The new site is open and now operational.  I have added a RSS feed widget to the right hand column.  Please feel free to visit these other sites that I frequent

The new blog location will be www.pastortimrogers.com Thank you for your patience.

I understand that spending cuts at NAMB in order to channel available funds to its church-planting program included an elimination of support to the Conference of Southern Baptist Evangelists (COSBE).

Max

The comment above was third in the comment stream for a post here at Southern Baptist in NC.  The post was one where I analyzed the recent NAMB mission statement that was approved at the convention in June.  Brother Max commented concerning the COSBE cuts made by NAMB and certainly we have many full-time itinerant Evangelists concerned over their relationship with the entity that was created in order to evangelize North America.

My concerns about this new mission statement covered four areas and not one of these areas had anything to do with COSBE. In all four areas my concern was the appearance of eliminating any kind of partnership with the local association.  When Brother Max brought to my attention the concern of elimination of COSBE I remembered how church planting here in NC, at one time, was not producing churches that were known for baptizing people.  To my recollection there was a time in NC that we did not see a significant increase in baptisms among our church plants.  That concern was voiced throughout the pastors of NC and within the halls of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina (BSCNC) offices in Cary. Thus, I responded to Max with the following comment.

I believe you are correct. That is what I understand. What you will find if you check with state conventions is they are eliminating Evangelism Director and even entire evangelism departments. Many are going with just church planting.

Here in NC, our Evangelism Director had a come to Jesus meeting [Emphasis were not in original comment] with our Executive Director/Treasurer concerning church planting boot camp without training the church planter in evangelism training. The results of that meeting was an implementation of evangelism training in the church planting boot camp and that resulted in church plants growing.

We seem to have gone to a new evangelism of just planting churches. Read the Church Planting report of our recent BSC Board of Directors meeting. We are seeing many churches planted and many baptisms. Thus, it seems all one has to do is plant a church if one wants to see baptisms increase.

Blessings,
Tim

Many times comments garner me emails and sometimes a phone call or two.  Some emails and phone calls are very cordial and encouraging while others are not so encouraging or cordial.  I have come to understand that you take the good with the bad.  Well, this comment did more than garner me a phone call, it brought about a follow-up visit from Brother Don McCutcheon, Executive Director of our Evangelization Department.

Let me say from the start that Brother Don’s visit was both encouraging and cordial.  I wish all of my visits from people that disagree with me on a comment were this way.  Brother Don came out and we enjoyed a couple of hours together discussing ministry and cooperative efforts within the Kingdom.  The time we enjoyed together is the kind of time I desire to spend with all my denominational leaders.  His visit opened the door to, what I pray will be, a very close and joyful relationship with a Brother in Christ.

Brother Don expressed a concern over the statement that he had implemented a “come to Jesus meeting” with the BSCNC Executive Director/Treasurer, Milton Hollifield.  He expressed to me that it gave the appearance there was a rift in the BSCNC office concerning this issue.  He was very insistent on assuring me that there was no such division concerning this issue and the meeting that took place to discuss the baptisms of new church plants was a concerted effort of the Church Planting Team along with the Evangelization Team and Brother Milton.

My writings mirror the way that I talk on a personal level.  It has been very hard for me in blogging because my writing comes across sometimes as very coarse and terse.  Those who study communication tells us that 90% of communication is in body language.  Thus, my writing many times reveal something that was not exactly what I was trying to say.  I work diligently not to allow that to be the case in my writing but sometimes what I write is not what I am saying.  This is one of those cases.

When I used the phrase “come to Jesus meeting” I certainly did not mean to imply there was a division within our leadership team.  I understand that when some people read that phrase, to them, it expresses a division that must be worked out or someone has to go.  That was not what I understood about this meeting and my writing implied, to some, that we had a division among our leadership team here at the BSCNC. As a matter of fact, Brother Milton Hollifield and I had a gracious and productive conversation concerning the meeting I had with Brother Don.  Brother Milton went out of his way to schedule a phone conversation with me just to follow-up the conversation Brother Don and I had.

My point, as I expressed to both Brother’s Don and Milton, was not that we had a division that had to be worked out.  The point I was trying to make was a concern needed to be addressed by our leaders over the lack of baptisms within our new church plants.  Our leaders addressed that concern, not as a result of one individual, but as a concern within the church planting department and our leaders came out with a plan that all work hard to maintain.   When I used the term “come to Jesus meeting” I intended to convey that our leadership teams came together and would not quit until they successfully addressed the concern.  I did not acknowledge our Church Planting Team as a part of that process in my comment because I depended on my memory instead of doing the simple research.  I thought the Church Planting Team was under the Evangelization Director.  However, if one views our convention structure one will find the Church Planting Team is a department separate from Evangelization.

Allow me to express my desire to clear up any misconceptions I may have caused by using that phrase.  It was never my intention to present the NCBSC as being divided over this issue.  I beg the forgiveness from our Leaders if that was the way my words were perceived by my readers.  While I am not in complete agreement with all things BSCNC, I respect Brother Milton and our Leadership Team and desire to see the BSCNC pierce the darkness.  Not only do I desire to see it, I desire to be part of its efforts!  Thus, I am in support of our leaders and beg their forgiveness for any unintended consequences, and unintended explanations they had to issue, that my comments may have caused.

Brother Jerry Davenport

Jerry Davenport has presented another thought provoking, self-assessing article for our consideration.  We would all do well to heed the application within our own lives.

Brother Jerry is a graduate of Criswell College and also a West Texas rancher.  He told me that being a rancher does not mean he has bunches of money, it just means he has the capacity to lose bunches of money.  Brother Jerry also told me that his ranch is merely the object that God uses to allow him to take mission teams into Mexico. Jerry is a very effective missionary to Mexico and is being used by God to establish a mission plan for that area.  When many people are talking about evangelizing the dangerous territory of Mexico, Brother Jerry is doing it.   It was a mission trip to Mexico where Jerry and I met.  Brother Jerry heads up The River Ministry, a ministry where he coordinates mission trips into Mexico.  He is also an active member of Mother Holmes Memorial Baptist Church in Sheffield, Texas.  Jerry produces an article for the local papers in his area and he agreed to send them to me also.

The Color of Skin

Last week while traveling I decided to stop in at a little hamburger stand to cool off and get a coke. While sitting there a family came in that was of a different race. They were nicely dressed and the three small children with them were well behaved. They sat down at the table next to mine so I struck up a conservation with them and it was amazing all the things we had in common. For instance we were about the same age and they were traveling with their grandkids. It was humorous to watch them because it was just like my wife and I with our grandkids. Seeing that family reminded me of something in the Bible. We have to be very careful that we do not reject or shun away from people because they are different. It could be anything like religion, education, dress, race, nationality, language and the list is unlimited. Jesus Christ set the example of crossing barriers for us and we are to follow it, (1 Peter 2:22). Jesus crossed barriers like poverty, sickness, (John 5:5-9) contagious diseases, (Matthew 8:2-4), wealth, (John 4:46-54), The Samaritan woman, a outcast because of race and sin, (John 4:4-29), and even Peter’s mother in law, (Matthew 8:14&15). We need to watch out how we accept or reject others because God may just treat us the same way, (Matthew 7:1&2). See you in Church next Sunday. Brother J

I called Dr. Billy Blakley and received his permission to post this on my blog. In my conversation with him he expressed to me that no blogger has contacted his office and this comes after we had a blogger express his ethical guidelines. However, he posted about this issue without even contacting the DOM and even admitted as much in his article.  Here you will find the Association’s official response concerning this situation. Below you will find this same letter composed by the Association’s Vice-Moderator for their church.  He gave Dr. Blakley permission to use it as the Association’s response to this issue.

The following article is written by Dr. Joel Stephens, pastor of Westfield Baptist Church and Vice-Moderator of the SBA, and by Rev. Jim Richland, associate pastor of Westfield Baptist Church and chairman of the Membership Committee of the SBA. Since it explains the rationale and the biblical basis for the motion made to remove fellowship with Flat Rock Baptist Church, I want to share the article with all our Surry Baptist members.

This month, due to a situation that has developed in another church within the Surry Baptist Association (SBA), your pastors felt it necessary to write a joint article to address the situation and how it may affect our Association and our congregation. The situation is as follows: Flat Rock Baptist Church of Mount Airy voted to call a new pastor who happens to be a female. Many within the Surry Association feel that this action is unbiblical, and we agree.

The role of women within the church is a complex, broad, and hotly disputed issue. Our newsletter forum does not provide adequate space to deal with this subject exhaustively. But there are some basic issues that need to be addressed. In order to address these issues, it is absolutely necessary to investigate the Scriptures that relate to it without taking those verses out of context and therefore arriving at a faulty interpretation.

The primary verses that address the gender of pastors are found in 1 Timothy 2:12-14 which says, “I [Paul] do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.” The issue in these verses is what it means “to teach or to have authority over.” Again, context is essential. Beginning in 1 Timothy 2:8, Paul is explaining the appropriate behavior of men and women respectively in the church. This discussion continues on into chapter 3 of 1 Timothy where the qualifications of pastors (“overseers”) and deacons are listed. It is clear from the context of 1 Timothy 2:12 that Paul intends to lay out the parameters of who should oversee the teaching in the church; and that those who oversee the teaching in a local church (i.e. the pastors) should be men.[1]

Some object to this because of emotion. They know female pastors in other denominations who are kind and knowledgeable, and who work hard to care for the churches that have employed them. With due respect to all, especially to those ladies who are genuinely trying to do what they think is right, our opinions and feelings cannot be allowed to overrule what God has said in His Word. After all, our feelings and plans are untrustworthy because we are sinful (see Proverbs 16:25, Jeremiah 17:5-9).

Some object to limiting the office of pastor to men because of a feeble view of Scripture. They may say, “That was just Paul‟s opinion,” or “Our culture is more advanced and more sophisticated that it was then.” This causes them to ignore certain teachings in the Bible and cling to those verses that don‟t offend their biases. But the fact of the matter is that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tim. 3:16). Because the Holy Spirit superintended what Paul wrote, it carries the same authority as the words of Jesus Himself, because they all have God as their ultimate Source. If we begin discarding certain verses that we don‟t like, where does that stop? If we can‟t trust 1 Timothy 2:12, then what makes us confident that we can trust John 3:16? “All Scripture” means “all Scripture.”

Some object by stating that Paul‟s prohibition of women as pastors was based upon the cultural situation of the day: that women were excluded from education or subdued by a male-dominated society. Again, context is the key. 1 Timothy 2:13-14 clearly explains why Paul, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, limited the office of pastor to men. Those verses say, “For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.” The first word (“For”) means “because.” Paul‟s reasoning (ultimately the Holy Spirit‟s reasoning) for limiting the office of pastor to men had to do with God‟s design in the order of Creation. This divine design transcends all cultures or social realities; it is a timeless, universal truth.

Some object by pointing to various biblical characters and popular female teachers today. “What about Deborah in Judges 4?” The role of women in civilian government is not the issue; it‟s the role of pastors that we are concerned with here. “What about Philip‟s four daughters who were „prophetesses‟ (see Acts 21:8-9)?” “What about Beth Moore or Anne Graham Lotz?” Beth Moore and Anne Graham Lotz both have powerful ministries that God is obviously blessing (as He certainly did for Philip‟s daughters). „What can women preach about,‟ „which women can preach,‟ and „who can women preach to‟ are all questions that Scripture does not answer directly. Our newsletter does not lend itself to a full treatment of that issue. Furthermore, preaching (in general) and pastoring a local church are not the same. While preaching is certainly one of the main duties of any pastor, a person can preach without being a pastor (e.g. an evangelist). The office of pastor also carries with it the responsibility of overseeing the doctrinal purity of the church as well as overseeing the spiritual lives of the members of that congregation. The Bible may not answer all our questions with respect to women-preachers, but when it comes to women-pastors, the Bible is clear: it is not scriptural for a woman “to teach or to exercise authority over a man” (1 Timothy 2:12, English Standard Version).

Still others object to limiting the role of pastor to men because of a faulty interpretation of other verses of Scripture. Usually this group will quote Galatians 3:28 (out of context): “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Obviously they lay hold to the phrase “there is neither male nor female…in Christ Jesus” and hijack this verse to preclude any distinctions in gender roles. However, an honest unbiased reading of the context surrounding Galatians 3:28 leaves the reader with the inescapable conclusion that the writer is addressing the issue of salvation, not gender roles in the church. In other words, Paul is saying that Jews are no more saved than Gentiles, and slaves are no less saved than free persons, and that men and women are on equal standing at the foot of the Cross of Christ Jesus.[2]

So, if women are not supposed to be pastors, what can they do? The God-given roles for women in the church are numerous and absolutely indispensable! Women can lead prayers in church (see 1 Corinthians 11:1-16).[3] Women are commanded to teach other women in the church (see Titus 2:3-5). Just like the men, women are to give, go on mission trips, pray, encourage, serve, etc. The women of the church have diverse opportunities for kingdom service and their contributions are absolutely essential. Nevertheless, where God has placed a limit, we must respect His design and submit ourselves to His authority.

Sadly, those in leadership at Flat Rock Baptist Church have chosen a different path. As you may have heard, the Surry Baptist Association‟s Membership Committee invited the leadership of Flat Rock to meet to discuss this situation. Flat Rock refused their invitation and thereby closed the door on any reconciliation with the Association. For that reason, a motion was presented to the messengers of the Surry Baptist Association last Monday to withdraw the SBA‟s affiliation with Flat Rock Baptist Church. The motion passed by a very large majority.

One of the major tenets of “being Baptist” is something called autonomy. Autonomy literally means “self-governing.” That means that Flat Rock Baptist Church is not under any earthly authority. They cannot be told what to do by any other congregation, by the Surry Baptist Association, or by any other denominational organization. They must make their own decisions based on their convictions about the teachings of Scripture. But, so must the churches of the Surry Baptist Association. When two parties cannot agree on basic issues, it often becomes necessary to no longer associate with one another. This does not mean that we should treat one another harshly or spitefully. But sadly, there are times when parties must go their separate ways because they no longer agree on essential issues.

But please understand: withdrawing our fellowship with Flat Rock Baptist Church was never the goal! Restoration to doctrinal purity and a renewed sense of unity in the churches of our Association were our goals. Unity must always be one of our highest priorities; but it must never eclipse the priority of doctrinal purity. Unity is extremely important, but if we sacrifice biblical truth in order to have unity, in the end we will have neither.

It is important to remember that while Flat Rock‟s actions have been unbiblical, our response to those actions and to their members and leaders must never become unbiblical (see Galatians 6:1-3; Matthew 18:15-17). Pray for them daily. Pray that others within our Association will handle themselves with Christ-like love. Pray that the membership of Flat Rock will be convicted to correct their error. Pray for the lady elected as Flat Rock‟s pastor, and for her young family. Pray for our Director of Missions, Dr. Billy Blakley.

May God grant us supernatural wisdom with which to restore the strained relationships between the churches that remain in our Association. And may Christ have His way with His Church “that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish” (Ephesians 5:26-27).

If you have any questions or concerns with what has taken place or what these pastors have written, please don‟t hesitate to call or come by the Association office.

Brother Jerry Davenport

Brother Jerry Davenport has presented us with another great article.

Brother Jerry is a graduate of Criswell College and also a West Texas rancher.  He told me that being a rancher does not mean he has bunches of money, it just means he has the capacity to lose bunches of money.  Brother Jerry also told me that his ranch is merely the object that God uses to allow him to take mission teams into Mexico. Jerry is a very effective missionary to Mexico and is being used by God to establish a mission plan for that area.  When many people are talking about evangelizing the dangerous territory of Mexico, Brother Jerry is doing it.   It was a mission trip to Mexico where Jerry and I met.  Brother Jerry heads up The River Ministry, a ministry where he coordinates mission trips into Mexico.  He is also an active member of Mother Holmes Memorial Baptist Church in Sheffield, Texas.  Jerry produces an article for the local papers in his area and he agreed to send them to me also.

Walking the Aisle

The day and the hour had arrived and everything had been made ready. It was so beautiful the different colors, music and flowers. All the friends and family were there. Just by the excitement in the air you knew a very special event was about to take place. The groom appeared not dressed as usual but in fine clothes and then came his groomsmen all dressed in fine attire. As the music continued the bridesmaids appeared followed by little children spreading beautiful flower petals that the bride would walk on. The groom had a special glow on his face because he had planned and waited for this special moment. A hush fell upon the place and then that special music and the moment the groom and everyone was waiting for. The bride appeared and proceeded with such grace and beauty and the gown was so elaborate and yes it was white, pure and spotless. The moment she had been waiting for because she took her place beside her groom. They said their vows and were forever joined together in a special new relationship. That beautiful event reminded me of something that is going to take place in the future. It will be the day that every Christian or born again believer, (1 Peter 1:17-23) is united with Christ Jesus, (John 1:29) in heaven, (Revelation 19:5-9). It will be such a glorious event and day! See you in Church next Sunday. Brother J

Rev. Bill Harrell

In our last post Brother Bill Harrell began a discussion of Contemporary Worship and Calvinism.  It is concluded in this post.

William F. (Bill) Harrell, has been the Pastor of Abilene Baptist Church in Augusta, GA for the past 30 years.  He has served in many capacities in the Georgia Baptist Convention as well as the Southern Baptist Convention and has just completed his second eight year term on the Executive Committee of the SBC.  Brother Bill, as he is affectionately called, was vitally involved on the Executive Committee during the years of the Conservative Resurgence chairing one of the main sub-committees through which many of the necessary changes were made.  He is the preacher on Strength For Today, the television ministry of Abilene Baptist which has a potential audience of over two million people each week in Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama and Tennessee.

This casual approach is also affecting the preachers and staff members.  Many preachers and musicians stand before their church each Sunday dressed in a way that my school teachers would not have tolerated and would have sent me home to change.  My mother used to make me get new jeans if a hole came in the knee.  “Boy, you can’t wear those jeans to school, they look terrible”, she would say.  But, the casual, contemporary philosophy is that one cannot “reach” the people unless they are like them.  Quite frankly, from what I have witnessed, those church leaders who hold that philosophy are insulting their members.  Are they saying that they dress sloppily because their church members dress the same way?  Sounds like it to me.  The people of the world are looking for an example to follow, not someone else like them.  Most unsaved sinners are sick of who and what they are and they are looking for something different….something to change their lives both spiritually and socially.  But they are made comfortable with who and what they are when they see pastors, staff and church people who don’t seem to be concerned with what they are projecting.  I am weary of being expected to condone the idea that the casual, contemporary model is setting the right example and is acceptable.  What does the lost person who is looking for answers to life’s deepest questions think when he sees a preacher on the platform looking like he just washed his dog, put on a sloppy coat, left his long shirt tale hanging below his coat hem and rushed to the church to preach without even combing his hair?  When the preacher and staff project the casual approach to Christianity that is what the people will adopt.  Everything rises or falls on leadership and that is why a leader must make sure that he does not project the wrong thing.

The way people dress to attend church these days is downright dishonoring to God.  When the pastor bites the bait of casual dress, it results in casual actions which breed a casual approach to God.  Of course many in the contemporary movement will say, “God is interested in what’s on the inside more than He is interested in what’s on the outside.” Oh, really?  Does one mean to say that because God cares about what’s on the inside that He does not care about the outside and how we come before Him?  If one were called and asked to be in the Oval Office within two days what do you think he or she  would do?  If he did not have a suit and tie he would go to the expense of buying one so that he could go into the presence of the President of the United States properly attired.  Likewise, a lady would not think of entering the Oval Office in shorts and flip flops.  But these same people think it is permissible to come before the God of the universe with an appearance they would never deem appropriate for their president.  I tell the people of our church that if a tee shirt and jeans are the best they have, wash them, iron them and wear them to church.  That is just fine.  But if the best thing one has is a fine tailored suit then don’t wear the tee shirt and jeans.  We should come before God in the best we have.  How can the pastor be a proper spiritual role model for others unless he sets the right example?

In the Old Testament God was very particular as to how the people constructed the Tabernacle.  He outlined it specifically and the people followed his instructions.  When it came time to give the  instructions on how the Priest should be clothed, he designed the wardrobe very specifically.  He told them how the head piece should be made.  He designed the breastplate very intricately as well.  Certain stones were used for particular reasons known only to God.  The robe was of particular significance with the hem to be sewn with red thread.  Now, why did God say He wanted red thread.  First, the red thread is a “type” of the blood of Christ.  Secondly, He said to have the robe hemmed with red thread because that is the way He wanted it and He does not have to make excuses for anything He says to do.

Everything about the design of the Priest’s garb was for a purpose.  He was to come before the Holy God of the universe in a certain way.  He stood out from the crowd.  He set the example of how to present oneself before God.  The people didn’t dress that way but they saw him as an extension of God in their midst.  That is the way preachers should be today.  They should stand out as an example and as an extension of God’s presence among His people.  The same God that prescribed how the Priest was to come before Him is the same God who still sits on the same throne He occupied then.  He is the God who does not change in any way so why do we think that He has now modified his approach as to how we present ourselves to him?  He does not care which century we occupy.  He does not care about social implications in today’s world.  He is unchanging and I think He still wants us to honor Him by coming before Him in our best attire to signify our awareness of where we are and Who we are coming before.

The ultimate effect of the contemporary, casual approach to Christianity and particularly worship, is to lead the people to believe that they really don’t have to give up anything or change anything to come before God.  They can dress in such a way that they don’t have to change clothes in order to go for an afternoon at the lake.  One doesn’t have to give up their love for rock music, not even for one hour because we are going to give them the same style, volume and appearance while calling it “Christian rock”.  One doesn’t have to be concerned about living the Christian lifestyle because we now tell them that social drinking is just fine according to the Bible.  The bar is lowered so low that the world will be glad to come into our church because we will take them as they are and send them on their way as they are with the idea that because they came to church they will go to Heaven when they die.  This casual approach leads one to believe that God is happy to take us just as we are with no commitment from us concerning a change in our lives.  If the Bible says anything about Christianity it is that we must have a life-changing experience with Jesus Christ.

The Contemporary movement combined with Calvinism is, in my opinion, what is causing a decline in baptisms in the SBC.  The Contemporary movement, in general, does several things which result in the decline in baptisms.  First, it does away with the evening worship as an evangelistic event and replaces it with some activities or “educational” opportunities.  What they have effectively done is to convert worship time into the old Church Training mode.  Question:  how many people in the SBC were saved in an evening worship hour?  A significant percentage of our people were saved in the evening service.  To remove it takes away an opportunity for people to hear the gospel and be saved.  Second, it does away with revivals.  Not all contemporary churches have ceased to have revivals but so few do that the effect has been that they are almost nonexistent in those churches.  Question: how many people in the SBC were saved during a revival?  I can assure the reader that many of them were.  To do away with revivals is to limit the number of people who just might give their heart to Jesus.  Are the contemporary church leaders saying that an office that is ordained of God, (the evangelist) should not be employed in our churches simply because what he is gifted to do doesn’t fit the casual church model any longer and simply won’t work in these days?  I think this is exactly what is being stated overtly by many  and implied by others.

This casual approach to Christianity also tells people that they won’t be asked to be dedicated and consistent in their attendance.  The casual Christianity approach falsely assumes that people won’t come to your church if you demand anything of them.  They are not asked to make a public profession of faith as Jesus tells us to do.  In the New Testament one could not be a silent or secret Christian.  They made the declaration of their faith in Jesus in a public way.  Jesus told us to “confess Him before men” and that if we do He will “confess us before the father”, (Matthew 10:32-33).  But if we follow the casual model the idea is that if one has to make a public profession of faith, they will not come to your church.  Also, don’t place the visitors in any kind of situation in which they will feel uncomfortable in being welcomed.  This whole process is a “you do it your way” mentality because we want to make sure that you come to our church even though you will be a “lowest common denominator” Christian and church member.  My question is:  is the “lowest common denominator Christian” really saved or are they being led astray?  This movement is one of the major reasons that the baptisms in the SBC are falling.

Calvinism is contributing to the fall in baptisms as well.  I won’t take the time to go into the theological reasons I think this is true but I will point out a simple truth.  Calvinism, traditionally, produces few baptisms and smaller churches.  This is undeniable and beyond debating.  Now, I am sure that one can point to a few Calvinistic churches that are larger than some non-Calvinistic churches, but overall, what I have stated is true.  When one weds these two things together, Calvinism and the Contemporary church model, the result will be fewer baptisms.

Casual Christianity is the model and mode of the day.  This crude society in which we live has influenced even the pulpits of our convention and beyond.  More and more, some “preachers” are willing to use crudities in the pulpit.  They apparently think it is cute and that it communicates.  Here again, if a preacher does such things as using crudities and “light” profanity from the pulpit, he is saying to his audience that they really don’t mind him doing that.  He feels comfortable doing it and in so doing he insults the sensitivities of many people.  The pulpit is no place for cursing or crudities.  It is no place to be used to excuse social drinking.  It is no place to speak of bodily functions or tell questionable jokes.  God is nowhere within a million miles of such a thing.  The world has been very effective in convincing the Lord’s Church to “let its hair down” and “quit being so stuffy.”  And, the church has been willing to be convinced if the process will increase the numbers of people who will come.  Many of the people who do come into the casual church environment are not coming to be changed.  They are coming because the church no longer expects them to change and just because they have come they feel that when they walk out the door they have done God’s bidding and will be welcomed into Heaven when they die.  Perhaps these will be in the company of those to whom the Lord says, “Not everyone who says unto Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.”

We are in the Day of Apostasy, I fear.

Rev. Bill Harrell

Brother Bill Harrell has done it again.  In this two part series he presents to us some of the issues we must be aware as we lead our churches.

William F. (Bill) Harrell, has been the Pastor of Abilene Baptist Church in Augusta, GA for the past 30 years.  He has served in many capacities in the Georgia Baptist Convention as well as the Southern Baptist Convention and has just completed his second eight year term on the Executive Committee of the SBC.  Brother Bill, as he is affectionately called, was vitally involved on the Executive Committee during the years of the Conservative Resurgence chairing one of the main sub-committees through which many of the necessary changes were made.  He is the preacher on Strength For Today, the television ministry of Abilene Baptist which has a potential audience of over two million people each week in Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama and Tennessee.

In the early nineties, a movement  was born in the Evangelical world which has grown beyond the expectations of even those who started it.  A pastor in Chicago, Bill Hybels, is credited with being the genesis of the contemporary movement and even he has acknowledged the destructive side of it and has stated so.  When I concluded my first eight year term on the Executive Committee of the SBC, I delivered a short devotional to the subcommittee on which I was serving.  In that devotional, I stated that there were two things which were going to have to be confronted and solved in the coming years and that they both begin with a “C”.

The two things to which I was referring are Contemporary worship and Calvinism.  Concerning the Contemporary worship style, I made the following observation:  There is the risk of losing our denominational identity because people, by their nature, would always be looking for something new and fresh and that they would ultimately seek things which have, traditionally, been outside of who we are as Southern Baptists.  I stated that we would finally become confused as to who we are and if we become confused about it, the society around us will see nothing distinctive about us at all.  The result will be that we will blend into the surrounding spiritual landscape to the point that we will no longer be recognized as the Southern Baptist Convention we have known.  This is in the process of happening to us and it is happening at warp speed.

The second thing I mentioned beginning with a “C” was Calvinism.  In the SBC of the early nineties hardly     anyone could see that, ultimately, this would be a problem.  We have always had Calvinists in our midst and we have coexisted with no problems.  Even a cursory reading of history will show one that, while seventeenth and eighteenth century preachers in our developing country disagreed on this issue, they respected each other and worked together.  After the formation of the SBC in 1845 we might have disagreed with each other but we never sought to bring the SBC to a unified position on the issue.  Everyone could believe as he preferred as long as salvation through the blood of Jesus was the unifying factor.  However, I believed then, in 1994, and I believe now, that the Calvinists had an agenda to identify the SBC as a “reformed” convention.  While no one denies that many of our prominent founders were Calvinists, there were others who were not.  Whatever the case, the SBC began to turn away from that position near the middle of the nineteenth century.  This has resulted in those holding to Calvinism being in a small minority among our people and churches.

While Calvinism is in the minority in the SBC, it enjoys influence far beyond its numbers.  As certain leaders have committed themselves to the “reformed” position for the SBC, they have affected this effort by intentionally raising up an “army” of Calvinists through the educational system that the people of the SBC have paid for with their Cooperative Program dollars.  This army is dedicated to the task of seeing that Calvinism is the major theological position of the Southern Baptist Convention.  These leaders have known that the young people who have been indoctrinated with the five point Calvinistic model will be just as dedicated to seeing it succeed as those of us were who fought the Battle for the Bible and dedicated ourselves to the task of dealing with the issue of inerrancy.

As I have said on other occasions, I feel it is necessary to reiterate it here:  I have no problem with one holding the “reformed” or Calvinistic theological stance.  They are free to believe as they wish and though I believe they are wrong, I have never let this disagreement hinder my fellowship with those people.  Let it also be stated that I do not seek to “convert” a person to my viewpoint.  Many lively discussions have been held but that was the end of it when the discussion was finished.  The fact that I have had noted Calvinists lead revivals in my church are proof of the fact that I harbor no ill feelings toward someone who follows that theological model.  However, I am opposed to the effort to “reform” the SBC especially through a planned, orchestrated process which has that end as its goal.

Anyone who has followed the situation closely knows that one of our theological seminaries in particular is leading the way with this agenda.  A second seminary has joined the effort in recent years after employing a new president who is in the process of taking that school into the same camp.  That Calvinism was taught at our seminaries in the past was not a big deal to most Southern Baptists, but to intentionally transform those schools for the intended purpose of installing Calvinism in the SBC in order that we be touted as a “reformed” convention is too much for me to tolerate.  I also feel that the majority of the people in the SBC share the same feelings.  The above statements will be vigorously denied but as my Grandmother used to say, “the proof is in the pudding.”

Competition for members between churches in a given geographical area has resulted in those churches taking the contemporary movement to the extreme in order to attract the largest crowd.  When one church goes to a certain level of the contemporary, casual model, others feel they must do the same things or either invent some new twist which will attract more people than their “competition.”  One noted pastor said that he wanted his music to get more “edgy” because he was tired of losing members to another certain church in town.  This approach is dangerous because of the nature of human beings.  When people are being entertained they always want something more sensational than they had the time before.  Human nature is never satisfied with its experience and is always seeking something new in order to keep itself entertained.  Just ask Disney about this.  Why are they always adding new attractions?  Once people have been there, done that and have the tee shirt, they want something new in order for the entertainment factor to always be there.  Churches are experiencing the same thing.

First, there was the addition of screens with graphics for an audience which was raised on television and video games.  Then there was the abandonment of hymn books and those old, musty hymns for the new, bright, entertaining choruses.  Of course, they were tailor made for the video screen and for quick and easy access.  Besides, one no longer had to hold the hymn book….that heavy old thing.  Along with that came the idea that everyone, no matter their physical condition, should stand for thirty minutes or so while they look at the video screen, read the words and sing the choruses.  This has its roots in the rock concert scene where young people stand for hours and listen to a rock band.  So let’s copy that behavior in our church.  Surely, it will work here too.  Then, lo and behold, in order to further emulate what the world does, let’s bring more entertainment and excitement by adding strobe lights and smoke framed up in a black background.  Don’t forget to make it so loud that one can hardly stand the decibel levels.  That is what one gets with the secular rock bands.  I believe this: the medium becomes the message if one cannot understand the words.  And, in most cases, a person would be hard pressed to understand the words as performed by the “Christian rock bands” which copy the style of the secular bands.  While we are doing all of this, we must do away with that old choir.  Too many older people in it and the young people won’t come to our church if they see that.  We can replace it with about six people with microphones and a pied piper in order to lead our people in the choruses they are going to read off the screen.  This writer is not trying to be sarcastic but when the truth sounds sarcastic, so be it.

Rev. Bill Harrell

William F. (Bill) Harrell, has been the Pastor of Abilene Baptist Church in Augusta, GA for the past 30 years.  He has served in many capacities in the Georgia Baptist Convention as well as the Southern Baptist Convention and has just completed his second eight year term on the Executive Committee of the SBC.  Brother Bill, as he is affectionately called, was vitally involved on the Executive Committee during the years of the Conservative Resurgence chairing one of the main sub-committees through which many of the necessary changes were made.  He is the preacher on Strength For Today, the television ministry of Abilene Baptist which has a potential audience of over two million people each week in Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama and Tennessee.

In Part 1 Rev. Harrell laid the foundation for his thesis.  I would encourage you to read that foundational article if you haven’t already. 

The devastating thing is that the Church has largely accepted this diminished role in society as the proper one for it to fulfill in these days.  She has done this for several reasons.  First, it is simply easier to fit in and let society define who the church is and where and how she should conduct herself.  It’s the “Oh well, I’ll just do all I can do under the present circumstances and I can do no more.”  This frame of mind simply rewards the lazy and uncommitted.  In their minds it exonerates them from the call to make a difference.  Churches like this have simply given up while at the same time trying to appear holy.  Somehow I do not think that this is what Jesus had in mind when He said, “I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

Secondly, the church in the postmodern world is being intimidated into subjection.  It seems that the only people who do not have complete freedom of speech today are the preachers and the church at large.  For fear of losing their tax-exempt status many men of God have capitulated to the postmodern god called the federal government.  I don’t find that behavior in scripture.  Suppose Elijah or Daniel or Jeremiah had taken that viewpoint?  Can you just hear them saying to God; “Well, you must understand God, the king won’t put up with that.”  So, the church today is timid about the crucial things to which it should speak with boldness.  She is religiously fulfilling a perfunctory role in society while becoming weaker and weaker all the time. Where are the men and the churches who will stand up and say with Bible in hand, “Thus saith the Lord God.”  If ever a society needed a church to lead it spiritually, morally and ethically this one does and the church, led my men who are afraid of their shadows, is not filling the bill.  When did the ACLU become stronger than the Church?  I’ll tell you when; it was when the Church forgot to place its trust in God and His Word to the point that she is intimidated into subjection.  It has happened only when God’s people allowed it to happen.  The world does not mind what the church does as long as she does it within the walls of the sanctuary on Sunday.  They just don’t want us to bring it outside the sanctuary walls and impact society.  That’s when they get excited and begin to blow and hiss about how wrong it is for the church to force its opinions on others.  “Just stay in the sanctuary and we will tolerate you, but if you come outside then we will violently oppose you.”  We must regain our boldness and stand up for our Christian faith or we will slowly lose it by degrees which, incidentally is already happening.  We no longer live in an environment which is basically accepting of Christianity and it will finally eliminate us altogether unless God’s people once again become bold and claim the high moral and spiritual ground granted to us by the Lord Jesus himself.

Thirdly, the church has become powerless in this age because she desires to become like the society in order to be pleasing to it.  The approach which pleases the world and tickles its fancy is totally opposite to what Jesus said the situation should be.  He said we were going out as Lambs among the wolves.  The only way a lamb ever satisfied a wolf was to become its meal and the world, the flesh and the devil would love to devour us.  Also, the marketing of the church is not Biblical.  Jesus said, “I will build my church”.  What we must do is to be faithful in proclaiming the gospel and witnessing to the lost as well as ministering to the Saints.  Then, we must depend on the Lord to add to the church.  This whole marketing concept cannot be found in the Bible and I don’t think it pleases God one bit.  The world will love and attend a church which poses very little or no challenge to its way of life.  These people are led to believe that if they simply attend church they will be acceptable to God.  If when they leave the church building they feel good about what they have done, then God must certainly be pleased with it.  Their whole concept of worship is that if it makes them feel good and complete that it was obviously the kind of worship God desires and that it will bring his blessings and exoneration from sin.  This is the postmodern, pragmatic frame of mind which says that if the desired result is achieved, then the process must have been acceptable.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  When the bar is lowered enough, then the world will find no difficulty in stepping over the bar and attending a particular church.  They will not be challenged by anything which is said or done.  Yes, the world will flock to such a church, but when they do, then that is exactly what that church has; a church full of the world.  This writer still believes that what we do in our worship must, to some degree, mirror the gravity of what took place on the cross.  The reason for this is that without the cross we have no reason to be in worship at all.  Jesus did not say, “It is finished, now go and have yourselves a good time.”  To the degree that a church or denomination modifies itself in order to be acceptable to the world, they will cease to have the power to make a difference in the lives of the people in society.  If we look, sound and act similarly to the way the world acts, then what testimony do we have and what advice can we give to them?

We have become, and are in the process of becoming just another organization as the world views them.  The supernatural nature of the church is being stripped away and we are letting it happen and yes, even abetting it.  The question must be asked: If we continue to go in the direction we have charted over the past ten or twelve years, what will our children and grandchildren think of the church in the coming years and, more importantly,  how much will they value it’s message?

As Paul says in Romans 13: 8-14, we must do two things.  We must WAKE UP and we must CHANGE CLOTHES.  We have no business looking and acting and sounding like the world.  The contemporary movement which is now so in vogue must remember something.  The word “contemporary” literally means “temporary” and that is exactly what satan wants us to be…..temporary.  This movement is flighty, shallow and appeals to the whims of worldly people who have lost the vision of what the church is or what she is suppose to be.  They are there for themselves and not for God, and we must remember that our worship is for God and not for us.  He is the one who should be the focus of all we do in worship and not our own gratification.  They are the ones who demand to be pleased or they will go somewhere else.  They are consumers, not contributors and the church cannot be built on such a foundation.  This contemporary movement is nothing more than the result of people marketing the church, manipulating the environment and appealing to a shallow generation in order to build numbers and prestige.  It creates a church with a split personality as the new, contemporary crowd slowly tries to take the direction of the church away from the solid people who founded it.  More than one church has experienced this problem and the resulting split.

There is much more that could, and indeed, should be said about all of this, but I think that by now the point is well taken.  Many people will not totally agree with me on my assessment of the situation, but I have arrived at where I am by carefully examining what is happening in today’s church and comparing that with what the Bible says about who and what we are.  I will stick by my conclusions.  I think that history will prove I am right.

Rev. Bill Harrell

Today I want to introduce you to the ministry of Rev. William F. Harrell.  Brother Bill has been in, and through,  the trenches of the Conservative Resurgence.  As a matter of fact, it was Brother Bill that organized the conservatives in Georgia.  After a time of getting them organized the Lord opened avenues of service for Brother Bill in the national conservative movement. This post is Part 1 of a two part series.  This is merely the introduction and the strength of this post will be evidenced tomorrow with Part 2.  Enjoy and feel free to comment.

William F. (Bill) Harrell, has been the Pastor of Abilene Baptist Church in Augusta, GA for the past 30 years.  He has served in many capacities in the Georgia Baptist Convention as well as the Southern Baptist Convention and has just completed his second eight year term on the Executive Committee of the SBC.  Brother Bill, as he is affectionately called, was vitally involved on the Executive Committee during the years of the Conservative Resurgence chairing one of the main sub-committees through which many of the necessary changes were made.  He is the preacher on Strength For Today, the television ministry of Abilene Baptist which has a potential audience of over two million people each week in Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama and Tennessee.

A casual perusal of recent history will reveal that it has not been too many years since the Church really made a difference in the way society conducted itself.  The public needed a moral compass and the Church was it.  When evil and immorality reared its ugly head, the Church was the first to confront it and more often than not, was successful in dealing with the problem thereby protecting the moral and spiritual climate of society.  It was the Church, along with Godly parents, which taught the people what was morally right and socially acceptable.  She was viewed as a vital part of the culture while at the same time remaining separate from it to the point that she would be able to influence that culture in a Godly fashion.

It was the Church, and Godly parents who had themselves been taught by the church, that set the standards for what was good and prudent behavior.  She held high the standards of decency which are today being cast aside.  People knew it was wrong to co-habitate without being married.  They knew that homosexuality was wrong as was profanity and drunkenness.  People were warned about the sins of sexual license and pornography.  They were told that these things are wrong.  And, when someone stepped over the line and violated what was considered proper spiritually, morally and ethically, the church, as the spiritual Body of Christ who himself must do the forgiving, was the institution of society to which they went for forgiveness.  They automatically knew that it was the church which set the standard and that it was to the church that they must go in order to set things right.  There is no redemptive power in social, civic or educational organizations and people knew this.  For redemption and peace they automatically turned to the church.  It is the Church, and only the Church, which has the message of redemption which truly changes lives and saves souls.  No other institution or organization has this vital message or the ability to apply it.

In this postmodern era in which we live the situation is quite different and it will continue to get worse unless the Church re-claims some of the high ground it has given up to the world.  People now place as much or more confidence in the government and its social programs to provide answers for life as they do the church.  In fact, to the average person today, the postmodern church is little more than just another organization present in society.  It is a good organization, but to them, it is just that; another social organization which is supposed to make people feel good about who they are.  The true message of the Church is too straightforward for people who have absorbed the postmodern frame of thought on how life should be lived.  They will not tolerate the actual message of Scripture because they have been taught that it is too narrow and demanding.  Not only is it demanding they also feel that it is demeaning.  It violates their right to be the person they want to be as prescribed by the politically correct, postmodern culture in which we now live.

Tomorrow you will read how the post modern church is lazy, intimidated by society, and powerless to do anything about it.  

Brother Jerry Davenport

In the past year I have gotten to know a person that I met on a mission trip in 2010.  Jerry Davenport has become a friend and is quickly becoming a close friend of mine.  Brother Jerry is a graduate of Criswell College and also a West Texas rancher.  He told me that being a rancher does not mean he has bunches of money, it just means he has the capacity to lose bunches of money.  Brother Jerry also told me that his ranch is merely the object that God uses to allow him to take mission teams into Mexico. Jerry is a very effective missionary to Mexico and is being used by God to establish a mission plan for that area.  When many people are talking about evangelizing the dangerous territory of Mexico, Brother Jerry is doing it.   It was a mission trip to Mexico where Jerry and I met.  Brother Jerry heads up The River Ministry, a ministry where he coordinates mission trips into Mexico.  He is also an active member of Mother Holmes Memorial Baptist Church in Sheffield, Texas.  Jerry produces an article for the local papers in his area and he agreed to send them to me also.  I am honored to be on this list and, with Jerry’s permission, I decided to publish them here at Southern Baptist in NC.  They are spiritual applications to everyday events.  I will publish them as Saturday Citations.