Did the Founders intend to snub the SBC pastor's conference this year?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
"There is the official Southern Baptist Pastor's Conference and then there is the Founder's Conference for SBC pastors being held in the Convention Hotel ballroom at the same time and on the same day (Monday, June 10, 2019).


"...Holding a competing "pastors' conference" at the same time as the official SBC Pastor's Conference is unprecedented in modern times."

https://www.wadeburleson.org/2019/06/the-2019-sbc-pastors-and-founders.html

The theme of the Founder's conference seems to be masculinity. This seems to be happening at the same time as there is controversy over the place of women within the SBC.

So, is this a intentional snub happening, sort of like a protest? A shot across the bow?

What exactly is going on with the SBC? Seems to be a lot of controversy lately.
 

Bill The Baptist

Puritan Board Graduate
It could be a coincidence, but I doubt it. With all the self-righteous virtue signaling and Beth Moore congratulating going on, someone needed to step up and offer a differing view.
 

alexandermsmith

Puritan Board Junior
"There is the official Southern Baptist Pastor's Conference and then there is the Founder's Conference for SBC pastors being held in the Convention Hotel ballroom at the same time and on the same day (Monday, June 10, 2019).


"...Holding a competing "pastors' conference" at the same time as the official SBC Pastor's Conference is unprecedented in modern times."

https://www.wadeburleson.org/2019/06/the-2019-sbc-pastors-and-founders.html

The theme of the Founder's conference seems to be masculinity. This seems to be happening at the same time as there is controversy over the place of women within the SBC.

So, is this a intentional snub happening, sort of like a protest? A shot across the bow?

What exactly is going on with the SBC? Seems to be a lot of controversy lately.

I wish the church would hold conferences on Male Headship rather than on "masculinity". The latter is cultural. The problem isn't that men aren't manly enough today (though that is a problem) but rather that we have lost the doctrine of male headship, which is not dependent on how macho a man is but on the fact that he is a man and a woman is a woman. The feminisation of the church is a consequence of the loss of this doctrine.

In evangelical circles the argument is now over who can hold office which means the battle is already lost. Who cares whether a woman can offically hold the office of pastor if you've got women's bible studies, women's conferences, women employed by the church for pastoral purposes: women are already leading in our churches. They have already been given authority which is forbidden them. This should be the focus but instead we get conferences and books on being more "manly" when actually the church should be asserting that men are to lead in the church, the home, the society because they are men and God has ordained men to lead.

On the other hand: Maybe they will address these issue. Maybe I'm being unfair. But when I see a heading "Mature Men in an Immature Age" that is subjective. That is about cultural norms of manhood, rather than Biblical authority. In that article you linked the writer snarkily asked if this was a euphemism for "Biblical Men in an Unbiblical Age". That would have been a much better title with the proper focus.
 

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
The placement of this conference (its timing) seems like a smack to the SBC, though. It seems petty. Why not just have the conference one week later? If they differ that much, why not just leave the SBC?

Also, if the SBC is covering sex abuse among the clergy, that is a pretty important topic to cover and not bypass. I heard that 400 SBC clergy (ministers or church workers) are currently charged with child or sexual abuse. That certainly trumps masculinity as a need.
 

Herald

Administrator
Staff member
The placement of this conference (its timing) seems like a smack to the SBC, though. It seems petty. Why not just have the conference one week later? If they differ that much, why not just leave the SBC?

Also, if the SBC is covering sex abuse among the clergy, that is a pretty important topic to cover and not bypass. I heard that 400 SBC clergy (ministers or church workers) are currently charged with child or sexual abuse. That certainly trumps masculinity as a need.
I wonder if there is more to this story than just a schedule conflict. Maybe further details will emerge to put it in proper context.
 

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
Perg,

You can reach out to Founders via their contact page: https://founders.org/about/contact/. Tom Ascol and Jared Longshore are probably who you would want to engage with any questions.

PO Box 150931
Cape Coral, FL 33915
(239) 772-1400

ok, I sent them a message asking them the rationale for having the conference on the same day and if this was a protest or not, and if so, what were they protesting specifically in the SBC official pastor's conference.
 

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
I think it’s time for confessional and doctrinally sound Baptist churches to part company with the SBC. Jmo

That might be. The SBC seems to be drifting leftward. But unless abuse is also addressed by the Founders, this is probably a bad move. The issue of abuse in the church is a big one, and one which many churches have not dealt with correctly (see ARBCA's recent past, for instance). Our witness is no good unless we correct this blind spot (but the way to do it is not by adopting a SJW worldview). Sometimes a reaction to an error can also lead to error.
 

Blueridge Believer

Puritan Board Professor
You are correct that the abuse issue should be correctly dealt with but there seems to be no compromise with the Moore faction of the denomination. Doctrine can never be sacrificed. Can two walk together if they’re not in agreement?
 

Pilgrim

Puritanboard Commissioner
Although it has been a few years, Dr. Ascol has always responded to me relatively quickly, (and graciously) even though I'm a nobody. And in both cases it was me disagreeing with something they were either doing or failing to do.
 

Pilgrim

Puritanboard Commissioner
The funny thing with Russell Moore is that in 2006 he had an article published in a journal where he argued for patriarchy and that complementarianism isn't enough. My how times have changed!
 

Jose Manuel Chapa Mendez

Puritan Board Freshman
I think theres gonna be a separation in the SBC. Orthodox churches will from their new OrthodoxSBC. As it happened before with other denominations, the thing is that the remains will go full crazy left.
 

Herald

Administrator
Staff member
I think theres gonna be a separation in the SBC. Orthodox churches will from their new OrthodoxSBC. As it happened before with other denominations, the thing is that the remains will go full crazy left.

Considering that the SBC is only an association, perhaps separation is a good thing.
 

Pilgrim

Puritanboard Commissioner
I think theres gonna be a separation in the SBC. Orthodox churches will from their new OrthodoxSBC. As it happened before with other denominations, the thing is that the remains will go full crazy left.

I think to a large degree, the SBC (and the PCA) have remained relatively conservative due to the residual "conservatism" of the surrounding Southern culture. Now in larger Southern cities like Houston, Atlanta, and Charlotte, we see that professional/business culture is just about as progressive as Seattle, NY, and SF. Unless most churches in those metropolises are really prepared to stand contra mundum, we can expect to see them continue to move much closer toward progressive orthodoxies than would have previously been thought impossible, with some completely going over to the other side as City Church in SF and others have done. So it's possible there may be some sort of split along those lines, but most people in the churches have no clue whatsoever what is going on right now unless their own pastor is a SJW who is pushing the envelope.
 

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
Can anyone give a simple synopsis of what exactly is happening within the SBC?

I am glad they are dealing with clergy sexual abuse, it is a blind spot that has needed dealt with for years. Churches routinely silence victims or weaponize forgiveness and bitterness against the victims (you must forgive...if you pursue justice after many years you must be bitter, etc) and cover for the predators (who routinely then go and abuse many more children until someone steps up to stop them). The world deals with this stuff better than the church so often. Of course, if we castrated or executed (or executed by castration) on the first offense, there'd be no follow-up abuse.

But I also hear they are pushing for women preaching? And race (again) has become an issue? Also, did a resolution call the Frankfurt School (Critical Theory) a "helpful tool" or something insane like that?

There seems to be several issues going on. I am supportive of the #churchtoo movement to deal with sexual abuse. But the other stuff looks SJW-ish and shady (women preaching and the race issue).

I think Tom Ascol is reacting against some of these trends. But I hope not all of these trends are rejected. Protecting children is, indeed, a good thing. Was abuse covered during the competing Founders Conference?

I really don't like Russell Moore much on politics. But he seems to deal with pro-lie, bioethics, and issues of abuse very well.

I also believe women teachers could be helpful for women and children's ministries, especially among gender-segregated populations such as tribal or Muslims peoples. But so much of the theology that comes from women is horrid, most would do better to support and make their husbands happy and be silent in the church (waiting for the crypto-feminists to throw their tomatoes now).

Can anyone recommend good summaries of what is going on? Twitter is awash with a chorus of yays and nays but they are all partisan voices and in 146 character snippets such that I cannot get a good summary.
 

SeanPatrickCornell

Puritan Board Sophomore
Yes, the SBC passed a resolution (Resolution 9) that included language saying "Critical Race Theory" and "Intersectionality" can be "useful analytical tools".

http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/2308/resolution-9--on-critical-race-theory-and-intersectionality

Oddly, Resolution 9 as written strongly condemned and repudiated both CRT and Intersectionality, but the Resolution was altered before passage.

https://sovereignway.blogspot.com/2019/06/sbc19-resolution-9-on-critical-race.html

Further reading:

http://www.deliveredbygrace.com/the...n-critical-race-theory-and-intersectionality/
 

Kinghezy

Puritan Board Sophomore
You could listen to the founder's videos to make your own judgment on what was covered
http://founders.org/events/2019/06/mature-manhood-in-an-immature-age-2019-founders-sbc-event/

Regarding women preaching, it seems to me like that is being rolled into the critical race theory/intersectionality within the SBC. The PCA seems to be dealing with intersectionality with the revoice crowd. Big picture-wise, to me, CRT/intersectionality is the driver of sexuality in the PCA and complementarism in the SBC.
 

B.L.

Puritan Board Sophomore
Here is an article written today by Tom Ascol on Founders that gives his take on the events of SBC 2019. He spends a lot of time discussing Resolution 9. I really appreciate the work Founders is doing to hold the line.

Separately, Chocolate Knox (CrossPolitic) posted a short Q&A involving Russell Moore on his views on complementarianism past and present. I don't know how to link to the specific clip, but it was posted yesterday on his fb page.

FYSA is all.
 

alexandermsmith

Puritan Board Junior
The Southern Baptist Convention actually has a resolution titled "On The Anti-Gospel of Alt-Right White Supremacy"?? Bizarre.
 
Last edited:

KMK

Administrator
Staff member
I moved posts about politics to the P&G Forum. Please limit your comments in this thread to the subject at hand: The SBC Pastors Conference.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top