Conservative Post

I have grave concerns about the recent and final GCR Task Force Report. The biggest issue I have however, is that it is a shift to a top down hierarchy over churches rather than a bottom up cooperation of churches. When the sole decision for what gets funded comes from the national level and the Associational Missionaries are completely under the thumb of the National decision makers then what happens on the local level is determined by those who are not on the ground. There is no way the national control can be as effective. Add to that it is contrary to a cooperative and we move closer to a denomination.

I am disappointed that the use of the term “denomination” was used in the report to describe the convention. Considering that we are moving in that direction I have to ask if that is the intention of those who created this report. Until now the convention has been a cooperative of Baptist and autonomous churches that make decisions at the local level within the states to reach the lost. But with this proposal to change to a top down governance style in the convention and the use of the term “denomination” I have to wonder is moving toward a denomination the intent of the authors of the report. The Southern Baptist Convention has always been a cooperative not a denomination. When the secular press uses such terms I pass it off as ignorance. When our convention leaders uses such terms then it is not ignorance but decisive intent.

With the level of unpopularity this has received some of those on the task force have become quite defensive on a very immature level. It is unnecessary to suggest that any rejection of this final report means Southern Baptists are rejection the great commission. Such defensive tactics shows a clear problem with conscience.

I do not expect that this will pass at the convention in Orlando, but should it pass I have serious concerns that this will work to split the convention. I do not believe this will simply be accepted and everyone will move on. This GCR proposal reaches the same level of the recent health care laws that were crammed down the throats of Americans. Neither will be accepted quietly.

There is much controversy over the proposed strategy changes put out by the GRC Task Force. Quite honestly I am not all that thrilled with these proposed changes myself. I am not sure I understand them with much clarity thus far so I will withhold my opinion until I have had a chance to study them further. But we, as Southern Baptists, need to maintain our unity if not draw closer together during this time of disagreement. A Recent article in the Baptist Press News entitled “GCR Terminology a Disaster for CP” is a prime example of someone taking advantage of the situation for political purposes and to create division in the convention. In it Jeeson takes this opportunity to question the motivations and commitment of the leadership that has been elected “for most of the past 30 years”.
My first response was that this was inappropriate. But as Dr. Patterson once said “picking your nose at your wedding is inappropriate” this goes beyond such a simple designation. It is in fact outrageous and Jeeson needs to offer an apology much like Jerry Rankin did to Morris Chapman. He needs to apologize for questioning their commitment to the CP, and to all Southern Baptist who voted for these past leaders as he accused them of voting for “validation by corporate image”. And he needs to apologize for trying to stir up such unnecessary strife born out of a disdain for the conservative leadership. While the article is entitled “ GCR Terminology a Disaster for CP” it is clear that the title does not fit the heart of the article. It should have been title “ My excuse for criticizing conservatives”.
This is made obvious by the designation of “most of the last thirty years” in reference to the leadership. Everyone knows that such a time span fits the conservative resurgence. And of course he sets a rather spurious standard by using the percentage of the churches budget. Making a comparison of a large church like FBC Woodstock to a small church running less than 100 can only be accomplished by percentages. The truth is the total amount given by larger churches even at 2 to 6 % is much greater than a small church who is giving is at 10%.
I must say that I agree with Jeeson that the current changes proposed do not do anything to create a heart change in people. And such a heart change is what is needed most, not the current hyper-pragmatic attitude that is being displayed by the GCR Task Force. But we need to stick to the real problem rather than using it for political purposes and conservative criticism.

B.H. Carroll
First President, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (1908-14)

…These modern devotees of higher criticism must wait each week for the mail from Germany to know what to believe or preach, to find how much, if any, of their Bible remains….
– “Theological Seminaries and Wild Gourds”

Lee, keep the Seminary lashed to the Cross. If heresy ever comes in the teaching, take it to the faculty. If they will not hear you and take prompt action, take it to the trustees of the Seminary. If they will not hear you, take it to the Convention that appoints the Board of Trustees, and if they will not hear you, take it to the great common people of our churches. You will not fail to get a hearing then.
–”Deathbed Commission to his Successor,” L.R. Scarborough

The modern cry, “Less creed and more liberty,” is a degeneration from the vertebrate to the jelly fish, and means less unity and less morality, and it means more heresy. …It is a positive and very hurtful sin to magnify liberty at the expense of doctrine.
–An Interpretation of the English Bible

“There’s a huge difference between building a church and building a crowd,” he said. “There’s a huge difference between having a movement with results and having a movement with eternal results.”?~ Dr. Ergun Caner

No words said have ever been more true. Dr.David Allen once spoke similar words at one of the pastors conferences in Jacksonville Fl, “Heaven help us to know the difference between a crowd and a church”. The ABP recently reported on the debate over the use of the Camel Method in reaching Islamic people. My concern does not just end with the heretical method but the attitude toward scripture by the person who developed it. Kevin Greeson a Southern Baptist Missionary is the developer of this heresy and what is more alarming is his lack of faith in the word of God and his failure to rely on the Holy Ghost in evangelism.

The use of contextualization has lead to serious theological error and the setting aside of God’s word.  “Culture” and “contextualization” are fast becoming a religion in and of themselves and an excuse to give credibility to everything under the sun. Recently Greeson said “They didn’t believe in Jesus as the Son of God or in His resurrection. They did not acknowledge the authority of the Bible, so quoting scripture was useless.” Mr. Greeson that is the way of all the lost. Lost people always reject God, His Son, and His word. Paul made this clear in 1 Cor 1:18 when he said that the preaching of the cross is foolishness to the lost and he goes on to say that God chose preaching to win the lost. What God did not say was to build bridges by using their false religions. God did not say use any method under the sun outside of scripture under the guise of contextualization. And God did not say that using scripture is ever “useless” in presenting the gospel. In fact God did say that when His word is spoken it goes out and accomplishes all that He intended.

But now some in the convention would ignore scripture and turn to the wisdom of men rather than the “foolishness of preaching” which is the only prescribed method given by God in His word. I am concerned that the reason for the need of the conservative resurgence is alive and well in our convention. When our pastors and or missionaries hold the view that scripture is ever useless then they should, everyone of them, be pulled from their position. We need men of God who are convinced that the word of God is the only standard for faith and practice and it is completely reliable at all times and there is no other method or bridge that should replace it for reaching the lost.  Kevin Greeson needs to have his commission pulled.

There is always within the culture and even in our churches the conflict between older and younger generations. The younger are always looking for the newer, faster, and the better. There can be no doubt that they are, in so many cases, discontent with methods and ways of doing things they saw growing up. The older generation often is working to maintain what they have known for many years, and have seen work hundreds of times over. I have a concern that in so many cases where this conflict of generation’s pops up the older congregants get the short end of the stick, and often without legitimate cause. The fact that the older generations have been serving God faithfully for many years, and have spent more time in scripture than far too many pastors is overlooked.

Just because differences arise between the generations does not mean the core problem or conflict is a “generational gap”. It just may in fact, at times, be that the new thing being presented is in error and needs to be carefully looked at with older eyes and wisdom. Attaching catch words to new ideas, such as “cultural context”, “progress”, or any number of other words should not immediately give the idea credibility as the right thing to do. I am greatly disturbed at the growing disrespect to our older generation. As of late it seems the younger generations cannot wait for them to go home to heaven so as not to be hindered by them.

When the church loses its respect for our older members because we cannot get our agenda through then we have lost sight of what a church is as a whole and the church is now a reproach. We need to remember that the word of God speaks favorably of our older generations (Pro 16:31). Maybe we need to spend as much time if not more trying to understand the older generation as we do running out and trying to understand the lost culture. If nowhere else, understanding ought to begin in the church first and foremost even if we “think” the older generation is not trying to understand anyone else.

We need to recognize that there is a vast difference between a generational gap and carnal minded Christians. The latter come in all sorts of stripes and colors and it is in error to assume the older generation is being carnal minded just because they do not immediately buy into what is new and presented as “culturally relevant”. This “cultural relevance” does more to divide people in our churches than anything else these days. We need to honor our older congregants just as much if not more than the world’s culture. Let’s get back to treating our older congregants with the love and respect they deserve.