Lineup for Pastors Conference Riles SBC Complementarians

I work at a secular university. Two to three times a semester I have to attend classes for faculty on diversity. Guess what? Its all intersectionality and critical theory. 100%. I don’t need some internet blogger to tell me what intersectionality is, nor CT. If you want it, fine. But I’m not buying it. Come here and sit through one workshop then tell me how great it is.

I’m looking to help people, not divide them into classes. If you are looking for “oppressors”, count me out. MLK Jr had a dream, and his descendants turned it into a nightmare.

[WallyMorris]

BJU is now more open to many new ideas, such as Stiekes’ acceptance of Redaction Criticism. Eventually we will see the cost for that.

What is your basis for saying that he accepts redaction criticism?

Where Rachel now attends church (I don’t stalk her btw) is a minor point to the argument. You look it up. I believe it is a Presbyterian church if I heard right. But I could be wrong… In the past, her family attended a Sovereign Grace church, which was tangentially associated with the SBC only because what’s his name was connected with SBC. I do not think they were SBC primarily, if that makes sense.

1. This thread is about the Preacher’s Conference

2. My main point is almost all SBs don’t know who Rachel is… Yes, this is true. A casual survey of pastors and church leaders at a recent state convention meeting revealed most do not follow current news in the SBC. These hot plate discussions here at SI are irrelevant to them. Preaching the other Sunday night I asked before if anyone knew who Al Mohler was at my church. Out of 25 people there, NONE (yes NONE) knew who Al Mohler was! (Gasp)

RajeshG:

Stiekes wrote 2 articles for the BJU Seminary blogsite Theology in 3D in September 2018 where he advocated using Redaction Criticism methodology. Here are the links:

https://seminary.bju.edu/theology-in-3d/redaktionsgeschichte-in-the-gospels/

https://seminary.bju.edu/theology-in-3d/lukes-redaction-and-the-holy-spirit/

He gives the usual cautions but still advocates using Redaction Criticism. Note especially the comments by Layton Talbert at the end of the first article.

Horn allowed this to happen at the BJU Seminary, yet The Master’s Seminary is well-known for its opposition to Redaction Criticism and similar methodologies. See the book The Jesus Crisis by Thomas and Farnell.

Wally Morris

Charity Baptist Church

Huntington, IN

amomentofcharity.blogspot.com

Tyler, I understand your perspective, but I think it’s profoundly misguided. Reality is that the world sees the word “Baptist” and assumes that we’re more or less monolithic, so this kind of thing matters. I may have a little influence or big influence, but I do the churches I love no favors if I just walk on by while others in the broader “movement” are stinking up the place. That counts for churches that welcome men like Paige Patterson, and it goes for churches that sponsor divisive movements like KJVO and the like.

Again, my comment may be as terse as “knock it off”, or I might plead with those who adhere to these bad ideas to contemplate what they do, or whatever, but there’s a point where you’ve got to stand up and say “what on earth are you guys doing?”

And Mark, it is my hope that you are dead wrong about the rank and file SBS not knowing about the work of the Denhollanders, and it should be your hope and prayer that I am right and you are wrong. It does the SBC no favors if most members are living under a rock with regards to one of the biggest threats to the long term viability of churches, that of toleration of sexual abuse.

(and if you want to know a bit about their church history, read her book)

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

[WallyMorris]

RajeshG:

Stiekes wrote 2 articles for the BJU Seminary blogsite Theology in 3D in September 2018 where he advocated using Redaction Criticism methodology. Here are the links:

https://seminary.bju.edu/theology-in-3d/redaktionsgeschichte-in-the-gospels/

https://seminary.bju.edu/theology-in-3d/lukes-redaction-and-the-holy-spirit/

He gives the usual cautions but still advocates using Redaction Criticism. Note especially the comments by Layton Talbert at the end of the first article.

That is interesting. I had the exact same reaction to the first article as Layton Talbert. Seems like there is no good reason to bring in the Redaction Criticism terminology when it carries such negative liberal weight. I am one that thinks it is important to find and teach the unique message of each gospel, and so I agree that it is important to study the differences and try to figure out the whys, but I would not personally call that Redaction Criticism. I also would not say that Mark’s unique message is the protrayal of Jesus as a servant, but that is another matter…

I expect to sway absolutely no one on this thread, but for the sake of truth…this line:

Rachel isn’t even a SB for crying out loud!

Is wrong. Not misunderstood, just flat out wrong. They do attend an SBC church in KY and Jacob is pursuing a Ph.D at one of the SBC schools…don’t recall which one. Rachael was a featured speaker at the ERLC Conference “Caring Well” last year for goodness’ sake!

Nehemiah 6:8 comes to mind when I read some of this thread.

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

First, declaring I am absolutely false is easy. Provide a link to one article saying where Rachel attends church… I haven’t found one.

Being asked to attend a conference as a speaker MEANS NOTHING! Look at the Pastor’s Conference this year that is causing so much internet chatter…

When she was abused she was at a Sovereign Grace church. That is not the same as a Southern Baptist church. I cannot find anything on the internet that says what church she attends at present. I recall hearing her say in a talk one time about a Presbyterian church in KY. I can easily be wrong but that is what I remember.

As for her husband, I have no idea if he is a PhD candidate anywhere, but attending an SBC seminary does not mean you are SBC.

The point is NOT where Rachel goes to church! Talk about fixating on the minor. The point is the overall flow of the SBC.

I know you are not in the SBC, so stop acting like you are. I am. One other man here at SI is. Are you at local conferences, state conferences, regional conferences? Do you watch hours of the national conference? Do you read sbc.net, etc. I do. I know the pulse of the SBC right now.

That was my concern.

I could, I guess, demonstrate knowledge of where my heroes go to church and seminary, but at a more basic level, does it matter? What are we trying to do if we respond to a complaint with “but you’re not Southern Baptists!”?

The most obvious inference is that it’s just an issue of “tribalism”, where the implicit argument is “it’s not your sandbox, so butt out!”. OK, fine, but again; does the world see us as IFBs, GARBCs, SBCs, and ABs, or does it see us as “Baptists”? For that matter, does the world see us as Baptists, SGCs, Bible churches, etc., or does it see us as a more generic “evangelicals” or even “fundagelicals”?

I’d argue we’re usually seen as “fundagelicals”, even lumping us in with charismatics and pentacostals, and as such, we do have an interest in whether someone is, in effect, relieving himself in our “bigger sandbox”.

And again, if you are curious about the Denhollanders’ spiritual journeys, you can buy her book , read her Twitter feed (or her husband Jacob’s), visit her website, or attend events at which she’s speaking. I just plead with this forum not to ask this question with the intention of saying “well, she’s not of our tribe, so we can just ignore her.”. That’s a level of tribalism that will discredit a lot of us, so please; knock it off.

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

Bert, I can assure you that nothing interests me less than reading about the Denhollander’s spiritual journey. I can also assure you that I do not intended to allow Paige Patterson to speak at my church, or to hire a fellow elder who has been run out of his church for mishandling sexual abuse allegations, or who has been accused of sexual abuse himself.

So, it looks like I’m covered!

Meanwhile, the SBC is having a pastor’s conference that looks troublesome. From an outsider’s perspective, I wonder if the SBC will hold together in the next 10 years! I haven’t the foggiest idea, but there seem to be major divisions.

Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.

I am discussing the trend downward that I see first hand in the SBC. That is what I am commenting on. Paige Patterson is a blog battle. Most SBC members don’t know him, or that he was president of SWBTS, or what is alleged to have happened. That is my point. I brought up being SBC because I live it, brother. It is not just a blog I read like in your case.

Same with Rachel. YES, I know her spiritual journey. So what?

I am just saddened by the drift to the weird middle that I see in the SBC.

The point is NOT where Rachel goes to church! Talk about fixating on the minor. The point is the overall flow of the SBC.

Then why mention the Denhollanders in this discussion at all?

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

[Jay]

The point is NOT where Rachel goes to church! Talk about fixating on the minor. The point is the overall flow of the SBC.

Then why mention the Denhollanders in this discussion at all?

Because I was sharing a personal story about my life and its intersection with the SBC. I apologize. If I could I would delete that. I regret opening up the discussion. I was looking for fellowship from “fellow” fundamentalists to process my situation… bad choice.

The main thing with Rachel is, imho, that people use here to cover up the real problem in the SBC, which is leaders who cover up and tolerate sexual sin. Why can’t a man step up and tell other male leaders to stop it. Simple. Rachel just is easier for them to float her by and change nothing.