"...When He [Jesus] saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd." Matt 9:36

"Do not rob the poor, because he is poor... for the Lord will take up their case and plunder those who plunder them." Proverbs 22:22-23

Friday, March 19, 2010

Hypocrisy in the SBC Over Female Pastors

"A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. (1 Ti 1:11-12)

"The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church." (1 Cor 14:34-35)

The Georgia Baptist Convention very soon will disfellowship another church for the terrible "sin" of calling a woman pastor. This time it's Druid Hills Baptist Church (DHBC) in Atlanta, as they recently voted to appoint the pastor's wife, Mimi Walker, to the position of co-pastor along side her husband, Graham Walker (both at left). The ABP reports that a GBC meeting will occur in Albany, Georgia this fall to vote to give GBC the right boot of (dis)fellowship.

Last year the GBC disfellowshipped the First Baptist Church of Decatur for hiring Julie Pennington-Russell as their pastor.

Most of the banter on the Internet over the Decator and Druid Hills matters has been about church autonomy - that is, whether a state baptist organization should be involved in disfellowshipping a church for exercising their right to hire a female pastor. Certainly some believe hiring a female pastor to be contrary to scripture, but it is not a primary doctrinal matter. Neither Pennington nor Walker are in "sin", they are exercising their God-given gifts to minister as appointed by their church congregations. If their churches want to call women pastors, so be it. Plenty of SBC churches ordain women deacons, while many conservative churches would never do that. And the scripture quoted above could be used for this justification - its pretty clear - women should be quiet in church, not speak, and should ask their husbands if they have a question...or do I need to understand the Greek to interpret that?

It is clear: neither Druid Hills Baptist Church, or the most conservative SBC church abides by the very clear scripture that women should keep their mouths shut and direct all questions to their hubbies. Women speak in church. They hold leadership positions. They teach Sunday School classes. They are "directors" on staff. How can this be, given that very clear scripture? Because, obviously, they all interpret that scripture to mean something different than how it actually reads.

I'm not arguing either side on women pastors. I'm saying that there is no uniform agreement amongst SBC churches as to what scripture means on the role of women in the church. Some ordain women deacons, some do not. Some allow women to teach co-ed Sunday School classes, some do not. Some churches hire full time staffers that give them supervisory responsibility over paid male staffers and lay persons, while some churches do not.

And Druid Hills Baptist Church believes they are within the bounds of their interpretation of scripture to hire a female co-pastor. Before the typical cast of (male) characters comes here and blasts this as an "antimoniam" blog, I would ask them if in their churches they are abiding by 1 Tim 1:11-12 and 1 Cor 14:34-35. No, they are not, and their wives wouldn't stand for it, nor would any women in their churches, and they have interpreted those scriptures to mean something other than what the scripture says. I'm ok with that, until they start calling for the disfellowshipping of a church that inteprets that scripture different from THEIR interpretation.

But what sickens me even more than that this intolerance over tertiary doctrinal matters, is the hypocrisy in disfellowshipping a church whose congregation calls a co pastor, while other churches who have defacto female "co pastors" go untouched. I maintain that Druid Hills has done what many baptist churches have already done, in hiring and paying the pastor's wife as a "co pastor".

Two examples: Mac and Debbie Brunson at First Baptist of Jacksonville, and Ed and Lisa Young at Fellowship Church in Fort Worth.

First, Debbie Brunson: It can be argued that Debbie Brunson is a co-pastor of FBC Jacksonville with her husband, Mac Brunson. Sure, she is not called a "co pastor", but she occupies office space in the pastor's lavish pastor suite. She is not a secretary, as the Brunson's have a pastoral secretary in the pastor's suite with them. If she is NOT the co-pastor, whatever position she DOES hold is not clear as her position has not been posted anywhere on the website. This is not meant as a criticism of Mac and Debbie - I'm merely pointing out that they minister together, she was hired by Mac, and it can be argued that she serves as a de facto female co pastor. Also: Debbie Brunson has recorded several TV commercials - one with Mac and one with the women's ministry director at FBC Jax - so both she and Mac are the face of FBC Jax in the community, further evidence of her role as co-pastor. I'm told she participates in staff meetings, and is very involved as a leader at the church in staffing decisions. I'm also told her salary is very generous, more than the average SBC pastor even. Mac himself admits that women are "more sensitive to the Holy Spirit" than men, and to his credit Mac understands the value of his wife assisting him in ministry.

In my opinion, Debbie Brunson is a de facto co-pastor with her husband.

But the difference is Druid Hills dared to make their co-pastor official. They dared to vote on it OFFICIALLY and announce that they have a female co-pastor. They dared to allow the church to VOTE on hiring her. For some reason, FBC Jax doesn't officially tell anyone what Deb Brunson's position is in the church.

Next, Lisa Young: while she is not called a "co pastor" at Fellowship Church, a visit to the church website will reveal she, like Deb Brunson has a prominent role at her church. Go to their main website page, http://www.fellowshipchurch.com/ and click on "About", and you will see the first two hyperlinks are "Ed Young" and then "Lisa Young" (if you want to learn "About" Fellowship Church, you first should read about Ed and Lisa!) Click here to read about Lisa Young. I argue, she is a de facto co-pastor with her husband. She is described: "Lisa communicates God’s Word with warmth and grace, inspiring others to pursue a more intimate relationship with Him. Her passion is to see herself and others embrace the joys of walking with Christ in every day experiences."

I believe Lisa Young is the de facto co-pastor at Fellowship Church with her husband.

The arguments against this will be that neither Debbie Brunson nor Lisa Young preach in the church services, while Mimi Walker does. True. However, again, the scripture I've quoted above seems to be pretty clear - women should not speak, and its obvious they should not have leadership over men. If you don't think the male staffers at FBC Jax and Fellowship Church answer to Debbie Brunson's and Lisa Young's de facto leadership, you're crazy. They are there, they are visible, and their presence is felt.

Also, I know of churches that allow women to teach men in co-ed Sunday School classes - yet these churches are not disfellowshipped.

So what's my point? My point is that why not let these churches decide for themselves who to call as pastor or co-pastor, who to ordain as deacons, and who to teach Sunday School? Its called church autonomy. How many times have critics of this blog told me to butt out of their business? Those at Dallas will likely say the same when we discuss their proposed "Crystal Campus" starting next week. And spare me the argument that female pastors are a slippery slope to ordaining homosexual pastors. Homosexuality is a sin, and last time I checked being a female is not a sin, so these two issues are not related except in the minds of men who really don't want to see women teaching in a pulpit because, well, they don't like it.

Those in SBC leadership today should hope that a group more conservative than they doesn't gain control some day, and disfellowship them for allowing women to walk around church with their heads uncovered, speaking and daring to look men in the eye and ask them questions.

I hope the Walkers at DHBC stand strong, and present a strong defense in the meeting this fall prior to the vote, and that other churches and pastors in Georgia will come to their defense.

103 comments:

Thy Peace said...

An excellent and timely post. Please forgive me for posting these links related to this topic ...

Stop Baptist Predators [Christa Brown] > "Worse to have a woman" redux.

SPIRITUALITY - WHAT'S WITH PAUL & WOMEN?.

"The book you hold in your hands is comparable to an antidote for a venomous snake bite. The viper known as 'the doctrine of male authority' has bitten the church. The toxin emitted by this errant teaching affects the Females within our assemblies. It debilitates their God-given gifts, denigrates their Spirit-led ministry, and downplays their role as New Covenant priests. Those of us who have seen the church bitten need assistance,and help has arrived. This book will help you suck out the venom of male only authority within the church . . . .”

- excerpt from the Foreword by Wade Burleson, pastor of Emmanuel Baptist Church in Enid, Oklahoma
.

What's With Paul & Women? by Jon Zens.

Ministry of Reconciliation [Debbie Kaufman] > This Is Just Wrong Yet Southern Baptist Women Flock To This.

Were Women Silent at Pentecost? by Jon Zens.

1 Cor.14:34-35 and Its Context by Jon Zens.

Four Tragic Shifts In The Visible Church
180-400 A. D. by Jon Zens
.

Grace and Truth to You [Wade Burleson] > Are the Sisters Free to Function? by Jon Zens.

Grace and Truth to You [Wade Burleson] > There Is a Huge Difference Between Homosexual Sin and Women Preaching the Gospel.

Grace and Truth to You [Wade Burleson] > To Break the Chains of Bondage Requires an Understanding of the Real Problem.

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

Excellent, thanks for the links,TP!!

Anonymous said...

Well, you hit a hot button with me and I'm sure that's exactly what your intentions were. First, if Debbie Brunson is indeed co-pastoring and receiving the salary of a pastor, then that is wrong! But two wrongs do not make a right as that old saying goes. No where in the scripture do I see the validation of women having spiritual authority over men in their role in the church. In fact, just the opposite. Because FBCJAX went through a very similar upheaval as my former church, I was drawn to this blog site. However, your leanings are a bit too liberal and even angry for my taste. It's good to challenge one another to think through certain subjects, but it is another to continually stir up a hornet's nest against the church. Have you checked out the six things God hates? The sixth one is: "he that sows discord among the brethren"
(Prov. 6:19b). The only kind of provoking we Christians are to do is to provoke one another to love and good works (see Heb. 10:24).

Anonymous said...

DB receiving $25 k a year is hardly generous. If that is way more as you speculate other pastors make then shame on theses congregants keeping their pastor having to get food stamps and other forms of public assistance.

Lydia said...

These guys have always played fast and loose on this topic. Depends on who you are if it is ok.

Mrs Criswell taught a 300 person MIXED class for years and years. It was even on the radio each week!

They said she was under her husbands authority. But lets look closely at that. According to those in the know, he was not in the room while she was teaching and had nothing to do with preparing her lessons. Was his authority therefore a nod? And what does that mean? He is more spiritual than her because he had a title?

And as Joel Gregory said in his book, nobody, including Criswell, was going to pry her hands off that mic each week. This was one of those situations everyone knew was going on at the flagship SBC church but it was simply ignored.

Junkster said...

Anon March 20, 2010 2:23 PM said...
No where in the scripture do I see the validation of women having spiritual authority over men in their role in the church. In fact, just the opposite.


In fact, no where in scripture do you see the validation of anyone, man or woman, having authority over other believers in the body of Christ simply by virtue of their position or title. The reason people object to women as pastors is because of this mistaken notion of pastoral authority. If folks would understand that biblical eldership is about service to others and not power over others then they wouldn't get so hung up on the idea of women pastors.

However, your leanings are a bit too liberal and even angry for my taste.

Here we go -- so typical. When you disagree with someone's interpretation of scripture, call them liberal. When you dislike the truths they point out, call them angry. Don't deal with the issues, just silence all dissent by name calling. Don't folks who use these tactics get as tired of using them as the rest of us do at hearing them?

Have you checked out the six things God hates? The sixth one is: "he that sows discord among the brethren"(Prov. 6:19b).

And who is sowing the discord? Those who disagree with the so-called authorities? Or those who abuse their positions to oust those who disagree with them?

The only kind of provoking we Christians are to do is to provoke one another to love and good works (see Heb. 10:24).

And how is this provoking accomplished? By only saying sweet sounding words and never criticizing those who are wrong? And what is love and good works? Sitting back and doing or saying nothing while others are abused?

Jesus wasn't always nice, you know. But He always did what was right.

Anonymous said...

"DB receiving $25 k a year is hardly generous. . . .

TRY TELLING that one to some of our struggling missionairies.

One would think DB would gladly volunteer her services with a husband pulling in a 6 figure salary. . . .this hit a HUGE NERVE for me because I am a supporter of many missionaries who are at the mercy of doing two jobs - (1) doing the ministry God gave them a passion for and (2) trying their best to humbly ask for and raise monies so they can just stay on the mission field.

This subject is not new and has long been a HORNETS NEST.

Members have no clue what DB actually does so please don't repremand when a legitimate question of asking ones job description and salary range. Especially when it comes to a preacher hiring and paying her a salary from the church members tithe.

Preachers putting their wives on payroll really smells! One would think DB would be a gracious lady and would have long ago said thank you, but please give that $25K to one of our missionaries.

Yep, a big nerve hit on this subject - need a pain pill!

Anonymous said...

"Mrs Criswell taught a 300 person MIXED class for years and years. It was even on the radio each week!"

Anne Graham Lotz and Kay Arthur each speak to mixed audiences but neither think it is scriptural for a woman to pastor a church.

Junkster said...

WD,
Good post. Just a couple of minor points. It is antinomian, not antimoniam. And tertiary, not tertial. Yeah, I'm picky, but I'm sure you'd rather have a friend point it out than someone who just wants to distract from your points. Feel free to delete this if you chose to make the corrections to the original post.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
DB receiving $25 k a year is hardly generous. If that is way more as you speculate other pastors make then shame on theses congregants keeping their pastor having to get food stamps and other forms of public assistance.

March 20, 2010 3:03 PM

The problem is pastors putting their family members on the payroll - at whatever salary.

Junkster said...

Another thing ... one of the most hypocritical aspects of this push by the state and national conventions against women pastors is that Southern Baptists have always appointed couples, both husband and wife, as missionaries. As far as I call tell, the only differences between a husband-wife missionary team and a husband-wife co-pastor team are titles and locations.

Junkster said...

Anonymous March 20, 2010 3:03 PM said...
DB receiving $25 k a year is hardly generous.


Where did the $25,000 a year figure for Mrs. Brunson come from? Are you an insider privy to FBCJ salaries? If so, can you settle for us what Mac makes (total compensation package)?

I suspect that the reason Debbie's role and responsibilities aren't listed anywhere is because whatever she is paid is basically just "mad money" so she can do her shopping, etc. without it coming out of the Brunson household budget.

New BBC Open Forum said...

I've posted this story by Leon McBeth before, but it bears repeating because it humorously illustrates the hypocrisy of a lot of Southern Baptists.

As a very young man, I served as pastor of a strong, rural church in west Texas. We had a one-room building, and divided the Sunday School classes by drawing burlap curtains strung on clothesline wire. We had no pastor’s study, so I sat in the men’s Sunday School class. Our teacher was a wonderful man, a farmer named J.E., a man unspoiled by the schools. I had no car, so I rode the Greyhound bus to the nearest town; and many a Saturday afternoon, J.E. and Joyce picked me up and I spent the weekend with them. On Sunday morning on the way to church, Joyce would drive while J.E. prepared his lesson. His preparation went as follows: "Joyce, where is the lesson for today?" She would tell him the Scripture passage, he would open his Bible, find the passage, insert his quarterly at that place, and close his Bible. That was his total preparation. In class we would each read a verse and tell what it meant to us.

The women’s class met just across the curtain from us. Not five feet away, their teacher, Duchess, taught an excellent lesson. She had a strong voice; I should have such a voice. We could not help but hear her teaching; and most Sundays after a few moments, our class would lapse into silence, and we would just sit there listening to Duchess across the curtain.

That was my first pastorate, and I did not know anything. One day I said, "Why don’t we just draw back this curtain, and all of us make one class, and let Duchess be our teacher." There was a stunned silence. I wish you could have seen the look on the faces of those men: consternation, shock, dismay, and disbelief that the pastor would suggest such a thing. "Oh no," they said, "we can’t do that. That would make it a mixed class."


Full article.

Anonymous said...

In reading some literature and hearing some things on landmark baptist theology and its resurgence...it is highly inaccurate on successionism. Someone stated that this is what is going on in the conservative SBC circles...messianic judiac congregations were the ones that were persecuted by the Constanian policies.

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

Junkster - antinominan, anti-shonnononmian...whatever. I think Les and Joe feel really smart and important when they use it. Thanks, corrections made!

Anonymous said...

Dr. Dog-

Very interesting points made !! It all goes back to truthfulness and disclosure. And the members demanding accountability. It would be extrememly interesting to see what the actual numbers are for Debbie Brunson and Lisa Young, but I seriously doubt they will ever be published.

Keep up the great job, Dog !!

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

Watchdog, that angry liberal.

Never thought I'd be called a liberal, but heck, I've been called worse.

Anonymous said...

Mrs Criswell taught a 300 person MIXED class for years and years. It was even on the radio each week!"

Anne Graham Lotz and Kay Arthur each speak to mixed audiences but neither think it is scriptural for a woman to pastor a church."

Maybe it is time to explain what the scripture uses as an illustration for a 'pastor' and not what tradition and very bad translations (such as using the word office) made it to be.

Paul uses an interesting metaphor for pastor. The Greek word "huperetes" which literally means "under-rower" and refers to the slave pulling at the oars on the lowest, hardest level of the Roman trirme. Some prefer elder/pastor because of this. But it must be balanced. An overseer is simply someone mature in the faith...a very lowly servant who cares for souls. If an "overseeing/underower" seems to be a contradiction, well hold on to your hat because the truths of Christianity is full of them and why we are peculiar. Here are a few:

We worship a Servant/Lord
Who is a wouned/Healer
A dying/Life giver
As Christians we 'find life' by LOSING it. We receive by giving. We wear a yoke that lifts us up and save our lives by losing them.

It takes the indwelling Holy Spirit for that to make sense.

But humans want to crown other humans with authority in this Body that only belongs to Christ.

I must admit that going through my own sinful craving for authority caused me to study the whole issue. Doing so automatically brought in the woman issue. Boy, was I wrong on that one, too.

Doing the exegesis on all the relevant passages was a lot of work but it only proved how badly they have been interpreted. Why, I must ask...so us sinful men could have authority? And lazy women would not have to prayerfully develop and exercise spiritual gifts for the edification of the Body?

One over arching question folks must ask themselves when it comes to this topic is this:

If women teaching men is a sin then why do we not see this prohibited or commanded in the OT? (We sometimes confuse the Levite Priests with these functions)

No where is there a command in the OT that women cannot teach men. It IS taught as sin in the Mishna and other Talmudic writings. But not in the OC Word. That is interesting, no?

And if God commanded that women could not be in authority over men in the OC, then God would be violating His own supposed law with Deborah who was both prophet and judge.

Why would God make more legalistic laws for believing women AFTER the Cross?

This only means we have translated passages wrongly. And we can start with 1 Timothy 2. A whole industry has sprung from this very bad interpretation of authenteo. It does not mean authority over. It is only used once in the NC writings and is not used in ancient Greek lit as authority over since there are plenty of Greek words used in the NC to denote authority such as exousia and Arche. Authenteo denotes a sinister, evil hold over someone. (You don't need official authority to do that) Such as teaching them false doctrine. And that is what that ONE woman in Ephesus was doing.

Please prayerfully study on your own when it comes to this topic. The whole issue has become quite sinister in trying to shut up over half of all believers. Satan is thrilled.

There is no such thing as a senior pastor or a pulpit in the NC. We invented them.

Matt

PS: It will be easy to call me a liberal rather to engage the content of the Word. But I would recommend folks get this one right. It has to do with proclaiming the Gospel because by doing so, one is teaching another and this would mean women must discriminate against sharing the Gospel with men. Or at least the age some think boys become men.

Jack Therrell said...

Reminds me of "straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel" If U took all of the lady memembers from the church i pastor and all the things they do the doors could be closed. We no longer go by hair or dress rules Paul noted. I consider some things cultural or for a particular time and circumstance. There are essential things that to deny would be blasphemy but to be will to withdraw fellowship from an automamous church seems over the line. I don't have women pastors or deacons in my church but am fearful we do have some fruitless Christians maybe even some hypocrits. Should we be thrown out of our assoc.? If it came to that there are other true needs where we can send our offerings.

Doug said...

Who needs to be thrown out is Robert White and his 600K + salary/benefits, Gerald Harris and his GBC Propaganda paper "the Christian Index", Mike Everson and his gutless rendition of being a Consultant to others in the swamps of South Ga, and all those associated with this bunch...

Please do not get me started on The Georgia Baptist Convention - as I know them and their tactic very very well...

Mike Everson is the one who recommended these churches be removed...

He is the one who needs to "be removed - or another term - FIRED!!!

New BBC Open Forum said...

Speaking of the GBC... where did "Purify the Church" go??? And will it be back?

Anonymous said...

If you, as a woman, can get by this criteria then you can be a deacon or pastor....the pastor or deacon is to the the HUSBAND of one WIFE~~~Paul and the other NT writers wrote down what GOD(!) told them to write! Its not up for debate unless one wants to argue with God on the matter.

If you notice in scripture the house almost exclusively signifies the man's house not the woman's. The man is to be head of the house and protect the woman and be the spiritual leader in the home. Its a real shame that so many men have neglected their role, but that is still Gods plan. Once a church goes over the cliff in having women deacons and pastors they are out of the will of God, pure and simple.

It does not take away from what a woman is to do in teaching her children anything about the Bible which is every persons responsibility. Women can witness their salvation to anyone they are led to. Women can teach other women just not MEN. If you recall both Mrs. Lindsay's taught a new members class for years yet they were not the pastor and did not claim to be either. They used their experience as pastors' wives to teach what new Christians should and should/not do. And as a matter of fact did it quite well and probably better than some men in the church could have accomplished.

Anonymous said...

"If you notice in scripture the house almost exclusively signifies the man's house not the woman's. The man is to be head of the house and protect the woman and be the spiritual leader in the home. "

I normally try to stay out of such discussions when the information shows such ignorance of the Word but I cannot resist this blatent misinformation.


Let's turn to 1 Timothy 5:

14 Therefore I desire that the younger widows marry, bear children, manage the house, give no opportunity to the adversary to speak reproachfully.

The Greek for 'manage the house" is oikodespoteo. If you look closely at that word, you will see it is where we get the English word, Despot. This Greek word means: to be the head of (i.e. rule) a family:--guide the house.

Paul is talking about co-ruler in a one flesh union. And this is just one example of very bad translations.

Please friend, study on your own. The resources are free and at your disposal.

But I have one last question for you. Why would God put a human mediator, a sinner saved by the same grace, between an adult woman and Jesus Christ? What if the husband is a pervert who attends church and is even a deacon or pastor? Is he STILL her 'spiritual leader'?

Matt

Anonymous said...

"If you, as a woman, can get by this criteria then you can be a deacon or pastor....the pastor or deacon is to the the HUSBAND of one WIFE~~~Paul and the other NT writers wrote down what GOD(!) told them to write! Its not up for debate unless one wants to argue with God on the matter."

Then the same criteria must apply to single men. Right? Who would want to argue with God? The verses say "tis" (anyone in Greek) who desires this MUST be the husband of one wife.

Matt

Anonymous said...

"It does not take away from what a woman is to do in teaching her children anything about the Bible which is every persons responsibility."

If she has male children, at what age are they considered to be men and can no longer be taught the Word by a woman?

Matt

New BBC Open Forum said...

"Women can teach other women just not MEN. If you recall both Mrs. Lindsay's taught a new members class for years.... "

There were no men in the "new members" classes?

Thy Peace said...

Grace and Truth to You [Wade Burleson] > The Contaminated Pulpit and Other Weird Things.

It is widely believed that Dr. Bullock delivered one of the greatest chapel talks (i.e. 'sermons') in the history of Southwestern Theological Seminary. The tape has since been removed from Southwestern's archives, but we intend to post the audio in the next few weeks. The pulpit from behind which Dr. Bullock spoke was eventually removed from Southwestern's chapel under orders of the new President of SWBTS Dr. Paige Patterson. Dr. Patterson explained to those he had remove it that it had been contaminated by a 'woman' preaching behind it. Though the rumor persisted that the historic pulpit had been taken out and burned, the truth is far less dramatic.

Anonymous said...

"Dr. Patterson explained to those he had remove it that it had been contaminated by a 'woman' preaching behind it."


Wonder if this pulpit is gone?


Oh, and her husband also got her on the SBC "Great Commission Task Force"

Debbie Kaufman said...

That's interesting about Paige Patterson considering his wife speaks to the chapel service a couple of times a year, writes for the gender blog, read by both men and women, lectures around the world to both men and women etc.

Anonymous said...

Matt and others: There are always good arguments that can be made for any subject. I could argue both sides of this woman pastor issue equally effective. BUT,.... if you want to follow GODS WORD IN THE BIBLE then there must be a position of women NOT in the pulpit as pastor, or co-pastor. Otherwise, pick and choose which part of the Bible you want to believe and throw out the rest. There are many other pratical reasons why this should not be, but THE WORD OF GOD states it clearly. Argue, your position if you must, but THE WORD is enough for me.

If you knew either Mrs. Lindsays you would know that the New Member Class was really getting to know the new member and acquainting the new member with the church, rather than any form of preaching. There was scripture used, but many times one of the Jr., pastors or S.S. teachers (men) read it. The new member class was more of a "welcome to our church", hospitality class than anything else. It certainly was not preaching. These very gracious ladies always deferred to their pastor husbands on the Bible and church matters. They always taught Ladies classes, never men. THEY DID ALWAYS WITNESS TO ANYONE THAT GOD LED THEM TO.

Anonymous said...

"Matt and others: There are always good arguments that can be made for any subject. I could argue both sides of this woman pastor issue equally effective."

But you are not doing that. You are simply parroting a childish mantra that one believes like you if they are 'following God's Word in the Bible'.

I make that same claim for myself that I am following God's Word.

(I certainly hope you do not teach others with that tactic which only stunts spiriutal growth and maturity in the Word)

" BUT,.... if you want to follow GODS WORD IN THE BIBLE then there must be a position of women NOT in the pulpit as pastor, or co-pastor."

There are no pulpit's in the NC Word. If you find one, please give me the reference.

And we do not see the model of one special person speaking to the assembly week after week. Ironically, most "preaching"
was done outside the Assembly. Pastor is a spiritual gift.

Who was the pastor of the church in Corinth? Phillipi? What do you do with Pentecost? The church in Lydia's home? Chloe's 'people'? What do you do with Junia?

Again, I ask you to actually answer this question instead of parroting what you have been told:

Why is it women are not prohibited from teaching men in the OC but are now prohibited in the NC AFTER the cross? Do you really believe God decided to declare new law for silencing only women in the NC?


If you do not want to engage then why not refrain from backhanded insults that others who have studied believe differently from you are not following God's Word. I hate to say this, but your constant mantra only proves you are parroting. You almost seem afraid to engage this.

That, I can related to. It was hard to give up the lofty position. And for women it can be intimidating to realize they have no earthly mediator when they have been taught otherwise.

Matt

Anonymous said...

"THEY DID ALWAYS WITNESS TO ANYONE THAT GOD LED THEM TO."

One cannot witness without teaching. So, if they witnessed to men, then according to you, they were in sin. There is no way around this, friend. If one speaks the Gospel, they are teaching/preaching. The context of where they are does not matter.

As Christians, we do not have sacred furniture or buildings

Matt

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

Anon 6:53:

You say the following:

",.... if you want to follow GODS WORD IN THE BIBLE then there must be a position of women NOT in the pulpit as pastor, or co-pastor. Otherwise, pick and choose which part of the Bible you want to believe and throw out the rest. "

I assume your church does not require women to remain totally silent, and it allows them to ask questions of men other than their husbands...so why are you throwing out that part of the bible? It seems that you are the one who is guilty of picking and choosing which scripture to enforce. NT scripture is much clearer on women keeping their yappers shut in church than it is a 10% tithe, yet one is ignored and the other is pushed heavily. Wonder why?

And your words:

"There are many other pratical reasons why this should not be, but THE WORD OF GOD states it clearly. "

I wonder if you care to share those "practical reasons" against women pastors. That should be interesting. Perhaps by that you mean your own biases cause you to interpret scripture as you want it to read.

I'm not advocating women pastors - just pointing out the hypocrisy in those who ignore scripture that tells women to be completely silent in church, yet want to disfellowship Christians who do prefer to have a female co-pastor, when people ignore de facto female co-pastors who are appointed to their position and not voted on by their church.

But that's the day and time we are in, in the SBC.

A male pastor uses his lawyer friend to set up shell trust corporations to lease a private jet so he can go "minister" all over the world, and the president of the Florida Baptist Convention will fly out to defend him and support him. A church hires a female copastor to minister to their congregation, they get the right fist of disfellowship. And we shouldn't ignore either a women getting a trespass paper in an SBC church for the sin of fellowshipping with her blogging husband.

Anonymous said...

Matt your last question about a pervert being the spiritual leader of the wife. The answer is no. The fact is the wife should not be married to a pervert in the first place. She can attempt to get him saved, otherwise she can divorce him. Be not unequalley joined together with unbelievers would be the proper basis for either giving him an opportunity to get saved or her getting out of the marriage. Its basically her call. No one said a woman has to be married to a pervert. Why be married to a and live in such a horrible
marriage. One can invent any situation to try and justify a choice. The point is you eitheer believe the Bible or you don't. The Bible says women are not to be preachers!.

Anonymous said...

WD: We completely agree with you on the stated condition of the church and we have always agreed that what happened to you and your family was completely unacceptable. This is why we read this blog. And agree with your assessments. We have had our problems with church as well. But, the Bible is very clear on women preachers. I didn't write the Bible, so please lighten up on those of us who don't agree with women preachers. I agree that women are as intelligent and spiritual as men, in many cases more so. Women may even have a better grasp on scripture than a man. Women are not to be restricted and should not be treated unjustly in any area of life because they are women. But, the fact remains they are not to be preachers at least in my bible.

Anonymous said...

Matt your last question about a pervert being the spiritual leader of the wife. The answer is no. The fact is the wife should not be married to a pervert in the first place. She can attempt to get him saved, otherwise she can divorce him. Be not unequalley joined together with unbelievers would be the proper basis for either giving him an opportunity to get saved or her getting out of the marriage. Its basically her call. No one said a woman has to be married to a pervert. Why be married to a and live in such a horrible
marriage. One can invent any situation to try and justify a choice. The point is you eitheer believe the Bible or you don't. The Bible says women are not to be preachers!.

March 21, 2010 12:10 PM

I am afraid you have been quite sheltered. Many churches are full of such things. Some are even ministers who get caught years later.

Let me see if I understand you correctly:

As long as everyone is ignorant of the perversion,such as what took place at BBC with their minister, he would be his wife's spiritual authority until he got caught? As long as he looked the part, he can be her spiritual authority?

Would you please give us the reference that says women are not to be preachers. Let us look at it in context and the entire pericope.


Matt

Junkster said...

Anonymous March 21, 2010 12:10 PM said...
The Bible says women are not to be preachers!


No it doesn't!

See how that works?

debbiekaufman said...

Anonymous: The words you say concerning the Bible is more of a control issue on your part, but answer this because I believe in the inerrancy of the Bible. I believe every jot and tittle. I disagree with your interpretation.I have no problem belonging to a church that does not believe in or have women ministers, my church is a good example of this, although we have a variety of views on this subject. For example, a quote from this article which is worth taking the time to read says:

‘Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?’ And
stretching out his hand towards his disciples, he said,
‘Here are my mother and my brothers! For whoever
does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother,
and sister, and mother’ (Matt. 12:46-50).
In our Middle Eastern cultural context, a speaker who
gestures to a crowd of men can say, ‘Here are my brother,
and uncle and cousin’. He cannot say, ‘Here are my
brother, and sister, and mother’. The text specifically
affirms that Jesus is gesturing to ‘his disciples’ whom he
addresses with male and female terms. This
communicates to the reader that the disciples before him
were composed of men and women.

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

Anon 12:24 - you're not quite hearing me clearly. I'm not advocating women pastors, and I am not saying your interpretation of scripture is wrong.

I'm saying that there is room for different interpretations of that scripture that is about non-salvation issues. My point is that while we may say the NT forbids women to be pastors or deacons, we can't ignore the fact that we too are selectively ignoring scripture that says women should not open their mouths, and should be completey silent, and that if they do have a need to know something, they should ask their husbands only. That is a much clearer directive in the NT, than say, that Christians must give 10% of all income to their church. Yet we ignore that scripture, or we explain it away, or we let our pastor give us an explanation that he learned in seminary so that we can justify not enforcing that part of scripture that would be offensive in our culture.

Plenty of SBC churches have female deacons, and they are not disfellowshipped.

So if you and I are going to interpret scripture to mean women CAN speak in church, but can't be pastors, why would we want to disfellowship a church who interprets it differently and calls a woman co-pastor? Would I ever join a church with a woman co-pastor or pastor? Probably not. But why must we continually narrow our parameters on what it means to be SBC?

The other argument I'm making is the blatant hypocrisy in the SBC disfellowshipping a church for a female co-pastor when FBC Jax and Fellowship Church and others really do have female co-pastors already - on staff, paid handsomely, and in leadership positions. These two were appointed by their husbands, but let a church VOTE to bring a female co-pastor, they want to boot them out.

Anonymous said...

Women have a natural authority over men in the early stages of growth...such as why as women can evangelize and preach the Gospel. Ministers that are "rude" in their removal of women and won't help their husband's issues like they did to Mrs. Klouda go against the intent of the Scripture...but they conveniently ignore it. Paul was talking about the formative stage of growth with that of "mentoring" (which is the Greek word used) in his letter to Timothy.

Anonymous said...

It is also proven in science you don't stand in front of a man to train them...you come along side them because of how the vision/motor skill process work. Amazingly that is how the Spirit of God works as well.

Anonymous said...

The scriptures are already printed here as to what the Bible says about this argument. Abusive blogs., will not convince some of us believers that women should be preachers, or even deacons. Man has always tried to manipulate scripture or disavow it, in order to MAKE his point. This might be one of those occasions. There are so many reasons other than STATED scripture for women NOT being the preacher, Bible authority over men that I could spend hours posting here. But, you believe what you want to believe and I will believe what I know!

Anonymous said...

Matt 12:31 Your BBC remarks are unclear to me. I am not familiar with any circumstances you are referring to. But, while I am here addressing you 1. I am not interested in THE GREEK, I have an English bible, thanks. 2. I am not stupid 3. You and your abusive attitude have convinced me of nothing. How is that for "parroting!!! Oh, I guess abuse CAN work both ways. I do not appreciate the dismissive "friend" reference. I doubt you and I would ever agree on this subject. Just for reference, the one sending this blog is a woman!!!!! And BTW I am not "sheltered", controlled or brainwashed in any way. I am a very "liberated female" who has been saved and in church for many years. And, oh yes, my husband approves of my remarks here!!!! And, no I didn't ask his permission to send this.

Anonymous said...

"Man has always tried to manipulate scripture or disavow it, in order to MAKE his point."

I agree with you here. Which is why 'man' translated the word "office" into scripture when it was never there. And why "man" translated authenteo as authority over when that is not what it means. It is the Holy Spirit Who causes us to dig deeper. Otherwise the contradictions of your position within the whole pericope make no sense.

Do you know what the reference to judging angels means in 1 Corin 6 and in 1 Corin 11?

It would be good to find out. It is very important for you to know as a believing woman.

The ONLY place where the term for authority is mentioned between married men and women is 1 Corin 7.

The Word is inerrant. Translators are not. Which is why we have had so many translations. And why we have so many denomiations.

Matt

Anonymous said...

"The fact is the wife should not be married to a pervert in the first place"
==================================
If Only She'd Known:
Unfortunately a lot of women have no clue that their husband is a pervert until they (the husband) gets caught in his sins (and he always does)

These women thought they were marrying a true blood Christian when in fact the man was nothing but a drunk, cheat and molester of young adults.

Not only do some wives get deceived by these false pretenders, but so does the church who is so impressed with these performers they even put them in leadership authority.

FBCJ has had their share of men like this - these "perverts" can fool the church as well as the women who were deceived into marrying them.

The sad thing is that some of these men say "Im sorry" after they are caught and the church puts them right back into the same leadership role.

As a woman, I personally do not want a woman as a Pastor and I certainly don't want a "divorced" man serving in the role as a deacon or teacher to give me spiritual guidance.

Anonymous said...

" My point is that while we may say the NT forbids women to be pastors or deacons, we can't ignore the fact that we too are selectively ignoring scripture that says women should not open their mouths, and should be completey silent, and that if they do have a need to know something, they should ask their husbands only. "

Tom, for the record, that passage in 1 Corin 14 is a quote. Paul has quite a few quotes in 1 Corinthians he answers. In Greek there is no punctuation so the translators decided which ones to put quotes around.

In actuality, that verse is almost word for word out of the Mishna. (Those Judaizers again)

If you note, the word for silent in Greek means complete silence. No singing, no talking at all even to other women. (Talmud teaches that the sound of a woman's voice is lewd and filthy)

Paul clears this up by blasting them in verse 36...He uses sarcasm. The KJV captures his response pretty good:

36What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?

(We could ask this same question to lots of preachers, no?)

In any event, verse 36 completely negates the previous verses.

Verse 37 uses 'tis' meaning anyone who 'thinks' they are a prophet....

So, you have it right. If they want to teach this then it means absolutely no women's voices in the church are to be heard at all.

Matt

Anonymous said...

Since we are on this subject, listen to this clip for Jack Schaap pastor of First Baptist Church of Hammond, IN and independant fundamental baptist church. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_9JlsuLVTc
enjoy!

Anonymous said...

I think the church is in sin for using the name "Druid"!! a pagan cult.
They should relocate and rename....

debbiekaufman said...

Jax Watchdog: You have raised some interesting points in your post. If you sneak a woman(pastor's wife) in as co-minister, slip her in a desk(that wasn't there the day before) you can have a woman as co-pastor. Doing it officially will get you voted out at the next annual SBC meeting. Ironic isn't it?

Anonymous said...

Like the Bible says the NT liberated women. They were no longer under the Law but under grace. Women are fooled and so are some men when it comes to choosing a companion. Thats why we have courts to resolve these problems with perverts. I agree totally that no deacon or pastor who is divorced has a right to hold office. You sure wouldn't want their advice since they have already prooved they made a mistake themselves. All we like sheep have gone astray, however that doesn't mean we are to stay blind and stupid especially after seeing all the trickery in the Big Church and those who use the church to satisfy their greed or find a naive mate.

By the way Matt, the KJV translators were the best linguist and many knew several languages. I don't think you can improve on their intellectualism. They had all the documents and manuscripts to bring us a preserved Bible. It took forty of them 7 years to put the KJV together perfectly.

Thank you, but I'll stay with my English Bible anyday. You forget that the Bible is in Japaneese, Italian, etc,etc. I do not need the Greek. Its Greek to me!!!!
In addition we have so many translations because man is so arrogant, he thinks he can improve on Gods Word. And the biggest reason is because everytime a new translation comes along the translators make a lot of money off of it. There it is again, MONEY is the catalyst. Don"t forget each version must be changed 20% to meet copyright rules and laws. Yea, you are really going to have an accurate bible that way. Just keep changing it so you can sell it!

Anonymous said...

"If you, as a woman, can get by this criteria then you can be a deacon or pastor....the pastor or deacon is to the the HUSBAND of one WIFE~~~Paul and the other NT writers wrote down what GOD(!) told them to write! Its not up for debate unless one wants to argue with God on the matter."

Exactly! The agendas of: not tithing, taxing the churches, women as pastors - all are just evidence of more erosion of the church in these Last Days. The Southern Baptist denomination was once the leader in teaching and
adhering to the written Word of God. Now it has so deteriorated that it is following in the footsteps of other denominations that have fallen away from strong doctrine. No wonder our SBC churches are losing members and having so little impact on our culture. Similar to what is happening to our nation - once a strong leader in this world and now going the way of the
socialistic European nations.

New BBC Open Forum said...

"I agree totally that no deacon or pastor who is divorced has a right to hold office."

What do you do with Charles Stanley?

Anonymous said...

I have never liked the idea of husband/wife co-pastors. Those arrangements are more common in charismatic circles, at least that's what I have observed.

Who knows, maybe this trend will take off in the moderate camp.

I believe that this post and some of the comments do a good job of pointing out the various arrangements that are used in different places to maintain some historic male/female distinctions in roles.

All Christians are ministers. No one disagrees with that.

I am not a member of a church that is in the Georgia convention, but from what I can tell, that convention has drawn the line at official pastoral titles.

There is no real surprise here. The Georgia convention is apparently trying to maintain the gender distinction issue, and is drawing the line pretty hard to eliminate possible political activity that would be used to remove or alter the distinction.

But the moderates are having none of it. They appear to have given up the political game on the state level. Or else, they would not have designated these ladies "pastors", and they would have their full compliment of votes to use at the convention.

This just confirms that these churches already have little interest or presence in the convention. True, they probably would not prefer to be outed. But as the pastor of the Decatur church said when interviewed, we (the church) had already pretty much moved on with respect to the organizations they partner and work with. The visions of these churches, their emphases, the places and conferences they frequent etc. are not the GBC or SBC anyway.

So, if a state convention wants to draw a line like this, and the moderates don't want to try and stay in the convention (except for the initial PR buzz they get by being kicked out), then let them get divorced.

It's really no big deal. Birds of a feather...

Louis

Anonymous said...

BBC Open 6:58. I don't attend Charles Stanley's church. Once divorced, the pastor title does not continue in my opinion. But this is between Dr. Stanley and his church. Let me say that many things will be judged by THE PERFECT JUDGE at the Judgement Seat of Christ one day. There will be no opinions or arguments then. All of us (saved) will bow the knee. Many things will be made clear then.
1Cor.13:10: "But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away"

Vs. 12: "For now we see through a glass darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known".

Anonymous said...

Anon. 6:58: "Going the way of the world".

You have it right exactly! There is an epidemic of compromise going on in the world today from the govt., to the church. But this is expected in these last days of the Church of Laodicea. We should be saddened but not suprised. Keep looking up our redemption draweth nye.

Doug said...

I know exactly why the GBC wants no part of the ladies being a Pastor of a Church.

In my opinion, they would lose the Good ole boy network which would cost them huge dollars.....

think about what competition does!!

Now, recently I made my statement.

I quit going, tithing, designating, or sitting in or listening to any Baptist church in GA who are Ga Baptist Convention OR Southern Baptist Convention affiliated.

Why? Because I know the leadership's mentality!!!

I worked side by side with some leaders within the GBC, and know them well and if Ga Baptist knew them as well I do (did), well.....

that convention would be empty.

It is bad, real bad. But I took my stand and boy does it feel good!

Junkster said...

Anonymous March 21, 2010 7:59 PM said...
BBC Open 6:58. I don't attend Charles Stanley's church. Once divorced, the pastor title does not continue in my opinion. But this is between Dr. Stanley and his church.


I think you just made Watchdog's point. Different people and churches have differences of interpretation of God's Word. They fully believe the Bible, and they seek to follow it to the best of their understanding. But for various reasons people come to different conclusions about what the Bible says and means. And when churches in the same association / convention see things differently, how should they respond to each other?

What seems very plain to one person may seem less plain to another. One person or church sees that the Bible says there is no male or female in Christ, and that the greatest in the kingdom is not the one who rules over others but the one who serves them, and from this they conclude that the Bible is clearly saying that there are no gender or authority roles in the body of Christ. Others read 1 Timothy 3 and assume that "husband of one wife" is a clear command from God that pastors and deacons must be men. Still others say that pastors must be men, but deacons can be men or women, since Pheobe was a deacon, so "husband of one wife" means "man" for pastors but not necessarily for deacons. All these and many more differences of interpretation are put forth by Bible-believing Southern Baptists.

So what do we do when we encounter these differences? Dis-fellowship anyone who disagrees with us? Or do we agree to disagree on some things, yet still cooperate and fellowship around the main things?

As you said, some things are matters to be decided withing each individual church. What good does it serve for the Georgia Baptist Convention or the Southern Baptist Convention to break ties with a church just because they differ over the particulars of the requirements for being a pastor?

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

Wow, Junkster, very well said. I agree with everything you've said. Great summary of these issues.

New BBC Open Forum said...

I will go out on a limb here and say that most of the members of the GBC do not think a divorced man is qualified to be pastor of a church. Likewise, most of them seem to believe a woman is not qualified to be pastor of a church. So why the "disfellowshipment" of a church that calls a woman as pastor and not the same for a church that has a divorced man as its pastor? Double standard much?

Doug, what happened to your blog?

Anonymous said...

The point is you eitheer believe the Bible or you don't.
___________________________________

The Bible says "slaves obey your masters." So, if Jesus wanted them free he would have done so, right.

And when Jesus was directly and clearly asked "what must I do to be saved?" He told the man "go, sell everything you own and give it to the poor."

Really? If the Bible says it I either believe it or I don't? Don't I have to read the context of the scripture passages and also put the passages within the context of the entire Word?

Or do I just let men pick out verses and tell me what they MEAN, not what it SAYS. In other words, you dumb sheep have to believe what I tell you it says and means.

What does it say about "election?" What does it say about "eternal security?" What does it say about "tongues?" What does it say about picking up snakes? What does it say about health and wealth?

You sound like a Pharisee, not like someone walking with the living Lord and relying on the indwelling Holy Spirit.

Anonymous said...

But, you believe what you want to believe and I will believe what I know!
___________________________________

Wow. you must be "god's man" to be so sure and so arrogant. What we "know" and what we "believe" are often two very different things.

Are you a scribe or pharisee?

Thy Peace said...

The "decline" of SBC is probably due to the behaviour and fruit of the leaders.

Under Much Grace Blog [Cindy Kunsman] > Scripture concerning false prophets.

Of the 210 verses that refer to false prophets, priests, elders and Pharisees, here is a summary of their content:
- 99 verses (47%) concern Behavior
- 66 verses (31%) concern Fruit
- 24 verses (12%) concern Motives
- 21 verses (10%) concern Doctrine
.

Stop Baptist Predators [Christa Brown] > "Worse to have a woman" redux.

Here’s a reminder of how that reality actually works in Baptistland. It’s worse to have a woman than . . .

A ”senior pastor” who kept quiet about a minister’s admission to sexually abusing his young son, and with that sort of pastoral example, at least 10 more church staff people also knew and kept quiet.

A former California Southern Baptist Convention president and still-prominent pastor who said he “erred on the side of grace” when he kept quiet about a deacon’s molestation of children in his church.

...

Anonymous said...

Anon. 10:04: "You sound like a Pharisee."

Know some Pharisees do you. You don't? Well what are you doing JUDGING ME and my walk with the Lord,if you are against judging right from wrong via Gods Word? Of course all scripture is taken into context. That's the point .... it is context. You either believe the bible or you don't.

Anonymous said...

Some "practical reasons" for not having men pastors:

1) Daryl Gilyard
2) Bob Gray
3) Deacons, staff and current ministers that COVERED FOR THEM and ALLOWED THEM TO ABUSE AGAIN!

Women would have never let it happen! And if it did, would have made sure these monsters never hurt another women or child again.

But men cover it up. So lets hear some of the "practical" reasons why we can't have women pastors...smile.

Anonymous said...

Another good article in today's paper about the Pope apologizing for the Catholic church making every effort to keep reported abuses of innocent children secret. Still waiting on that apology from Pastor Tom Messer and from leadership at Shiloh Baptist Church.

If the Catholic church can come clean, why can't Trinity Baptist? Get that sin out of the camp!

And how is what the Catholic church went through and how they handled it (secretly moving the monster to another location where he could abuse again...and again...decade after decade) ANY DIFFERENT than what Bob Gray did and how Tom Messer and Trinity handled it?

People are outraged at the Catholic church. Why no outrage with Messer?

Just wonderin...

Anonymous said...

WD: This subject has become very nasty. I don't see anything I can say or anything anyone else is saying as helping the situation. Neither is it edifying. Will pass on further perusal and comment. Contention doesn't accomplish anything. Blessings to you and to all believers, reading here. By GRACE are we saved.

Anonymous said...

"By the way Matt, the KJV translators were the best linguist and many knew several languages. I don't think you can improve on their intellectualism."

You ought to read the preface they wrote someday. It is very interesting.

You cannot escape facts. They were laboring under a king who was considered the authority over the state mandated Protestant church. And it helps to know what was going on historically that led up to the decision to make that translation.

With that said, I really like the KJV in many ways but use the NKJV along with the interlinear.

Education is not a sin.

Matt

Lydia said...

"But the moderates are having none of it. They appear to have given up the political game on the state level. Or else, they would not have designated these ladies "pastors", and they would have their full compliment of votes to use at the convention."

Louis, this idea is a false dictonomy. This issue is not really moderate vs conservative. Those are labels to rally folks to sides. But it is working less and less

I could say that protecting pedophiles and perverts is conservative because that is exactly what happened with Patterson and Gaines. Would that be a correct rendering of the issue? Conservatives protect pedophiles and perverts in ministry but not women pastors because that is liberal/moderate?

How is your 'not anticipating working with the SBC' going? when do you start your term on the SBC related Foundation Board?

Doug said...

BBC, you asked....
Doug, what happened to your blog?

I am praying and seeking a new and better direction to expose these men whom I KNOW to be deceitful and who I know are an abomination to my Christ Kingdom.

There is an answer. It is my GOD.

As always and since those within the Baptist have shown me the real Baptist way starting over 3 years ago, I seek GODS discernment and guidance to my new direction of continuing to bring out the real truths against those within "the Baptist Mafia".

Just because I do not follow or hold a Baptist title as my denominational preference, does not mean I do not seek Christ Kingdom and wisdom.

I Wished I had not given up on man's delivering of Christ life, but man has now destroyed the story and its truths!

Following Christ, Not Man

Doug Pittman
doug@dougpittman.com

New BBC Open Forum said...

Thanks, Doug. Wish you would have left it up for posterity though. I was behind on my reading.

Jim said...

Junkster 9:19 p.m. your post was outstanding. It is interesting, however, that the situation you described actually existed in the SBC before 1979. I use that date because it was the year Adrian Rogers was elected President and the fundamentalist takeover of the convention began. Prior to that time we would meet in annual session (National, State or Association) with widely differing theological/doctrinal conclusions but bound by a common love of and commitment to missions. We agreed to disagree and built the strongest mission organization in history. However, once the fundamentalist mindset infected SBC life, civility and mutual respect disappeared and conformity became the order of the day.

Anonymous said...

What do you do with Charles Stanley?

March 21, 2010 6:58 PM

==============================
Charles Stanley is truly a gifted communicator with the gospel but as Tiger Woods, he left the public with a stain on his good name when he divorced and his family became divided.

I never watch this man on TV without seeing him as someone who refused to respectfully step away from the pulpit.

There are times when he preaches on subjects I wonder how can he say that when he himself didn't put his own words in practice. I have no respect for a DIVORCED PASTOR - they do not belong on stage.

PMC Member said...

I have no respect for the man who:

Pull a six figure salary in the ministry

Throws out any member of any church

Throws out any church for any reason

Throws out any college institutions who has been the lifeblood of a convention for any reason

Lie to readers of a christian propaganda paper to further personal causes

I have no respect for Baptist leaders now because of what I know as real truths

What is worse Politicians or Baptist Ministers?

I am having a difficult time figuring this one out.

Anonymous said...

Lydia:

You are missing the forest for the trees.

Dog has pointed out all of these different arrangements conservatives have with regard to this issue.

I have merely pointed out what has gone unstated. That while the division point may be over the "female pastor" issue, one will see that the arrangements always cut against moderate churches, not fellow conservatives who may make some allowances.

This issue is just a continuing skirmish that occurs in some SBC quarters. It is really a battle bewteen conservatives and moderates. It's just that the moderates have given up. Neither FBC Decatur nor Druid Hills is going to work hard to fight this. They will enjoy the attention for a few weeks or months and will then move on. That's because they already have moved on.

I don't know when my term begins. When I served previously, I had to be voted on by the Convention. I don't know if that changed when the Convention was restructured several years ago. If you ever have any concerns about the Foundation, you may contact me directly, and I'll be glad to look into your concerns.

Louis

Anonymous said...

I have had people ask me why I belong to a Baptist church, when supposedly it won't allow women to be in leadership positions. My response: I know that women run the church anyway, they just don't care who gets the credit or the title.

FBC Jax Watchdog said...

Louis - it depends on your definition of "moderate" and "conservative".

As you well know, the CR was a fight over the inerrancy of scripture. We were told that people in seminaries were being removed who didn't believe the Bible completely - men who believed the bible had error in it.

These people were the "liberals" ( or "moderates" they might call themselves). That was what we in the pews were told...we're cleaning this place up, and getting rid of the rascals who are trashing the Bible in seminaries and SBC leadership positions.

But what has happened is this four-letter word "liberal" is a label used now now just for those who are not inerrantists, but now its used to paint anyone who disagrees with the SBC leadership on interpretation of non-essential doctrines.

Not that these guys are anybody in the SBC, but read Joe Blackmon's comments or Les Puryear's blogs...if you don't agree with them on all non-essential doctrines, you're a liberal and worse - Blackmon called Burleson terrible names, and Puryear went after two seminary professors that don't agree with him on one issue: the tithe.

So it really isn't just about "liberal" and "conservative" anymore, its about who agrees to an increasingly-narrowing doctrine on what it means to be Southern Baptist.

Anonymous said...

It really doesn't matter what anyone believes anymore, but who you know!!! And who is in charge. It will continue to erode and become worse. NO ONE IS GETTING THE FACT THAT WE ARE VERY CLOSE TO THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST. Southern Baptist are as tainted as any other denomination. They have become just as arrogant and self-serving as any other organization. Thank God I do not rely on man or even a church or denomination for my faith. I have joined those that have left the "churches", denominations and social clubs, for a better place. Being, my bible and my singular relationship with the Lord. So Baptist..go ahead and knock yourselves out over pride and place. I want none of it!!! I don't need them...they need me, and others like me.

Anonymous said...

I think you need to look at their theology as a reason they might be booted,

JW

Anonymous said...

Very interesting comments. Check the Fellowship Church website and the message this weekend. While Ed was in Europe, one of the staff members, who is a regular speaker, gave the message. She is one of the best communicators at Fellowship. Although she speaks often, she does not have the title of "pastor".

www.fellowshipchurch.com

Anonymous said...

Dog:

I was just using the old definitions.

FBC Decatur and Druid Hills are squarely within that camp.

I am sure that there is much to be admired in both places, but I have visited one of these churches and drove by the other every day for 3 years. You know, you really do learn a lot from church displays and signs!

At any rate, I don't disagree that people throw labels around, often carelessly.

But what I am seeing in the case of the GBC, they are trying to draw a line on the women's issue that eliminates from their membership moderate or liberal Baptist Churches like these two churches.

It is fine to point out the various types of arrangements that conservative churches have with respect to women serving, but the GBC does not have an issue with them because I do not believe they advocate for the ordination of women and other issues that these moderate and liberal churches do.

I wouldn't call it hypocrisy. I would say it's a contoured line, rather than a straight one. But, interestingly, it works because it excludes those churches who are really not a part of SBC or GBC life anyway.

What I find interesting is that FBC Decatur and Druid Hills really don't seem to care, which may be a good thing.

The Baptists had 2 groups within their midsts anyway who did not agree on much. Time has seen a continuing separation of these groups, which needed to happen.

I would not say that all CBF churches are far away from the SBC. But many of them have emphases, programming and will promote or allow for pracitces and interpretations that are nowhere near what Baptists believe, under any of their historic confessions.

As time goes by it is healthy for these groups to pursue their own emphases and agendas.

It is ashamed that denominational politics and parliamentary matters play a part in this, rather than the natural process.

But with the denominational agencies no longer within reach, I think it allows the moderates or liberals (old definition, again) to move on gracefully.

It will be interesting to see how the gender issue develops in the future. It may be an academic question, really. Because even those churches or pastors who allow for the possiblity of ordaining women and hiring them as pastoral leaders are not doing so. There is quite a bit of acrimony in the CBF camp about this. So much so that I think February was someting like "Call a woman to preach" month or something. Churches were encouraged to invite women to speak in their pulpits that month or something like that. And that's the CBF camp. The SBC camp is even more conservative.

But, it will be interesting to see how it develops over the years.

Louis

Anonymous said...

"There are times when he preaches on subjects I wonder how can he say that when he himself didn't put his own words in practice. I have no respect for a DIVORCED PASTOR - they do not belong on stage.

March 22, 2010 8:02 AM

Dr. Stanley's wife divorced him; he did not divorce her. He never wanted nor asked for a divorce.
However, I am in agreement with you - he should have stepped down from being a pastor in spite of his people voting to keep him there.

Anonymous said...

"Don't deal with the issues, just silence all dissent by name calling. Don't folks who use these tactics get as tired of using them as the rest of us do at hearing them?"

Junkster:
All this in-fighting is like an army that goes to war but then turns on itself. When the enemy sees what's happening, it takes the opportunity to come in, overwhelm the army and defeat it.
This happened many times in scripture.

We have an enemy today who is out to destroy the church. Instead of being a united army in these Last
Days, we Christians are turning on each other. We are fiddling while Rome burns! A house divided cannot stand. The more we fight and rail against one another, the weaker we become. We better wake up and see who our real enemy is and remind ourselves we have a God whom we will all stand before, and give an account to, for every idle word we have spoken.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

"We have an enemy today who is out to destroy the church."

Like those power hungry pastors who take over church's as if they own them.

Sounds just like those power hungry politicians in Washington.

Anonymous said...

ANON:

Tell it to the Pharisee Pastors within the Baptist Convention,

They are the ones who need to hear "the word"....then act accordingly

Anonymous said...

Anon 5:07pm. You are correct, however where are the pastors when it comes to murdering 4,000 babies daily in the U.S.? There is no outrage and little concern from the pulpits of America. All we seem to hear are portions of a new book, an elongated dissertation on a Greek verb, how they are suffering persecution and other trivial things that most people could care less about. What we need is some good old hell fire and damnation sermons with some fire in their bellies if that is still possible!!! The church is on the way out just like the dishonest and unpopular politicians since it is all about self interest!!! The church needs to be purified and the sooner the better.The church went wrong when it started hiring CEO's!!

Jim said...

Watchdog, the Baptist battle was never about being "liberal" or "conservative"; and it sure as heck had nothing to do with accuracy in the interpretation of the Bible. It was about power and control of the largest non-Roman Catholic denomination in the United States. A few shrewd operators executed a brilliant plan to gain control of key convention offices then convince rank-and-file Baptists that a word like "inerrancy" should be the litmus test for Baptist orthodoxy and Biblical fidelity. It worked, and hundreds (perhaps thousands) of God fearing, Bible loving professors and missionaries became victims of the modern day witch hunts. Worse still, the entire SBC became corrupted by a fundamentalist mindset that has resulted in power hungry preachers who crave recognition and personal wealth, while pretending to be "God's men." Many of these same preachers will not even use the name "Southern Baptist" to identify their congregations. That is, I believe, the height of hypocrisy.

New BBC Open Forum said...

You're so right, Jim. Too bad it took a lot of us 20-30 years to realize that.

Anonymous said...

Jim you hit the nail on the head. This is one major reason they are having so much trouble keeping the members in line as some actually believe the Bible more than the preacher.Many claim to preach "inerrancy" from an "inerrant" bible, yet pervert the word at every turn, and preach whatever fits their agenda. I have watched them do it for years. The "inerrancy tag" is what keeps them in business. I have seen them hold up bibles and claim "This is Gods inerrant Word". I always say "Yeah which one". Depends on which bible you are using. Bibles change the word constantly, version by version. They can't all be inerrant! Keep spreading the Word.

Anonymous said...

Jim:

I disagree with New BBC and anon.

The CR was about theology.

I would enjoy your posting, say, the names of 25 professors (out of the "hundreds" or "thousands") who taught at SBC seminaries who "loved the Bible" and became the victim of a modern day witch hunt.

I would also like to know if you believe in innerancy.

Louis

Anonymous said...

"Innerancy"?

defined as

"Biblical inerrancy is the doctrinal position that the Bible is considered accurate and totally free of error."

Then there is "interpretation"

where the Anointed Pastors "interpret" what it means to them and how the sheep are supposed to live,

and there are alot of "thems" doing their own thing.

Anonymous said...

ANON.12:14 PM: Exactly!!! Thank you!!!

Anonymous said...

$10MM in the hole? Lets add $120MM or whatever? Sounds like the ObamaPlan to me...!

Lydia said...

Marshall Louis,

Were all the translators inerrant?

Without the Holy Spirit, the Bible becomes a club to beat folks with or a license to sin.

The CR used it as a club. I went along with it until I saw a lot of very bad things done by those in power first hand. And yes, I know quite a few that came off the mission field who were not liberals or even moderates.

The CR was about political power. If it wasn't, most of the leaders would have repented on their faces publicly for the tactics they used.

Jim said...

Louis, if I can get permission from 25 of them (some are now deceased), I will be pleased to post their names. Regarding whether or not I "believe in inerrancy"...I assume you mean Biblical inerrancy? Well, that depends on what you mean by "inerrancy" as it relates to Holy Scripture. Enlighten me and I will attempt to give you an honest, no frills answer.

Anonymous said...

Jim:

With all due respect, you have got to be kidding.

If they are deceased, you don't need permission.

If they are alive and truly were the objects of witch hunts, why in the world wouldn't they give you permission?

I am looking forward to seeing the names.

Your response - when I ask a question, respond with a question does not portend a productive exchange.

Louis

Anonymous said...

Lydia:

Glad to have you jump in for a familiar comment format - insult followed by proclamation.

But now that you have appeared, can you name just 25 out of the hundreds or thousands?

I beginning to think that people like you and Jim just get used to people accepting declarations about how many professors who loved the Bible were hunted down (and probably tortured) because they did not subscribe to inerrancy.

Let me see if you can name just 25. And please, don't use the "I need permission" excuse. Jim's already used that.

You and I have already gone round and round the garden about inerrancy. Go back and check my previous posts here and other places to refresh yourself as to my thinking on this.

Louis

Anonymous said...

Current cuts in Southern Baptist Land:

http://www.christianpost.com/article/20091126/southern-baptist-agency-to-cut-missionary-force-by-600/index.html

The Southern Baptist Convention’s international mission agency will cut its overseas force by as many as 600 missionaries in 2010.

Due to a severe budget shortfall, the International Mission Board decided to reduce the number of missionaries it has on the field, with the process already starting this year.

There are currently a little above 5,500 IMB missionaries overseas and the plan is to decrease that number to about 5,000 by the end of 2010.

“Southern Baptist [churches] took in $12 billion in 2008 in their offering plate,” the IMB spokesperson pointed out. “And so some of it may be a matter of priority of how churches choose to spend their dollar. Whether they use it to focus on reaching the lost world or spend it on programs and ministries that benefit themselves.”

Anonymous said...

11:39 pm: They had rather build monuments to themselves in the form of new buildings and alterations. They are never satisfied with what they have. I ask, what is more important spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ to a lost world, or buildings that don't matter and many of which will be grossly overpriced and unused. Buildings don't save people the gospel and Jesus do!!! But as usual wisdom has fled them and they are willing to go into debt to look like they are doing Gods work. How is losing 600 missionaries, but going into debt to build buildings or renovations the will of God?

Anonymous said...

“Southern Baptist [churches] took in $12 billion in 2008 in their offering plate,” the IMB spokesperson pointed out. “And so some of it may be a matter of priority of how churches choose to spend their dollar. Whether they use it to focus on reaching the lost world or spend it on programs and ministries that benefit themselves.”
_________________________________

Amen! and Amen! At least one IMB spokesperson sees and understands what this blog has been discussing! When the millions go to salaries and buildings and nepotism and land gifts for the pastor, and cruises...well, it just can't go to the missionaries too. One or the other needs to be cut. So, since the pastor controls the money and men who control the money, I guess we just need to cut 600 missionaries. Amen. And let's tell the people that it is God's will. Amen? And make sure you keep reminding them that the pastor is God's man and the staff is His gift to them. Then they won't question the obvious abuse of finances. Amen!

Lydia said...

"But now that you have appeared, can you name just 25 out of the hundreds or thousands?

I beginning to think that people like you and Jim just get used to people accepting declarations about how many professors who loved the Bible were hunted down (and probably tortured) because they did not subscribe to inerrancy.

Let me see if you can name just 25. And please, don't use the "I need permission" excuse. Jim's already used that."


It is a good reason, Louis Marshall. Especially after one has seen what they will do to folks who DARE dissent in any way or shape. My object is protection of folks. Not harm.

Knowing you from reading you for several years, you would work behind the scenes to ruin them even more. I simply do not trust you and you have given me NO reason to trust you.


Now, how about that comment you made several threads back about 'not anticipating working with the SBC' and we find out you are appointed to an SBC Foundation Board. What is to make me think you are any different when it comes to the tactics used by these men in power? Nothing.

Remember, I have been reading you for quite some time now.


How is Marilio? Your facebook, pal.

Anonymous said...

Lydia:

I'll take that as a long winded way of saying "No."

You can't name them either.

People who make claims about hundreds or thousands of professors in SBC seminaries who loved the Bible who were the objects of witch hunts during the CR should be challenged to name some of these folks.

Your claim to be "protecting people" is a ruse. You simply cannot answer the question.

The CR ended in 1992. The profs who were in the seminaries when the administrations changed were not as Jim described them. That is why neither he nor you can name them.

Louis

Jim said...

I apologize for not getting back to this, but I have been enjoying starting a garden with my grandchildren. Against my better judgment I will list 25 names, as requested by Louis. These are names of professors, seminary staff and missionaries marginalized in SBC life by fundamentalism's ugly witch hunt. This is but a fraction of those fired or forced to resign and does not include others who were able to hang-on until retirement, and whose reputation and life's work was trampled by the fundamentalist stampede. Neither does it include scores of denominational staff who suffered the same fate. This only scratches the surface, but Louis wanted 25 names, so here they are:Alan Brehm, Karen Bullock, Paul Debusmen, Ressel Dilday, Milton Ferguson, Diana Garland, Roy Honeycutt, Dan Kent, Sheri Klouda, Randall Lolley, Molly Marshall, Jeff Poole, Stephen Stookey, Larry and Sarah Ballew, Rick and Nancy Dill, Tom and Rebecca Daniel, David and Susan Dixon, Ron and Lydia Barrow-Hankins, and Leon and Kathy Johnson.

Lydia, I know many of the people listed above. They ARE good men and women, who have been faithful to the Word made flesh, and the word written. I was not trying to make a "declaration"; I was simply attempting to point to a tragic situation in SBC life: one I thought was well known. Perhaps I should have been more clear.

Anonymous said...

I believe there are around 1200 female pastors within the SBC. Some are the lead pastors and others the assistant pastors.