Lineup for Pastors Conference Riles SBC Complementarians

[Joeb]

Jay Rachel DeHollander Beth Moore and Other Victims/Advocates form a group of women who all are connected in a common cause to call the Very Sinful Male Leadership in the SBC into repentance. Many have been victims of this Male Leadership who LOVE PAIGE PATTERSON TO DEATH AND THINK HE ONLY MADE A FEW MISTAKES.

Remember what the Former ABWE Missionary and Wendell Kempton’s Baptist Bible College Roomate said here on SI. Wendall Kempton only made a few Godly mistakes only deserving of a few Godly rebukes. Versus the TRUTH that Godly Wendell was an aider and abetter to a group of three Pedophile Missionaries who to a certain extent were sharing the young gals between each other with one of the Pedophiles sacrificing his own daughter Ketchum. Wendall was a CRIMINAL who unfortunately never got a chance to share a cell with Bubba and be Bubba’s play toy.

So Jay as people write off DeHollander and her associates off as a minor mole hill in this discussion I think they are greatly underestimating the strength of these ladies. They just got Godly Andy Savage and Wes Feltner put out on the street. What happens as other victims in SBC step forward and contact these gals and share their stories. The result is these Fine Godly Ladies go after the offending Pastor by contacting female members in the church to back their cause. The gals either get the Scum Bag jailed or at least fired and exposed.

Bottom line it is part of this conversation because it’s the same SINFUL males attacking this woman so called Pastor for participating at the conference. The same group of males who probably think Paige Patterson did nothing wrong. The same group of males who call Beth Moore a GAY LOVER and paint her with the “LIBERAL” brush.

These SBC Ladies are not taking the crap anymore from these Twisted Male Pastors and other SBC Church Leaders. The first thing these so called Godly men did in the Wes Feltner case is down play what he did as youthful folly and threaten the victims with legal action. So when these same so called Godly men make a misogynistic move on one of their gals there not taking it anymore. I say BRAVO and good for them and these Buffoons who still pine after Paige Patterson should be defrocked by the SBC and thoroughly exposed for the Monsters they are.

Note: Jay this not a personal attack on you I’m presenting the argument why Rachel DeHollander and her allies are very much part of this discussion. Sorry if I sound strong on this issue but I back these Ladies to the hilt in their cause and believe God is using them to bring about repentance of Male Leaders in Evangelical America.

Nope… no broad brush in that post.

By the way, I know no Southern Baptist who thinks like what you wrote.

Mark, my take is that there are some very serious issues with the SBC, but CRT and the like are really not among them. To put things bluntly, in interacting with racial minorities that the SBC has had (for obvious historical reasons) trouble ministering to, I think that people there (and in my GARBC) need to tolerate a certain amount of what they think is error for the sake of building the relationship. I’ve been there myself as a visitor lectured me about Black Lives Matter, and again about his budding charismatic ministry. The interesting thing was that he’d repented of a lot of what he had believed about BLM the next time I talked with him. People often figure out their errors, and we don’t always need to fight them in the trenches about it.

For my part, watching the (not blog stuff, but) articles in various media about the SBC, I think the big issues facing the SBC (and again, GARBC, IFB, etc..) at this point are the historic tolerance and cover-ups for sexual abuse (along with most other fundagelical churches) and the historic tolerance and cover-ups for racism—including a number of social habits we have that (without us even knowing it) quietly tell minorities that they’re not welcome.

And in that light, one of the most dangerous things we can do—Joel Schaeffer calls us on this a LOT, and God bless him for it—is to assume that those who are trying to call us to repent have bad motives like Marxism and the like. When we do it—and yes, I see it a lot—what we do is to instantly make an enemy while preventing ourselves from learning anything.

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.

It’s been somewhat difficult to interact with you because you come across not willing to be “sharpened” by other perspectives within Fundamentalism. When I encourage you to read Neil Shenvi’s (and Dr. Patrick Sawyer’s book), website, and a long quote that he made about CRT, you seem to be automatically dismissing it (without even reading or interacting with anything) because it doesn’t agree 100% with your conclusions/experiences about CRT. Never mind that his writing partner Dr. Patrick Sawyer is a scholar who did his doctorate work on the subject of Critical Theory. Never mind that both of them teach seminars and lecture in conservative Baptist and Reformed colleges and seminaries on CRT/I. Yet you dismiss them as internet bloggers that have nothing to add.

Also, you are not the only person that sees CRT/I first hand because of your employment. As an urban missionary/executive director of an organization that does Christian community development as part of our mission, I regularly interact with secular social workers, school teachers, educators, along with dealing with current college students and recent grads (that want to volunteer in our ministry) that have been indoctrinated with the false systems of CT/CRT/I and etc…. It is precisely this reason that I’ve done much research and even leaned into Shenvi and Sawyer’s work. On several occasions, I’ve been able to share the good news of Jesus, spring-boarding off the conversations of CRT/I, where I maintain that the Scriptures have a far better and deeper analysis of race because it goes to the root cause of racism. It’s led me on discussions about original sin and total depravity (where I also acknowledge systems of injustice) which then eventually allows me to talk about Jesus and his redemptive work on the cross, which destroyed the wall of hostility that separated Jew from Gentile and reconciled them together as one humanity (the church), which has implications for different ethnic/racial groups that are hostile towards each other. And when I invite them to church, they see a multi-ethnic body of believers that love each other. Our multi-ethnic, multi-cultural body is also multi-political. 1/3 are Republicans, 1/3 are Pro-Life Democrats, and 1/3 are Pro-life Libertarians. Also, because our ministry has a social justice aspect to it, some of these same (white) college students and graduates (most of whom grew up in fundamentalist and/or conservative evangelical churches) see first hand what is and what isn’t truly social justice. So we model a social justice that begins with regeneration in Christ and is thoroughly Biblical. A few have returned to God out of their disillusionment of both their church backgrounds that saw no need for social justice (and were joined at the hip with the Republican Party) and psuedo-promises of CT/CRT/I and are now part of our church family.

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

Are you sure that it is even a drift to the middle? Or maybe it is remaining a conservative evangelism entity, whose forefathers are people such as neo-evangelical, SBC theologian Dr. Carl Henry? Both Dr. Mohler and Dr. Moore consider Dr. Henry their theological mentor. If you’ve read Dr. Henry’s God, Revelation, and Authority, which is one of the hallmark theological writings of the 20th century that brilliantly expounds and defends the authority of Scripture, it also leaves room, by common grace, insights from anthropology, sociology, and etc…. His 14th Thesis in the book has three chapters, 23, 24, and 25. Chapter 23 is titled “Good News for the Oppressed.” Chapter 24 is titled “Marxist Exegesis of the Bible.” Chapter 25 is titled “The Marxist Reconstruction of Man.” Henry writes a blistering critique of Liberation Theologies and Revolution Theologies that come from Marxism. He also writes a blunt critique of missiologist Orlando Costas for attempting to synthesize much of the methodology and some of the main tenants of Liberation Theology while claiming adherence to the Authority of Scripture. He mildly criticizes Ron Sider for certain parts of his theology of the poor that uses Marxist categories. Yet he was not against gaining insights in general revelation, even from Marx. This quote is from Henry’s GR&A, Vol IV, 569.

Although Costas warns against the infiltration of exotic ideas into the Christian faith, he insists that “the best methodology employs,” as has been noted, an ideology “that favors the oppressed in their struggle for liberation.” But does one really need a fully forged and self-contained ideology in order to favor the oppressed? Is not biblical revelation “ideologically” adequate? Can we not, moreover, find in Marx, as in Einstein and others, valuable insights without a compunction to comprehensively correlated the Bible with such viewpoints as a total system?

A few pages later, Henry says this:

By no means does this trend require evangelical Christians to ban the reading of Marx’s writings any more than the influential “great books” authored by secular philosophers and literati. There is much value in mastering secular thought, provided that such reading is not the only kin one masters lest it master its learners. That value lies not in infallible answers given to questions concerning either personal or social salvation, however, but rather in formulating and pursuing wider and deeper questions that the Christian must probe in studying the inspired Scriptures. Have evangelical Christians perhaps sacrificed to Marxists and religious humanists what stands at the heart of the Bible, namely a profound sense of social concern for a radically different society? Is the only human possibility of the liberation of the poor that proposed by the Marxist ideology? In what way does this ideology frustrate what the kingdom of God truly requires? And how then are Christians to identify themselves with the needy and oppressed in accordance with what God’s new covenant demands?

Even if Christians should and must deplore pseudo-theologies that deal inadequately and objectionably with human oppression, they nonetheless must recognize the positive concerns of theologies of liberation and revolution with their indictment of political, economic and other injustice against the human spirit. The critically desperate condition of vast masses of people strangled by oppression pleads for evangelism and social engagement. Concern for a theological orthodoxy devoid of justice and compassion is not orthodoxy, but heterodoxy.

That is why I say that Proposal #9 is not at all a drift towards liberalism, liberation theology, social gospel, and whatever else you call it. It is conservative evangelical social ethics built on the conservative side of neo-evangelicalism from conservative Biblical scholars and Biblical Ethicists such as Dr. Carl FH Henry.