Conservative Post

If there is a common religion to be found within the Western world it surely is pragmatism – the religion of “what works?” Pragmatism has no cathedrals; it follows no liturgy, hires no pastors and cannot be found in any listing of denominations, yet it is woven into the very fabric of the Western church. Whether we are talking about mainline, Pentecostal, Fundamentalist, Emergent or Orthodox, it does not take much observation to realize that pragmatism is interlaced throughout each tradition. To attempt to remove pragmatism is to pull a thread which could very well unravel the whole structure of Christianity and church life as we know it today, yet to pull on that thread we must. The problem is that far too many of us are willing to use any approach available to accomplish our goals, even if those approaches and/or goals do not mesh with the revealed will of God. Our creed is, “If it works it must be of God” for, after all, the outward blessing of God is the criterion by which we often measure the approval of God. By using the standard of pragmatism rather than Scripture, we can with all good conscience live lives and develop ministries that have the appearance of wisdom but nevertheless fall seriously short of God’s standard. We would do well to ponder the warning found in Proverbs 14:12: “There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death.”

Take for example the wildly popular and thoroughly pragmatic book Blue Like Jazz by Donald Miller. The cover of Blue Like Jazz tells us that it was written for “anyone wondering if the Christian faith is still relevant in a post-modern culture” and “for anyone thirsting for a fresh encounter with a God who is real.” Yet Miller uses not a single biblical quote or reference and only in passing mentions scriptural situations as he purports to lead us toward an authentic encounter with God. It is for this reason that he can sing the praises of one of the most depraved college campuses in the world (by Miller’s own admission) while telling us, “I had more significant spiritual experiences at Reed College than I ever had at church.” [1]

http://www.svchapel.org/resources/articles/21-church-trends/604-the-challenge-of-pragmatism-part-1

Powered by Bookmarkify™

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.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

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.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

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

Powered by Bookmarkify™

“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.

Powered by Bookmarkify™