Egalitarianism? If not, I would encourage you to read it before watching today’s movie. And if you’re new to the complementarian vs. egalitarian kerfuffle, I would encourage you to read, not only that article, but all of the articles in the “Additional Resources” section of that article as well.

Why?

Because today’s Movie Tuesday movie, Battle for the Minds, approaches the issue from the egalitarian perspective, and you need to be sure you’re firmly grounded in the biblical perspective so that “no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.”

Also, today’s movie is kind of like a homework assignment. How would you apply the complementarian apologetics you learned in yesterday’s article as well as your knowledge of Scripture to the egalitarian arguments and pronouncements being made in this movie?

Battle for the Minds was released on PBS in 1997. It presents the egalitarian viewpoint on the stage of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary’s transition from theological liberalism to biblical theological conservatism under the then-new leadership of Dr. Albert Mohler, and delves into a bit of the Conservative Resurgence in the Southern Baptist Convention around that time as well. (As an aside, I am not familiar with any of the people in the film presented as being on the egalitarian side except for Ann Graham Lotz. I’m only familiar with a few of those on the complementarian side: Albert Mohler, David Miller, and Paige Patterson.)

If you are Southern Baptist, I strongly encourage you to watch and carefully consider these events from our history in light of the battle we are now facing in the SBC concerning the role of women in the church and in the Convention. Because what Nancy Ammerman says at the 37:04 mark is correct. Since all SBC churches are autonomous, many Southern Baptists only concern themselves with their own churches and don’t trouble themselves to worry about what’s going on at the national level. But when you do this, you fail to take into consideration that what’s going on at the national level trickles down to your local church in the form of what’s being taught to your next pastor or staff member at our seminaries; the authors, musicians, and other content creators being sold (and not being sold) at LifeWay; the theology in the Sunday School and VBS curriculum your church uses, etc. It also affects the theology and ecclesiology our IMB and NAMB missionaries and church planters use and teach. And finally, the leadership and issues at the national level are the face the Southern Baptist Convention presents to the world.

But even if you’re not Southern Baptist, you will probably still find this movie informative to the way your own church or denomination is responding to the issue of the biblical role of women in the church.

A couple of things to be on the lookout for, and give consideration to, as you watch Battle for the Minds:

•Notice the amount of Scripture presented in the movie. Is any Scripture presented that backs up the egalitarian view? Is egalitarianism vs. complementarianism presented as a biblical and spiritual issue or an “our position vs. their position” issue?

•Note the sex of each person on the egalitarian side and the sex of each person on the complementarian side. Are any complementarian women presented? Do you think there were absolutely no women on the complementarian side of the issue when these events were transpiring? Do you see how the exclusion of complementarian women in this film gives the subtle illusion that a) all women are egalitarian, and b) the reason men are complementarian is because they’re sexist and trying to protect their power and position – the same argument people like Beth Moore are attempting to make today? Do you think it was sexist to exclude women from the complementarian side?

Random Ramblings Ruminations Resources

Random Ramblings, Ruminations, and Resources

A couple of months ago, I “beta tested” a new feature here at the blog, which I alliteratively titled Random Ramblings, Ruminations, and Resources. People seemed to like it … or … at least the majority of readers didn’t seem to hate it too much. So I decided to bring it back every once in a while when I’m feelin’ it.

I’m feelin’ it today. Buckle up, Buttercup. 

I’m Sorry…

I need to kick things off with an apology. God has graciously seen fit to convict me that my tone has been too harsh in some of my articles recently, particularly in the first part of this article. If you’ve ever been offended or hurt by the tone of that or any of my other articles or remarks I’ve made on social media, I wanted to say I’m sorry and to humbly ask your forgiveness.

And even if you weren’t offended or hurt, I know where my heart was as I was writing that article and the tweet it was based on, and I know it wasn’t right. I failed to exercise self-control and selfishly spewed my emotions in a way that was designed only to vent my own frustration and get it out of my system (which was pretty hypocritical since I was writing that we shouldn’t be slaves to our feelings!). I wasn’t even thinking about how a new Christian, someone going through a difficult time, or someone weak in the faith might have taken the tone in which I was saying those things. Romans 15:1 says:

We who are strong have an obligation to bear with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves.

Well, I don’t consider myself all that strong, but I guess each of us is stronger in the faith or in a stronger position of life circumstances than somebody. And for those who are weaker in the faith than I am, or walking through a time of pain or discouragement, I did the exact opposite of what this verse says to do. I pleased myself at your expense, and that’s not what someone who serves you in the name of Christ is supposed to do. So, again, my deepest apologies and I hope you’ll be able to forgive me.

If you’re so inclined, I would like to ask you to pray for me about this. Tone is an extremely difficult and confusing sea to navigate, at least for me (that’s one of the many areas in which I’m weak). It is important to speak biblical truth firmly, unequivocally, and unapologetically, but some Christians see that, in and of itself, as being harsh. It’s also important to demonstrate gentleness, kindness, and compassion, but other Christians see that as being wishy-washy or not standing firm on Scripture. I have written articles to which some have responded that I was too harsh and others have responded that I wasn’t harsh enough – to the same article! Add to that the fact that Jesus, Paul, and others in Scripture sometimes used phraseology that we would consider very harsh today…..but yet Paul says, “Imitate me as I imitate Christ.” And, add to that that there are different expectations in the evangelical mind of how women are to address things versus how men are to address things, and you can see what a fine and perplexing line it can be to walk. But I really, really want to get it right in God’s eyes, because I want to please Him.

I can’t promise my tone will never offend you again. That would be foolish. I have over 11,000 blog subscribers and over 10,000 social media followers. Everything I write is going to offend somebody, even if I don’t mean it to. Also, I know my heart, so I know I’m going to sin again by being selfish and uncontrolled. Furthermore, I can’t attempt to please everyone. That’s not only an exercise in futility, it’s unbiblical. What I can tell you is that I will do my best to think more about how I’m coming across, edit more to keep my own words, approach, and personality from becoming a stumbling block, and pray more as I write, asking God to grow me in wisdom and self-control, in order to honor, and be pleasing to, Him.

About five years ago, I wrote an article called Sacrificing Truth on the Altar of Tone. While it’s incumbent on us as readers and listeners to be able to put tone aside in order to discern whether or not what the speaker or writer is saying is true, it is also incumbent upon those of us who speak and write not to burden our hearers and readers with the necessity of doing so.

Thanks so much for your prayers as I pursue obedience to Christ in this area of my life. You are such a blessing to me, and I love and appreciate each of you.

Fill it Filled to the Rim

Didja hear? I’m doing a women’s conference with the ever-awesome Amy Spreeman at the end of March. It’s free, including a couple of meals, and it’s in Princeton, Illinois.

(In case you were wondering, that’s not where Princeton University, former home of Jonathan Edwards, is located. That’s in Princeton, New Jersey. I know this because I was wondering about it, too, and had to look it up.)

If you’re still trying to make up your mind about whether or not to come, lemme help you: come. And you need to hurry up and register too. Last week the event planners said they were already at 83% capacity (one of them must have been a math major!).

Here’s all the info. Be sure to check out the app and other links for resources on accommodations.

Illinois is too far away? Being from Louisiana, I get that. Look, plan your own conference, and I’ll come to you. “Impossible!” you say, “I go to a tiny church with an even tinier budget!”. Get together with a couple of sister churches to share expenses. Do a bake sale or a garage sale or crowdfunding. Take up a love offering and/or sell tickets at a modest fee. If you’re at all able, offer a doctrinally sound conference option to the women of your church and community. Christ’s ewe lambs are hungry for truth.

UPDATE: As I go to press, this conference is at capacity (“sold out”). If the organizers are able to open up any more spots, I’ll let you know. Also, if you’ve already registered and end up not being able to attend, please contact Princeton Bible Church and let them know so they can give your spot to someone else.

Scandal in the SBC

By now you’ve probably read the Houston Chronicle article that came out last weekend: Abuse of Faith: 20 years, 700 victims: Southern Baptist sexual abuse spreads as leaders resist reforms. If you haven’t, you should, regardless of whether or not you’re Southern Baptist. But, maybe especially if you are. It’s horrifying. And the way some have responded to victims over the years is downright disgusting.

Unless God leads me differently, it’s currently my plan to write an article about this, but I wanted to take the time to give it plenty of thought and prayer. In the meantime, I commend to you this stellar article by Tom AscolSouthern Baptists, Sexual Abuse, and a Far More Serious Problem. It covers a couple of points that I had already rough drafted into my own article before I read his. (So, when you read mine later, just know – it’s not plagiarism, it’s two like-minded Christians drawing the same conclusions.)

This also seems an appropriate time to share this vlog with you explaining how I decide which kinds of evangelical current events to write about, and when, and which I don’t, and why:

And Speaking of Scandals…

This has been in the hopper waiting for me to write about it since the last high profile pastor “fell from grace” (I actually can’t stand that expression. If you’re saved, you’re “in grace” and you can’t fall from it, and if you’re not saved, you’re not “in grace” so you can’t fall from it. It makes no biblical sense. But, I digress…). And, with the recent news of Harvest Bible Chapel firing James MacDonald after years and years of spiritual and financial abuses, I was reminded of it again.

There’s a dynamic that happens on social media that you see nearly every time something like this happens. A Christian celebrity falls and other Christians re-post the news story and/or comment about it. In the circles I run in, the comments are usually

biblically appropriate (“This is so sad,” “We need to pray for his family,” etc.). But there will always be someone who will comment to the effect of: “Why is everybody commenting and re-posting about this event? How can it possibly be fruitful or necessary to share this information?” It’s not that people are commenting unkindly, but that people are sharing this information at all that bothers this person.

There’s probably an extent to which this person is right, and you can share or not share as your conscience dictates, and I’ll admit that there have been times when an event has been so over-shared that I grew weary of the dead horse being beaten. But God has very good purposes in sinful events coming to light. And He demonstrates this Himself in Scripture.

God could have omitted from Scripture every sin, failure, and foible committed by every Bible character, and we would never have heard about them. But He graciously pulls back the veil and lets us see some of them. Why? For His glory and our good. And the same could be said about the public availability of information about the sins of today’s high-profile Christians:

💡 These stories, both in the Bible and in yesterday’s newspaper, allow us to learn, and develop a holy fear of the consequences of sin without having to go through it ourselves. “Stay home from the war and seduce my neighbor’s wife? Um, no thanks. Look how that turned out for David. I’ll just avoid that altogether.”

💡 These stories emphasize to those in leadership that they must walk circumspectly because the world, and the church, are watching them. There is a heavy price to pay for setting a bad example.

💡 These stories are a reminder that we cannot hide our sin.

💡 These stories are a call to pray for everyone involved in the situation. You cannot pray about what you do not know about.

💡 When churches and other Christian organizations properly handle a sinful situation, it is a testimony to the world that the church is not “full of hypocrites” – that there are Christians who strive for holiness and obedience to God. It sets us apart from the world, and from “CINOs” (Christians In Name Only).

💡 When the high-profile Christian repents and submits to church discipline, it paints a picture for the watching world of the way sin is supposed to be dealt with by the individual, and the way God and the church deal with sin in grace, mercy, forgiveness, and restoration. It can be a testimony of the gospel.

On “Dating” your Daughter…

There are a lot of great, godly dads out there. I love hearing them talk about leading their families in worship, talking about their love, hopes and dreams for their kids, and seeing them spend time with their children doing special activities. All of those things are absolutely awesome, and more dads should be doing them.

So maybe it’s just me (it wouldn’t be the first time), but it’s a bit disquieting when I hear men label spending time with their little girls as “daddy-daughter date night” and doing things like bringing them flowers and candy, ringing the doorbell to “pick them up” for the date, dressing up as if for the prom, etc.

Listen, it’s not a sin, and the guys I know and love who do these things are doing them for all the right reasons. And, if they want to keep on using the “dating” terminology and motif, more power to them – they won’t hear a peep from me and I will still have the utmost respect for them as godly men and godly fathers.

But if I could just throw out some food for thought…

♥ There is a difference between a father’s role and fatherly love and a (potential) husband’s role and romantic love. Are we blurring the lines and confusing our daughters when Dad mimics boyfriend? Could we, instead, make sure those lines are clearly defined and teach our daughters (and sons) the beauty and goodness of the two different roles and types of love?

♥ We want our children to be safe from predators. If we introduce and normalize the idea that it’s good and godly for an adult man to engage in behaviors with a child that are usually associated with romantic love, is it possible that we could unwittingly be making it harder for our daughters to recognize when a predator is attempting to groom them?

♥ If we have both sons and daughters, how is this affecting our sons? Are they getting the impression that their sisters are more special and loved by Dad than they are?

♥ How is this affecting the relationship between mother and daughter? Is Dad showing as much attention to Mom as he is to daughter? Is there potential for any undercurrent of rivalry or jealousy for Dad’s attention to develop between Mom and daughter? Could the daughter come to see herself as being on equal footing with Mom instead of submissive to her authority?

♥ Why is the “dating” terminology and motif necessary? Is there a biblical or practical reason why simply spending time with your daughter – whether it’s at home or even on a special outing to a restaurant, movie, etc. – without calling it a “date” or acting like it’s a “date” isn’t good enough?

♥ If the purpose of “dating” your daughter is to demonstrate how her future husband should treat her, what happens when she grows up, gets married, and her good and godly husband is just kind of inept when it comes to “date night”? Have we not created an opportunity for her to unfairly compare him to Dad, find him lacking, and resent him?

♥ If the purpose of “dating” your daughter is to demonstrate how a husband should treat his wife, couldn’t we be confusing our children by putting Dad in the role of the daughter’s “husband”? “I’m not his wife, I’m his daughter,” she could think, “so why is he acting like my ‘husband’?” Would it not make more sense to model for our children how a husband is to treat his wife by Dad treating his actual wife in a godly way?

Children are very impressionable and – if you remember back to your own childhood – highly susceptible to misunderstanding things and believing things that aren’t accurate. I’m just wondering if maybe we need to think through this whole “daddy-daughter date night” thing a bit more deeply.