Dr.Jonas'Blog

Baptist Historians

2010-09-27T08:50:00.012-04:00

Back in the early spring of 2002, I received an email from Buddy Shurden asking if I'd like to participate in a seminar with approximately 15-20 other "younger" Baptist historians. If I said "yes," I committed myself to read several hundred pages of primary source documents from the Baptist tradition in preparation for the seminar which would convene at Mercer University in September of that year.

Although I was busy with many things at the time, I agreed to participate. We just completed our 9th seminar last weekend in Atlanta. Buddy is now retired and no longer meets with us. Our group still meets though. We have added a few other names as some of the original members have had to drop out. But, in all honesty, this has been and continues to be one of the most helpful continuing education experiences of my professional life. We have read and discussed literally thousands of pages of primary source materials from 400 years of the Baptist tradition from both England and America.

We just completed our 9th seminar last weekend in Atlanta. This year we decided as a group to release a document which we hope will inform the public about some of the things we have learned through our reading of these primary sources. Here is the link to the document:

http://www.baptisthistory.org/bhhs/affirmationbaptisttheme.html

I am so proud to be associated with these historians. They are professional colleagues and I value their individual as well as collective expertise as historians. But the best thing that has happened through these 8 years of working together in this seminar is that we have all become close friends. A sense of community has developed between us. That has made this experience even more beneficial.

CBFNC and Priesthood of the Believer

2010-09-10T13:02:00.007-04:00

I have been away from blogging for a while due to being consumed with a long-term writing project. However, I want to return to blogging momentarily to comment on the proposed efforts of CBFNC to revise its foundational statement. In 2007, CBFNC appointed a committee to start the process of revision. The current statement is included here:

http://www.cbfnc.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=1sFC6ojb-Ss%3d&tabid=254

The committee has been at work for a several years now and has produced this revision:

http://www.cbfnc.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=8yecCUNauRk%3d&tabid=254

Two other Baptist bloggers, Aaron Weaver and Tony Cartledge have each written blogs about this effort and their posts are very insightful and detailed as to the differences, etc. Those blogs can be found here:

http://www.thebigdaddyweave.com/

http://www.tonycartledge.com/

I share two concerns about this proposed document. First, I have some questions about including the Apostles Creed (although, curiously, it is not named). While I don't have any difficulty with the Apostles Creed personally, I find it interesting that a group of Baptists who consider themselves to be non-creedal would include a creed in their foundational document. I wonder if the text could be referenced, as the document does with the Baptist confessions that it mentions. But, I question whether the text of the Creed ought to be included and it is unusual for a Baptist confession to include the text of an ancient creed (The Orthodox Creed of 1678 notwithstanding).

Second, and more troubling, I have big problems with leaving out all references to priesthood of the believer, liberty of conscience, etc. This concept is at the very center of the Baptist tradition from my understanding of the primary sources which I have read. It is not some invented concept that Enlightenment-era American Baptists developed. It is the very heart of the tradition from John Smyth to the present. It is clear. Sometimes it is stated more blatantly than at other times. But, it is a thread that runs through all types of Baptists for 4 centuries of our history. It is seen in confessions of faith, writings of Baptist theologians and preachers, documents produced by local churches, and most importantly, the actions of Baptists as they have sought to live and give expression to their faith. How can you talk about salvation in the Baptist experience without starting with a sinner standing alone in fear and trembling before a holy God? What use is it to discuss religious liberty without first starting with an individual conscience opposed to the majority? How can you think of a democratically-run congregation without first starting with an individual conscience? And why encourage discussion in a Sunday School class unless we trust every individual to read the Bible privately and to interpret it as they see fit under the leadership of the Holy Spirit? These are not trivial matters. This is the very core of our tradition as Baptists.

The proposed CBFNC foundational statement needs a robust statement of this concept included. At the very least, they should bring the statement on priesthood of the believer which is in the current foundational statement into the revised version. Perhaps a good compromise would be to bring from the former document the entire section titled, “Our Principles,” which contains statements on the “Centrality and Authority of Scripture,” “Priesthood of All Believers,” “Autonomy of the Local Church,” and “Freedom of Religion.” The document is terribly lacking if something resembling this is not included somewhere. Without it, CBFNC will be saying to the world that we are something very different than what we have been.

The first Southern Baptist Convention meeting I attended as a pastor was in 1988 in San Antonio. I was also a Ph.D student at Baylor and had an interest in Baptist history. I recall the feeling of shock that I and thousands of other Moderates felt as we heard read and then saw passed the infamous resolution on the priesthood of the believer. I remember Randall Lolley’s protest as he led several others to the Alamo where they ceremonially burned their voting ballots in response to this egregiously terrible resolution. The ironic thing now 22 years later is that CBFNC is in danger of doing the same thing that the Fundamentalists did in 1988 to this cherished doctrine. The only difference is that at least the Fundamentalists left the terminology. The committee which has produced this revised document has not even done that!

"This is What a Preacher Looks Like"

2010-05-26T23:10:00.003-04:00

Baptist Women in Ministry, an organization for which I have a tremendous amount of respect, sells a T-Shirt with the phrase, "This is What a Preacher Looks Like." I love that slogan. And, it has been promoted by BWIM very well via Facebook.
I teach Religion majors at Campbell University. Many of the students that I teach are female and most of them have a sense that God has called them to ministry. As 18 year olds, they do not know exactly what direction in ministry their calling will take. But, they have a deep sense that God has done something in their lives and following the call to ministry is their way of responding. I am supportive of women who have been called to ministry, whether it be to serve as a parish pastor, a chaplain, youth minister, missionary, or whatever form that call may take.
For the last two years almost, I have been engaged in a project to write the bi-centennial history of First Baptist Church in Raleigh. I am currently working through the period from 1911-1938. Today, I was reading old WMU minutes and came across an amazing entry from October 2nd, 1916. During the meeting on that day, Sallie Bailie Jones, one of the most important WMU leaders in the South in the early 20th century, spoke on the subject of "Women in Christianity." Listen to these words:
“Woman was created man’s equal and a high standard for womanhood was given in the Old Testament. Miriam, the sister of Moses, who led her people was as divinely appointed as Moses, and Deborah, the prophetess was the first woman to rule a nation by divine appointment. With the coming of Christ there came a higher life for women and the gospel of a risen Christ was first heard by the disciples from Mary Magdalene."
Now, this is not from the mouth of some wild-eyed radical feminist. This is from the Woman's Missionary Union that was part of one of the most prominent churches in the Southern Baptist Convention at the time. So, when some conservatives today say that it is God's intention that the woman should be "submissive" to the man, I think they would have a hard time convincing Sallie Bailie Jones of that!
"This is What a Preacher looks like!!"

Paige Patterson's Crusade

2009-09-30T14:46:00.003-04:00

I haven't blogged in a while. I've just been so busy with other matters that I didn't have time to keep up with my blog. However, this event covered by Tony Cartledge is just too good to ignore. The title is "Warriors for Jesus." See Tony's blog here:

http://www.tonycartledge.com/

This speaks for itself. I'll just add this: (1) Dr. Patterson is probably in need of a good retirement plan. (2) Dr. Patterson could probably use some therapy. (3) I have never been so embarrassed to be a graduate of Southwestern Baptist Theology Seminary. I may just take my diploma off my wall!

Laptop Use in the College Classroom

2009-03-17T10:27:00.002-04:00

There are some courses in the university where laptops are essential items for students in the class. My class is not one of them. Generally, my classes are lecture-oriented with a measure of discussion. If I need to refer to something on the internet, I use my laptop to connect and then flash the material on the screen at the front of the room with the boxlight projector.

I never really cared about laptop use until about 3 years ago. I started noticing that my students were not paying attention as well with their laptops open and that I was having to compete with Instant Messenger, Facebook, email, and a host of other distractions. One of our other religion classes also had a minor incident of a student visiting a website that was a bit offensive to his fellow students.

At this point I decided to implement a policy (stated in my syllabus) that forbids use of electronic devices in my classes. This includes cell phones, mp3 players, iPods (amazing that I had a student once listening to her iPod while I was lecturing!). Of course, I do allow for laptops and recording devices if a student has a special need for its use.

This article in the Chronicle of Higher Education caught my attention today. It seems to confirm what I have suspected for some time now; that students make better grades if they leave the laptops closed and pay attention to the lecture.

http://chronicle.com/wiredcampus/article/3662/when-shown-how-in-class-laptop-use-lowers-test-scores-students-stop-surfing

Students Stop Surfing After Being Shown How In-Class Laptop Use Lowers Test Scores
Professors increasingly frustrated by students who use laptops for non-class activities—like updating their Facebook pages—may be heartened by news from the University of Colorado at Boulder. A professor there has found that educating students about the negative effect that frivolous laptop use has on their performance reduces class time spent going walkabout on the Web.

Diane Sieber, an associate professor, teaches writing and ethics to engineering undergraduates. She told the Boulder Daily Camera newspaper that last semester, she identified 17 students in one of her classes who were using laptops most frequently. After the first test, she told them that they did 11 percent worse, on average, than their peers who did not have their faces in their computers as much.

Lo and behold, the number of laptop-nosed students dropped to a half dozen, and the test scores of those who stopped using their computers during class went up.
Ms. Sieber says she also tries to tell students about the effects their behavior has on others in the class. Students “ask their classmates, ‘Please don’t watch movies on your computer, because if I’m behind you I can’t focus,’” she told the newspaper.

As the number of wireless-enabled classrooms increases—at Boulder it has gone from about 15 percent to about 85 percent in the last several years, according to the report—the laptop-related challenges facing the people up at the front of the room has gone up as well. Several law-school professors, The Chronicle has reported, have banned laptops from their classrooms. Laptop-free zones have been ordered by law-school instructors at Florida International, Georgetown, and Harvard Universities, and the Universities of Michigan and Wisconsin.

But other instructors find bans hard to enforce, and also find that Web access can enrich classroom discussions. A recent survey of 29,000 students at 85 law schools supports this notion. It may be that treating students as grown-ups and letting them see for themselves what helps and what hurts them in class, as Ms. Sieber has done, results in students who make smart decisions. —Josh Fischman

-->

What is Their "Fair Share?"

2009-03-16T15:15:00.005-04:00

The Republicans (the party of choice for rich C.E.O.s) has been complaining about President Obama's plan to roll back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans to the levels that they were during the Clinton administration. This will be a change of 35% to 39.5%. Some wackos have even being calling President Obama a "Socialist."

Oh really?

Get this. At the end of Ronald Reagan's first term in office do you know what the tax rate was for the wealthiest Americans? 50%

Do you know that under Richard Nixon the tax rate for wealthy America was 70%?

Under Dwight D. Eisenhower the rate was 91%.

Above is a chart prepared by Moveon.org to show a comparison between what President Obama is trying to do and the tax rates that existed since the Great Depression.

With the latest news of AIG bonuses being paid out with taxpayer money, it is time for all Americans to stand up and say "enough!"

It is time for the wealthiest 1% of American society, as well as the large corporations to pay their fair share back to society.

Oh, and by the way, the Obama budget cuts taxes for 95% of all Americans. That's how it should be. The wealthy ought to pay more than the middle class. It's not socialism. It's common sense!

Rush Limbaugh and the Religious Right

2009-03-11T14:19:00.003-04:00

Robert Parham, Executive Director of the Baptist Center for Ethics has an excellent editorial on Rush Limbaugh and the Religious Right that appeared in the "Washington Post" today. I wanted to promote it through my blog today as well. He raises a good question: Why does the Religious Right embrace Rush Limbaugh so heartily when Limbaugh's life and thought are so obvioulsy contrary to basic Christian morality?

Here's the link:

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2009/03/limbaughs_unrighteous_hold_on.html

Here's the article:

Robert Parham
Limbaugh's Unrighteous Hold on Christian Right

Rush Limbaugh told what he thought was a joke to a cheering crowd at the 2009 Conservative Political Action Conference, an annual gathering of conservative activists and politicians. In his rambling remarks televised on FOX News, Limbaugh said that when Larry King died, he went to heaven and was met at the gates by Saint Peter. King's one question was: "Is Rush Limbaugh here?"

"'No, he's got a lot of time yet, Mr. King,'" said Limbaugh, pretending to be Peter.

"So Saint Peter begins the tour," said Limbaugh. "Larry King sees the various places and it's beyond anything we can imagine in terms of beauty. Finally, he gets to the biggest room of all, with this giant throne. And over the throne is a flashing beautiful angelic neon sign that says, 'Rush Limbaugh.'"

The audience laughed.

Limbaugh said, "And Larry King looks at Saint Peter and says, 'I thought you said he wasn't here.' He said, 'He's not, he's not. This is God's room. He just thinks he's Rush Limbaugh,'" said Limbaugh.

The crowd erupted with laughter, applause and hoots. Conservatives thought it was hilarious that God would envy the rival deity named Rush Limbaugh. Not a boo, not a hiss, not a grumble was heard from the crowd.

While CPAC was a secular event, it was an event sponsored, supported and attended by Christian Right organizations and leaders. The CPAC program listed as co-sponsors: Concerned Women for America, Family Research Council and Liberty University's law school. Exhibitors included the Alliance Defense Fund, Liberty Council and Regent University's Robertson School of Government. Focus on the Family held a reception for former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum.

No doubt, a lot of conservative Christians were in the room. Days later, no Christian Right leader has objected to Limbaugh's claim to be bigger than God, a claim similar to what John Lennon said in 1966.

When Lennon said, "We're more popular than Jesus," Bible-belt Christians roared with anger. They burned Beatles records, banned Beatles songs on the radio and boycotted Beatles concerts. They tolerated no rival claims to the messiah. When Limbaugh uttered a parallel claim, those who see Christianity under attack offered no response. No cry of cultural hostility toward religion was heard. No demand for an apology boomed from pulpits. No boycott was launched.

Why is that?

Why is it that the Christian Right reacted with such reverence to a man who, through thinly disguised humor, disclosed his prideful self-perception and espoused a worldview that counters the biblical witness? Are they afraid of Limbaugh? Are they afraid of his followers who pack their pews?

What explains the fact that Limbaugh can speak untruthfully, and yet he goes unchallenged by conservative Christians? He certainly spoke untruthfully at CPAC when he said that conservatives did not see other people with contempt. Yet he exhibited contempt in his comments about Senators Harry Reid and John Kerry.

When Limbaugh asserted that President Obama "portrays America as a soup kitchen in some dark night," that he wants to destroy the United States and that he was fueling "class envy," his untruthfulness went unchallenged. Limbaugh claimed, "We don't hate anybody." Yet he proceeded to speak hatefully about Obama, defending his statement that he hoped Obama failed, which was hardly endearing speech.

If truth telling isn't a conservative value, what about unbridled greed? Is greed a Christian concern? Limbaugh defended greed. He defended the conspicuous consumption and the corporate mismanagement of Merrill Lynch's former CEO John Thain as a way to defend capitalism.

Limbaugh asserted the primacy of excessive individualism. Again and again, he preached a radical individualism--the rights of the individual are transcendent. Never did he advocate sacrifice for another or urge his audience to avoid the pursuit of one's rights for the well-being of others.

Limbaugh's agenda had no room for the parable of the Good Samaritan, perhaps no longer a valued Christian narrative. Is Rush Limbaugh's agenda in sync with the moral values and vision of conservative Christians?

Given the thunderous silence of Christian Right leaders about Limbaugh's worldview, one wonders if talk radio's man of excessive individualism and political extremism has replaced the biblical witness as a moral compass.

Robert Parham is executive editor of EthicsDaily.com and executive director of its parent organization, the Baptist Center for Ethics.

Frank Schaeffer takes on the Republican Party

2009-03-10T13:21:00.001-04:00

Franky Schaeffer's father and mother were "founders" of the Religious Right in America, along with Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Tim LaHaye, and James Dobson. Franky Schaeffer was right along side of them in the decades of the 70s -90s. As late as the 2000 presidential election he was still trying to get Republicans elected.

That was then. Now, he has completely turned his back on the Religious Right and the Republican Party. In 2007 he wrote a book called "Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, And Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of it Back."

In the link below, Schaeffer, now a blogger for the Huffington Post, slams the Republican Party and more particularly Rush Limbaugh. He takes them all to task for creating the mess the nation is in both economically and militarily and then having the audacity to hope that the president "fails" in his attempts to lead our nation out of the crisis. He calls Rush Limbaugh the new "Hanoi Jane" in American society.

Good for him! It is encouraging to see more and more Americans (especially former Republicans) standing up to oppose the failed economic and military policies that the last 8 years brought us! And all the Republican leadership can do is say that they hope the president fails! Will the "real" patriotic Americans please stand up?

Strong stuff! Read the post for yourself here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/open-letter-to-the-republ_b_172822.html

Al Mohler and the Nemesis of Liberal Theology

2009-01-28T08:35:00.003-05:00

Yesterday, Robert Parham had a very good article on the financial problems that many seminaries and divinity schools find themselves in right now, particularly with our nation's economic crisis. You can find the article here: http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=1127

Parham called attention to an earlier blog written by Al Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY in which Mohler essentially argued that the decline of mainline denominations and seminaries is due to the liberal theology embraced by such institutions. Here is the link to Mohler's blog:
http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=1127

Mohler echoes a familiar theme here. During the takeover of the SBC by the Fundamentalists, the mantra was always that the SBC was in danger of embracing liberal theology and if it did so, it would decline. Therefore, the Fundamentalists needed to "save" the SBC. Well, they saved it all right! Now, the SBC itself admits that it is in decline. See the story here: http://blogs.lifeway.com/blog/edstetzer/2009/01/stemming-sbc-membership-declin.html

Mohler wrote his blog in April, 2008. In December, 2008, Southern Seminary announced that it expected a budget shortfall of nearly 9%. Just a few weeks ago, Southern announced a layoff of 35 administrative staff positions.

Southern Seminary is not the only theological school in the SBC fold with financial problems. New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary is encountering a financial crisis of sorts in which the president has announced that he will take a 10% salary cut and require faculty members to follow with a 5% decrease. Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, is cutting approximately $4 million from its budget and has closed the child care center on campus due to budget shortages.

Granted, the decline of the stock market and our nation's financial crisis have contributed to the crises that these schools are faced with. However, I believe that if I were the president of Southern Seminary, I'd write a blog retracting my earlier argument that the decline of mainline denominations and seminaries is due to an embrace of liberal theology. Perhaps there are other factors that need to be examined.

Bibb County Georgia Public Schools and the Inauguration

2009-01-19T08:45:00.003-05:00

It seems that when President-elect Barack Obama is sworn in as president tomorrow, there will be some school children in Bibb County, Georgia who will not be allowed to see it. There have been enough parents complaining about teachers' plans to have the children watch the swearing-in ceremony and Obama's inauguration speech that the school system is going to provide alternative learning activities for those children whose parents object. The story listed below indicates that the parents were concerned that seeing a new president sworn in and giving his inaugural address to the nation is not and "educational activity."

My friend, Amy Morton, in Georgia first blogged about this. You can see her blog here: http://georgiawomenvote.blogspot.com/2009/01/alternative-reality-school.html

Part of me is suspicious about this. Is the concern of the parents really that the activity is not "educational" enough? Or, is there perhaps a bit of racism in the background? I would like to think that this is not racially motivated. But this is Georgia after all. And racism is still alive all over the nation, but especially is it still rampant in the deep South.

But perhaps it is best to think better of these parents. So, the concern that viewing the inauguration of a new president is not and "educational" activity seems to me to be very wrong. Tomorrow's swearing in of Barack Obama is historic. On the steps of the nation's capital, built by slave labor, the first African-American president will be sworn in. It is as historic as watching Neil Armstrong take that "one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind" step in
1969. In fact, it represents a cultural shift of epic proportions in our nation's history. That may make it even bigger than Armstrong's leap.

So, I hope that those good citizens of Bibb County, Georgia who are objecting to this activity will reconsider and allow their children to witness this historic moment tomorrow.

http://www.macon.com/198/story/590053.html

The Dinosaur's Death

2009-01-09T10:43:00.002-05:00

I've always been intrigued by the mystery of what happened to dinosaurs millions and millions of years ago. Did they become extinct as a result of some sudden cataclysm? Or, was their extinction a gradual process? I am not a scientist or the son of a scientist so I'll leave the speculation to my colleagues in the science department.

For some time now I have said to my Baptist history classes that the SBC is a dinosaur and it doesn't know it. We can now see that the SBC is truly in decline both in numbers as well as in giving. The SBC will never again be what it once was. Thank God!

The "Controversy" has taught many of us that God's tent is much, much bigger than Southern Baptists. The Baptist tent is bigger (Freewill Baptists, Primitive Baptists, Candadian Baptists, Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, Nationial Baptists, Hispanic Baptists, etc. etc.) But, beyond that, the Christian tent is larger than just Southern Baptists. I think it took the Controversy over the last 30 years to teach many Southern Baptists this valuable lesson. Sadly, however, there are still many, many Southern Baptists who just don't get it.

Robert Parham, director of the Baptist Center for Ethics, has a great editorial today on Ethicsdaily.com analyzing the slow death of the SBC. It is worth the read. Thanks Robert for a great piece! I include it below:

http://ethicsdaily.com/article_detail.cfm?AID=11546

New Leadership and Theological Transformation Might Reverse SBC Decline

Robert Parham
01-09-09
Reversing the Southern Baptist Convention’s decline and loss of influence will demand new leadership and theological transformation, two very unlikely possibilities in the next decade. The SBC’s numerical slide and besmirched image took some 30 years to achieve and cannot be undone by a quick makeover.

After a decade-long internecine war, fundamentalists defeated the feckless moderates and took control in the early 1990s of SBC agencies and seminaries. Their successful campaign was built on two promises.

One promise was that the SBC would enter a golden age of growth when Southern Baptists read the Bible literally and had conservative positions on issues like women and abortion.

Fundamentalists believed the decline in mainline Protestantism resulted from liberalism, such as the critical study of the Bible and ordination of women. A conservative worldview was the best defense against decline.

If the first promise was theological, the second promise was organizational. Fundamentalists claimed that conservatives were neither hired at seminaries nor appeared on convention programs. They said they only wanted parity in positions.

Parity soon turned to purity, driving out those who were neither theological conservatives nor supporters of the Christian Right.

Without a counterbalancing force, fundamentalists quickly marched into an anti-everything posture. The SBC launched a boycott against Disney. It adopted a faith statement against women working outside the home. One seminary president made anti-Catholic statements on national TV, saying the Pope preached a false gospel. Leaders made anti-public school declarations, calling for an exodus of Christian students from public education. Others implied that the Democratic Party was against God.

Purity and negativity had dire consequences. Churches backed away from the SBC; even conservative churches dropped Baptist from their name. SBC-affiliated state conventions turned toward their own priorities. Fearing fundamentalist control, Baptist universities, such as Belmont University, sought autonomy. Attendance at the annual SBC meeting plummeted. Attempts to rally Southern Baptists to baptize more converts and to grow churches flopped. The promised golden age never happened.

Even if rank-and-file Southern Baptists had the power to hold accountable those who presided over the denominational fall, reversing the situation would require fundamental theological changes.

Positive growth requires that an authentic inclusivity must replace a rigid exclusivity for women in leadership. Civil ecumenical and meaningful interfaith engagement must supplant arrogant theological purity. A genuine commitment to non-partisanship must be swapped for the claim that God’s Only Party is the GOP.

Finally, reversing the decline would require Southern Baptists to redefine how they determine God’s favor. The current measurement of success is numerical growth, which the SBC does not have, meaning the denomination is out of favor with God, according to the body’s own definition.

A broader theological definition of faithfulness and cultural engagement would go a long way toward reversing decline, something that a new generation of leaders might advance.

Robert Parham is the executive director of the Baptist Center for Ethics.

Requested by the editorial page of the Tennessean, this column appeared on Tuesday, accompanying the newspaper’s own editorial about the decline of the Southern Baptist Convention and another column by Ed Stetzer, director of LifeWay Research.

Copyright © 2002-2008 EthicsDaily.com

A Century of the Gideons

2009-01-03T00:33:00.002-05:00

As I write this I am sitting in the lobby of my hotel in New York City. I am attending the American Society of Church History winter meeting, which meets every year with the larger American Historical Association. I love NYC. But I also love being in the company of so many historians.

So, with history on my mind, I came across this story. The Gideons are one hundred years old. Here's the story:

http://www.contracostatimes.com/nationandworld/ci_11346492?nclick_check=1

The Gideons International is an organization of lay people devoted to distributing Bibles worldwide. I appreciate the fact that it is an effort of laity and not clergy. I have also enjoyed hearing the incredible stories told by Gideons of how the Bible has impacted the lives of those who have at times literally stumbled upon it in a hotel room. Even today, as I checked into my hotel and opened up the desk drawer, there was a Gideon Bible.

And so, here's a word of congratulations to the Gideons for their good work of distributing Bibles around the world for a hundred years.

"AUgusteen" or "A-GUST-in?"

2008-12-09T18:46:00.003-05:00

For centuries scholars have been trying to figure how the great Bishop of Hippo's name should correctly be pronounced. I, of course, pronounce it the correct way: "AUgusteen," with the accent on the first syllable and a long "e" sound at the end of the name. Several of my colleagues on the theology side of the aisle insist that the correct pronunciation should be "A-GUST-in" with the accent on the second syllable and the last syllable pronounced as the word "in."

I remember a professor in seminary that used to pronounce the name the way my theology colleagues pronounce it and then he would add, "or "AU-gus-teen" for those who are intellectually challenged!" (I'm not sure those were the exact words but it was something to that effect). With a professor that insistent on a particular pronunciation, I wonder why I chose the alternative, although I could have been in the category he described who used the "AU-gus-teen" pronunciation.

On my final exam in my Reformation class last week, I decided to put my students to the test. An identification question on the test read: "The Correct Pronunciation of the name “Augustine.” The students were then required to explain to me the correct way to pronounce the name. Interestingly, not a single student disagreed with my pronunciation!

I also decided to consult my dissertation advisor, Dr. Bill Pitts, of Baylor University because I figured that he would surely know the right pronunciation. He also agreed with me. He indicated that: (1) the most practical reason for the accent being on the first syllable of the name is to prevent confusion with the "Augustan" age of Roman literature, the era of Emperor Augustus Caesar when the finest of Roman literature flourished; and (2) during the 18th century in England the best writers modeled themselves after the "Augustan" writers in classical antiquity. Consequently, the 18th century is called the "Augustan" period in English Literature. So, Dr. Pitts concludes: "unless one is willing to ignore a huge branch of humanities—namely, literature—it is best to reserve that pronunciation for these two eras of enormously productive literature while using the traditional pronunciation for our most influential theologian."

That settles it for me! I shared all that with my theologian friends and even that won't convince them. I'm open for suggestions!

Balthasar Hubmaier

2008-11-26T11:14:00.004-05:00

It was my church history professor and mentor in seminary, W. R. Estep that first introduced me to Balthasar Hubmaier. The first time I saw his name in writing I thought, "how do I prounce it?" But, it didn't take too many class sessions in Dr. Estep's course on the Anabaptists before the name became so common that all of us knew how to pronounce it.

The brilliant Hubmaier was born around 1481 in a small town called Friedberg just outside of Augsburg. He attended the University of Freiburg and there came under the tutelage of the great Catholic theologian Dr. John Eck. Hubmaier completed both the bachelor’s and master’s degrees then followed Eck to the University of Ingolstadt where he received the Doctor of Theology degree. Eck once called Hubmaier the most brilliant student he'd ever been associated with. Because of his great preaching ability and keen theological mind he accepted appointment as preacher at the cathedral in Regensburg in 1516. Five years later he became a parish priest in Waldshut and there came into contact with Ulrich Zwingli and the Swiss Reformation. Two years later, he became publicly identified with Zwingli’s reform in Zurich, but soon developed Anabaptist ideas.

Along with his preaching, Hubmaier’s pen became a powerful voice for spreading Anabaptist ideas. Soon, he came into conflict with Zwingli and in late 1525 Zwingli had both Hubmaier and his wife arrested. He was forced to enter the pulpit of the Fraumünster in Zurich and recant publicly. As he began to speak instead of recanting he said, “Oh what anguish and travail I have suffered this night over the statements which I myself have made. So I say here and now, I can and I will not recant.” Zwingli immediately stopped Hubmaier and had him arrested again. This time he underwent torture at the hands of Zwingli and eventually produced a written statement recanting of his Anabaptist ideas.

In early 1526 he left Zurich for Nikolsburg in Moravia where once again he took up the Anabaptist cause, this time with greater force than before. Moravia was one of the most tolerant regions in Europe and Hubmaier had a great amount of freedom to preach Anabaptist ideas there. It is estimated that more than 6,000 were baptized in the one year of Hubmaier’s ministry in Nikolsburg. But this year of relative peace was not to last long. The fortune of Anabaptists in Moravia soon changed and Hubmaier was arrested, taken to Vienna, and burned at the stake on March 10, 1528. Although tortured mercilessly for several days before his death, this time he refused to recant. He was urged to confess to a priest and receive last rites before his execution but he steadfastly refused. An eyewitness to his execution described Hubmaier’s death this way:

To the people he said, “O dear brothers, if I have injured any, in word or deed, may he forgive me for the sake of my merciful God. I forgive all those that have done me harm.”

While his clothes were being removed: “From thee also, O Lord, were the clothes stripped. My clothes will I gladly leave here, only preserve my spirit and my soul, I beseech thee!” Then he added in Latin: “O Lord, into thy hands I commit my spirit,” and spoke no more in Latin.

As they rubbed sulphur and gunpowder into his beard, which he wore rather long, he said, “Oh salt me well, salt me well.” And raising his head, he called out: “O dear brothers, pray God that he will give me patience in this my suffering.”

As his beard and hair caught fire, he cried out, “O Jesus, Jesus.”

Associated Baptist Press has this story today about the original writings of Hubmaier: http://www.abpnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3667&Itemid=53.

It seems that in just a few months all the writings of Hubmaier are going to be accessible on the internet. Great news about this nearly forgotten Anabaptist reformer! I have told my classes for years that if Hubmaier had lived out his full lifespan his influence in the 16th century might have rivaled that of Luther and Calvin.

Good for Decatur FBC!

2008-11-24T13:14:00.003-05:00

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has an article about FBC Decatur and its pastor, Rev. Julie Pennington-Russell. She was selected as the church's first ever female pastor last year. Furthermore, the church, with 2700 members is the largest Baptist church in the South to be headed by a female pastor.

Her presence as pastor of such a prominent Georgia Baptist church has been a thorn in the flesh to the Fundamentalists who control both the SBC and the Georgia Baptist Convention. So, it remains to be seen what action, if any both entities will take toward FBC Decatur. Knowing Fundamentalists as I do, I suspect both entities will seek some kind of "punitive" action toward the church. After all, they can't possibly be seen cooperating with a church that (in their twisted way of thinking) so violates the letter of scripture!

The article can be found at this link:
http://www.ajc.com/services/content/living/stories/2008/11/23/decatur_first_baptist.html

The best quote in the article is this: "If they would like to ask us to leave the Southern Baptist Convention, I think that’s fine,” Roper said. “I think our new minister is wonderful.”

Good for you Ms. Roper! And good for you all FBC Decatur! What a wonderful example to the rest of the Baptist world!

Is This the Future of the BSCNC?

2008-11-14T20:20:00.008-05:00

Several bloggers last week, most notably Tony Cartledge, have already included stories about the recent action of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina. Here's Tony's blog with the wrap-up:

http://www.tonycartledge.com/2008/11/bscnc-to-no-longer-tolerate-cbf.html

From my point of view, I found one portion of the convention positive since it approved the new relationship between the five colleges and universities and the convention. However, I thought the discussion about the CBF and the giving plans last Wednesday to be particularly nasty. I left the convention thinking to myself that after 15 straight Baptist State Convention meetings, this will probably be my last. I know where I'm not wanted.

I was resolved to all this as I returned home. Then I read Tim Rogers' blog:

http://rebekah1.wordpress.com/

I know Tim. I've always had a cordial relationship with him. I find his blog to be interesting. But he has a paragraph in his recent blog that I found to be chilling. He says:

"Also, there needs to be a call now to the head offices in Cary that NC Baptist have clearly stated we are not CBF. Thus, an employee at the convention offices should be a member of a NC Baptist church not one that is dually aligning themselves with the CBF and the BSCNC. We had the clarion call today during the budget vote that we will not even give you an opportunity to send funds through us to the CBF. We certainly should be able to say we want you attending a BSCNC church."

First, I don't know what the "head offices in Cary" means but I assume he means the BSC Executive Director/Treasurer, Milton Hollifield. And, I'll let slide the fact that the plural of "Baptist" is "Baptists" with an "s" added on to the end. But, more importantly, is Mr. Rogers calling for the termination of all BSC employees who belong to churches that may have a few members who choose to give through their church to CBF? I know some segments of the conservative movement in the BSC want a "pure" convention or to put it another way, a convention that promotes only their understanding of theology and the Baptist tradition. But, seriously, is there now going to be an attempt to purify the employees? Perhaps so. Is the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 next going to be imposed on convention workers? Maybe. Is this where the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina is headed? Is the tent going to be drawn even narrower? Surely, Mr. Rogers is not advocating the mass termination of these employees at the BSC, however many there may be.

I imagine that it would be a terrible thing to be terminated from one's employment. That would especially be the case with the current problems in our economy. Where's the compassion?

President-Elect Obama

2008-11-04T23:15:00.002-05:00

I am overcome with emotion and pride for my country right now. I haven't felt as proud to be an American since that July night in 1969 when Neil Armstrong stepped down onto the surface of the moon.

Last summer while I was at the Cooperative Baptist Fellowhsip meeting in Memphis, I went to the National Civil Rights Institute built around the Lorraine Hotel where Dr. King was killed. I literally stood feet from the spot where he fell to an assassin's bullet. I remember thinking how historic it would be if Senator Barack Obama would be elected president in a few months.

In his last speech in 1968, literally the evening before Dr. King was killed, he said these words:

"Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over. And I've seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land!"

I realize that "we, as a people" in that immediate context, referred to the African-American people for whom he was working. But, if I may, I'd like to interpret those words tonight a little bit more broadly. "We, as a people" refers to all Americans and tonight all Americans are standing on the mountaintop with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and all the heroes of the Civil Rights Movement. Our nation is truly better tonight because of this election!

Thank You Martin Luther!

2008-10-31T14:30:00.002-04:00

On this evening, exactly 491 years ago, Martin Luther nailed his "95 Theses" to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg. The "95 Theses" concerned the sale of indulgences (forgiveness of sin in return for a certain amount of money) which, given his shift in theology, particularly his doctrine of salvation, Luther thought was reprehensible.

I have sort of resisted saying that this act "started" the Reformation because I usually like to give some credit to "pre-Reformation" reformers like Hus and Wycliffe. Nevertheless, Luther's protest against the sale of indulgences was the spark that was needed that set off the powder-keg in the 16th century called the Reformation.

And so, this evening, I think it is good to remember and celebrate the life and work of this great man, Martin Luther!

It Is a Sad Day For Me

2008-10-30T14:41:00.005-04:00

I've been in a melancholy mood today. My mother and father are moving today from the home they have had since 1967 on Trexler Avenue in Rockwell, NC. They have made a decision to move to Aldersgate, a Methodist retirement center in Charlotte. They are getting along in age and although still healthy, they are thinking about the future. There are many reasons why this is the right thing to do. And, I have no doubt about that. In fact, their house sold in 1 week without even having to list it with a realtor! And that was in this current real estate market! It is the right thing for them. They will have a very nice apartment and when they need it, they can transition to a room in the nursing home. Furthermore, it is probably the last really big gift my parents can give to me and my sister (who lives in Charlotte). We will not have to be faced with the terrible question of "what do we do with daddy?" or "what do we do with mama?" So, this definitely is the right thing to do.

Still, I am sad today. For 41 years that little house on Trexler Avenue was my "home." There have been 41 Christmas gatherings there. From sleepy Christmas mornings that suddenly became magical when we realized that Santa had visited, to Christmases of recent years when "mom" and "dad" have become "maw-maw" and "paw-paw." I brought my first high school sweetheart over to that house to meet my parents. I brought friends from college home for weekend visits to that house. I brought my wife Pam to that house 20 years ago all the way from Texas to announce that we were getting married. Every inch of the backyard and the field beside our house still bears the marks of sandlot baseball or football games or lazy summer days playing with neighborhood friends. The walls in that house bespeak many, many happy times. There were also times when we cried together when grandma died or when granddaddy died and other deaths that touched our family. There were stressful times when mom and dad worried about how the next bill would get paid or how they were going to have the money to send my sister and me to college. But, overall, that house is testimony to a wonderful childhood with the best parents that I could have ever hoped for.

I dialed my parents' phone number last night for the last time. I wanted to see how mom and dad were doing. "I don't know if I'm going to get to bed at all tonight," my mother said. "There is still so much to do!" I'd heard those words before. Late nights doing laundry so that we would have clean clothes to wear. Late nights grading papers so her students would have an idea of how they were doing in her class. Late nights cooking for a church covered-dish lunch. Those words were familiar sounding. But, for me, calling the phone number for the last time was emotional. And, talking to momma over the phone was emotional as well. I remembered the week I went to basketball camp the summer of 1969 when I got so homesick that I had to put quarters in a pay phone and call momma. I remembered all the nights from college that I called home to share what was going on in this new academic community I had joined. I remembered calling from Texas so homesick when I first went to seminary in Fort Worth. I have a lifetime of memories calling that number.

A few weeks ago, I moved some furniture to our house which became bedroom suits for my daughters. I was last at the house a few days after that for some more things. I loaded up the van with as many of my dad's tools as I could get and carried them home to Buies Creek. As I put them all up in my toolshed last Saturday, I couldn't help but think that one day my daughters will be gathering my things and splitting them up as well. And one day my daughters will be saying good-bye to the old homeplace also. I guess that's how life goes. We move from one stage to another.

Still, I'm a bit melancholy today.

Elizabeth Dole's "godless" ad

2008-10-29T14:09:00.003-04:00

Today, the Elizabeth Dole campaign put up an ad that is sleazy, makes false claims, and is beneath the dignity of a United States Senator. But, she's behind in the polls and facing possible defeat from State Senator Kay Hagin so the ad smacks of desperation. The fact that Elizabeth Dole is one of the least effective senators in North Carolina history should be what voters are focused on. The fact that even though she grew up in North Carolina, she has lived her adult life outside of the state except when she moved back here to run for Senate should be a matter for the voters to focus upon. The fact that during the six years she has been in the Senate she has hardly visited the state of North Carolina and done absolutely nothing for the state should be the focus of the voters. But instead, in order to hide a shameless lack of effectiveness as a senator, she pulls out a sleazy ad like this.

See the ad for yourself here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lf2vDk-4Ag

Now for the facts:

(1) Kay Hagan is a devout Christian who teaches Sunday School and is an Elder in the First Presbyterian Church of Greensboro, NC. Furthermore, she lives out her faith in practical ways. A family tradition with her husband and children every Christmas morning is to go to the Bell House in Greensboro, a residential facility for severely mentally retarded adults where they cook Christmas morning breakfast for the residents and staff.

(2) The fundraiser in question was held in September and was hosted by more than 40 hosts including Senator John Kerry and furthermore, Hagan has never in her life heard of the "Godless PAC." This is more "guilt by association" that Republicans are playing as desperation "hail Mary" passes.

Don't let Elizabeth Dole get away with this sleaze. Vote for Kay Hagan and put a North Carolinian in the Senate who will truly work for our state.

John McCain "Pals Around" With Terrorists

2008-10-17T22:23:00.005-04:00

Most intelligent Americans think that the McCain/Palin suggestion that Barack Obama "pals around with terrorists" (in reference to several professional contacts with William Ayers) is simply put, a bunch of horse hockey. The story has been investigated thoroughly by major, reputable investigative journalists and there is simply nothing there. Ayers does not advise Obama. Ayers is not going to have a role in his administration. He is, at the very most, simply someone that Obama knows from Chicago.

Using the McCain campaign's twisted "guilt by association" tactic though, let's talk about G. Gordon Liddy. Those of you that are my college students may not know who he is. He was one of the Watergate conspirators, in fact, the only one that was "unrepentant." He was a true believer in Nixon and what Nixon was doing in the White House. He was the chief operative of the "White House Plumbers" group organized out of the Nixon White House to do domestic and political "dirty tricks" on political opponents. Ultimately, this is where the Watergate break-in came from.

But let's look at bit closer at G. Gordon Liddy. He spent 4 1/2 years in prison for his role in the break-in. He is a convicted felon. Furthermore, he admits in his own autobiography that he once planned to assassinate liberal columnist Jack Anderson with his Watergate co-conspirator E. Howard Hunt. On his radio talk show during the seige on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco in 1993, he made this statement to the Branch Davidians, "Now if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests. ... Kill the sons of bitches." And, perhaps worst of all, he once conspired to fire-bomb the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. where the classified documents leaked by Daniel Ellsberg were being stored.

Yes, you heard it right. G. Gordon Liddy was convicted felon, Watergate conspirator, who plotted to kill another American and plotted to fire bomb a Washington, D. C. building. And, he advocated the use of violent force against the American government at the Waco Branch Davidian seige. There are other things about him as well. He is not a nice person to say the least!

And now the clincher. In 1998 G. Gordon Liddy hosted a fundraiser in his own home for the re-election campaign for ???? You got it! John McCain!!! (here's the source: Kamen, Al (March 9, 1998), "A Host With Conviction", The Washington Post: A17) And, over the years, he has referred to McCain as his "old friend" and has contributed thousands of dollars to McCain's campaigns, including at least $1000 in 2008.

So, if Barack Obama "pals around with terrorists" for his supposed association with a man who is a "domestic terrorist," what makes John McCain's association with G. Gordon Liddy any different?

(For a good source that pulls these facts together, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._Gordon_Liddy#cite_note-5)

I Need a Caption for This Picture

2008-10-16T17:20:00.003-04:00

This photograph was captured last night at the end of the debate between Senators Obama and McCain. You supply the caption.

McCain Has Not a Shred of Decency Left

2008-10-10T21:43:00.005-04:00

After a week of whipping up his supporters into a Nazi-style frenzy against Barack Obama, McCain has nothing but points lost in the polls to show for it. It has not helped his campaign at all. In fact, it has hurt his standing in the polls.

McCain has spent a week raising doubts about the character of Obama, a campaign tactic that is tried and true and quite frankly fair game. However, what McCain has done is that he has gone far beyond standard campaign rhetoric. He and Palin have manipulated the anger of their die-hard believers into focusing their wrath, not on the problems of the economy and how they were created, but on Barack Obama himself. They have done this by portraying him as a dark and sinister character who can't be trusted. They have played into the ignorance of the "low information voters," the folks out there who work hard, obey the laws, try to pay their bills, and have been hit hard by the economic woes. But nevertheless, these people are prone to believe the internet rumors and urban legends about Obama such as the outlandish claim that he is a Muslim. If people believe he's a Muslim, the McCain camp knew that it wouldn't take much to get them to connect the dots by associating him with William Ayers and Jeremiah Wright. They have now, for this small segment of the electorate, created a dangerous brew of leading these people to believe that Obama is somehow un-American, an Arab, someone who consorts with terrorists, or even worse, a terrorist himself who is a part of an American sleeper cell.

This has got to stop. Bob Shrum today on the Huffington Post, has a good article about this. He recalls the McCarthy Hearings which ran out of steam when Boston attorney Joseph Welch said to McCarthy, "You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency sir? At long last have you left no sense of decency?"

Shrum says that someone should say those words to McCain. Indeed the wrath and anger generated at the McCain/Palin events could cause violence. That's why I say something "Nazi-like" is in a surreal way taking hold. Shrum ends his column tonight with this paragraph:

"The reality is that in an America facing two wars and a mounting economic crisis, these despicable appeals aren't working. Obama's lead is mounting, nationally and in the battleground states. But there is a threat here too that is all too real. When I heard someone in a Palin crowd yell out "traitor" as the candidate lashed out at the Democratic nominee, I thought of the full-page ad that appeared in a Dallas newspaper on the morning of Nov. 22, 1963. The headline -- "Wanted for Treason" -- was sprawled across a poster-sized photo of President John F. Kennedy." (Here's the link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-shrum/time-to-ask-mccain-have-y_b_133814.html).

God help us!

"I Want My Country Back!"

2008-10-07T08:42:00.003-04:00

As he did in 2004 for John Kerry, Bruce Springsteen is on a short tour through swing states working to get Barack Obama elected as president. Here's his short speech in Philadelphia this weekend. I don't know if it has an official title but I have titled it after a phrase in the speech: "I Want My Country Back!"

"Hello Philly,

"I am glad to be here today for this voter registration drive and for Barack Obama, the next President of the United States.

"I've spent 35 years writing about America, its people, and the meaning of the American Promise. The Promise that was handed down to us, right here in this city from our founding fathers, with one instruction: Do your best to make these things real. Opportunity, equality, social and economic justice, a fair shake for all of our citizens, the American idea, as a positive influence, around the world for a more just and peaceful existence. These are the things that give our lives hope, shape, and meaning. They are the ties that bind us together and give us faith in our contract with one another.

"I've spent most of my creative life measuring the distance between that American promise and American reality. For many Americans, who are today losing their jobs, their homes, seeing their retirement funds disappear, who have no healthcare, or who have been abandoned in our inner cities. The distance between that promise and that reality has never been greater or more painful.

"I believe Senator Obama has taken the measure of that distance in his own life and in his work. I believe he understands, in his heart, the cost of that distance, in blood and suffering, in the lives of everyday Americans. I believe as president, he would work to restore that promise to so many of our fellow citizens who have justifiably lost faith in its meaning. After the disastrous administration of the past 8 years, we need someone to lead us in an American reclamation project. In my job, I travel the world, and occasionally play big stadiums, just like Senator Obama. I've continued to find, wherever I go, America remains a repository of people's hopes, possibilities, and desires, and that despite the terrible erosion to our standing around the world, accomplished by our recent administration, we remain, for many, a house of dreams. One thousand George Bushes and one thousand Dick Cheneys will never be able to tear that house down.

"They will, however, be leaving office, dropping the national tragedies of Katrina, Iraq, and our financial crisis in our laps. Our sacred house of dreams has been abused, looted, and left in a terrible state of disrepair. It needs care; it needs saving, it needs defending against those who would sell it down the river for power or a quick buck. It needs strong arms, hearts, and minds. It needs someone with Senator Obama's understanding, temperateness, deliberativeness, maturity, compassion, toughness, and faith, to help us rebuild our house once again. But most importantly, it needs us. You and me. To build that house with the generosity that is at the heart of the American spirit. A house that is truer and big enough to contain the hopes and dreams of all of our fellow citizens. That is where our future lies. We will rise or fall as a people by our ability to accomplish this task. Now I don't know about you, but I want that dream back, I want my America back, I want my country back.

"So now is the time to stand with Barack Obama and Joe Biden, roll up our sleeves, and come on up for the rising."

McCain and Palin Clearly on the Dark Side

2008-10-06T20:22:00.005-04:00

John McCain's campaign is looking more and more desperate. It has been happening ever since he made the statement that the "fundamentals of our economy are strong," then spent the rest of the week bouncing around the economic issue like a pinball bouncing off of rubber bumpers before it finally slides by the flippers. Quite frankly, two weeks ago, McCain scared me to death. At the end of the week, desperate to gain the "upper hand" on the economy issue, he suspended his campaign to go back to D.C. and whip up the Congress into action. Some leader! After he'd been there for a day, one Senator publically begged President Bush to tell John McCain to go back on the campaign trail so that they could get some work done.

So, here we are two weeks later. McCain's dream of being president is clearly slipping away from him. Independents are now polling toward Obama in large numbers. Obama now has a solid lead in all the "Kerry" states and he could possibly turn some solid red states into battleground states. This weekend, Sarah Palin was in Nebraska of all places. When a Republican v.p. candidate has to campaign in Nebraska 30 days before the election, you can bet the party is in trouble.

And then she started the talk about William Ayers. She finally read a newspaper, the New York Times, and saw the story about Obama's very casual connection with Ayers, a 1960s radical who is now a citizen in Chicago. Did he do some very bad things in the 1960s? Yes? Should he have been prosecuted? Yes. But the fact is that (1) He hasn't done any "terrorist" acts in at least 40 years and (2) There is no evidence that Obama has anything more than a casual acquaintance with him. So, here's what Governor "Perky" said about him:
"Our opponent ... is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect, imperfect enough, that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country." And then she said this: "This is not a man who sees America like you and I see America."

Do you see what's happening here? They are trying to create suspicion about Obama. They are trying to create a narrative about him. They are trying to "swiftboat" him. By saying that he's connected to a 1960s radical, (a terrorist) they lead people to go mentally to his name "Barack Hussein Obama." That then leads to the Jeremiah Wright stuff with the thought that maybe Obama "hates his country." Or, perhaps it plays into the silly paranoia that he's really a Muslim.

Sarah Palin ought to be ashamed of herself. This is sleaze to the power of 10! The McCain Campaign is out of options. So they are slinging mud against the wall hoping something will stick. Here's the thing. Our nation is in perhaps the worst potential crisis of my lifetime. We are fighting a war on two fronts that has no end in sight. Our economy is very close to a deep recession, if not depression. The Dow fell today more than 800 points. People are losing their jobs. Banks are failing. And instead of the McCain Campaign inspiring the electorate with hope. Instead of making voters feel like as Americans we can be strong again. Instead of offering solutions and reasons why they should vote for him, McCain and his surrogates spend the last 3 days talking about a 1960s radical who did dispicable acts when Obama was 8 years old! Talk about out of touch!

Here's what Barack Obama ought to do tomorrow night in the debate. He needs to find the moment when this crap about Ayers comes up. And he ought to say this:

"John, you and I have served together in the U.S. Senate for several years now. We are colleagues. Are you saying that you truly believe that I have been consorting with terrorists who want to destroy our country? Do you stand by that statement? If so, that is a monumental charge to make against a fellow U.S. Senator duly elected by the state of Illinois. If you truly believe this, why are you not calling for hearings? And if William Ayers is so dangerous, why has not the Department of Homeland Security called him in for questioning under the Patriot Act? Do you truly believe this about me? Do you stand by those comments?"

That would put McCain on the defensive and it would electrify the press. Tomorrow's debate should be interesting.

McCain Missed a "Golden Opportunity"

2008-10-02T12:30:00.003-04:00

Last night, the Senate passed the "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008." That is the formal name of the "Bailout" package that Congress has been working on since last week.

If you read my blog, you will know that I am a partisan Democrat. I just need to say though that I am outraged at what happened last night. The bill was "sweetened" with more than $100 billion in tax cuts mostly for businesses and the middle class. In other words, "PORK!" Now, I am not opposed to tax cuts for the Middle Class and for small business. Neither is Barack Obama. But such things had no place in this bill! Let's get the economy working again and then talk about such things.

Have you heard of some of the things in the "sweetener?" Tax breaks for rum producers in Puerto-Rico and the Virgin Islands? It's in there! "Exemption from excise tax for certain wooden arrows designed for use by children." That is actual language in the bill! Amazing!

But, here's the big picture. If John McCain was truly the "Maverick." If he truly wanted to "shake up Washington" and "take a pen to earmarks." If McCain truly wanted to cut spending, why did he vote "yes" for this bill?

I know we needed some kind of bill to get credit flowing again. And, I'm upset about the pork in this bill. But, wouldn't it have completely shaken up the campaign if last night McCain would have come into the well of the Senate and said something like this:

"My friends, I rise today to register my disapproval of the pork that is in this bill. At the time when our nation is suffering its worst economic disaster since the Great Depression, when the nation is looking to us for leadership, we want to pass a bill with $100 billion of extra spending. I have been campaigning all over the country and telling the nation that when I become president I am going to cut out the wasteful spending in Washington. Well, I'm starting right now by voting against this bill and its pork. And, I call on you Senator Obama to do the same!"

Now, I'm an Obama supporter. But, a speech like that would have been a game changer for McCain. It would have put Obama on the defensive and the press would have still been talking about it today. But McCain missed it. Once again, a sign that he is not what he says he is. McCain is not a Washington outsider (like he's been trying to tell everyone).

So, you take away McCain's "Maverick" persona, what do you have left? An angry old man with 20th century solutions to 21st century problems.

WaMu CEO Walks Away With $20 Million

2008-09-29T00:54:00.003-04:00

Alan H. Fishman was CEO of Washington Mutual for 17 days before the bank failed last week. For his 17 days on the job, while investors and employees lose millions, he will walk away with $20 million.

Just more evidence that Wall Street's greed has driven our economy to the brink of disaster. This happened on the Republican watch. They had the White House and the Supreme Court for the last 8 years and Congress for 6 of the last 8 years. They bear the responsibility.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,428641,00.html

WaMu Gives New CEO Mega Payout as Bank Fails

Nice work — if you can get fired from it.

That's just what one Alan H. Fishman might have thought when he woke up Friday morning.

Fishman was the new chief executive officer for Washingon Mutual — WaMu — the nation's largest savings and loan, which was taken over Thursday night by federal bank regulators and quickly dumped in a fire sale to JPMorgan Chase for the Wal-Mart-like price of $1.9 billion.

But don't cry for Fishman, who reportedly was sky-high — literally — last night, on a flight from New York to Seattle, when WaMu collapsed. Even though he's only been on the job for less than three weeks, he's bailing out with parachute worth close to $20 million, according to an executive compensation analysis conducted for the New York Times by James F. Reda Associates.

That's right, $20 million for 17 days on the job ... and his company failed.

Fishman, who formerly was chairman of Meridian Capital Group, apparently was much coveted by WaMu, which was counting on him to lead the failing thrift out of mortgage troubles that pushed the bank to a $3.3 billion second-quarter loss.

According to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, WaMu threw a $7.5 million bonus at Fishman when it hired him on Sept. 8, and guaranteed him an immediate cash severence of $11.6 million — both of which he gets to keep.

He also was eligible for annual bonuses of up to 365 percent of his annual base pay — set at $1 million — to go with millions of shares of company stock.

Fishman does lose out on a big bonus that would have kicked in had he remained on the job through 2009.

Documents show WaMu was going to pay their new boss $8 million to simply not screw up and get fired — all negotiated as the Seattle-based banking giant's loses climbed to an estimated $20 billion.

A Good Word About a Bad Idea

2008-09-23T17:32:00.006-04:00

Evidently, the Alliance Defense Fund has come up with an incredibly stupid idea. They want to recruit scores of pastors by this coming Sunday (September 28th) to blatantly endorse political candidates for office. Their purpose is intentionally to provoke I.R.S. investigations of those churches with the goal toward litigating a lawsuit over the matter.

As you are probably aware, a local church is tax-exempt. That means that it cannot be active in endorsing candidates for political office. A local church (or pastor of that church) can speak out on any issue they so desire. But they cannot formally endorse political candidates. If they do so they run the risk of investigation by the I.R.S. and ultimately could lose their tax-exempt status. That means among other things that any donations to that church would no longer count for income tax deductions which would kill the fund-raising efforts for the church's budget.

There are good reasons for this prohibition. First, those of us who love and read history know the problems that are created when the church gets into bed with the state or when the state gets into bed with the church. When the "wall of separation" between the two institutions is breached ultimately, both institutions lose out. All you have to do is read the history of Christianity from the 4th to the 17th centuries and you will see how devastating union of church and state can be for Christianity. Second, the church always needs to have a prophetic voice in society, particularly against the state. When a pastor or church endorses a candidate, that pastor or church ultimately loses the prophetic high ground and no longer maintains objectivity. It makes it much more difficult to speak a prophetic word when that candidate needs it.

Of course, as you can probably guess, their real intention is not to have "freedom" in the pulpit. Their real intention is to find a legal way to allow conservative, megachurch pastors to endorse candidates so that their church members can go to the polls and vote a certain way.

Thankfully, Rev. Brent Walker of the Baptist Joint Commitee for Religious Liberty has spoken out about this ridiculous idea and has spoken a good word about it. He went into the "lions' den" and discussed the idea on Fox News. Here is a link to a story about his comments in the interview.

http://www.bjcpa.org/news/news/09.23.08%20Pulpit%20Sunday.htm

Basically, Brent said three things: (1) "Pulpit freedom" is a misnomer because pulpits are already free in America. How many examples can you think of when authorities have broken into a conservative Baptist church and carried away a pastor in handcuffs for preaching out about a social issue such as homosexuality or abortion? How many instances can you think of when a liberal church pastor has had a sermon interrupted by civil authorities and that pastor then taken away for preaching about gay rights or opposing the war? It happens in countries where there is no such thing as religious freedom and separation of church and state. But it does not happen here. Ever heard of the Westboro Baptist Church? As repulsive and abrasive as their pastor is, he still has the freedom to proclaim whatever he wants from the pulpit. Pastors aren't arrested for addressing moral issues from the pulpit. But, if they endorse a candidate, the church is at risk of losing its tax-exempt status and rightly so.

(2) Walker also said that this idea of a "pulpit freedom" sunday is a bad idea because of the dissension that it could create within the body of a local congregation. Let's face it, most congregations are very diverse politically. I have served as interim pastor of congregations that had politicians who represented both the Democratic and Republican parties. I would have been committing clergy suicide if I had climbed into the pulpit and endorsed one candidate over another!

(3) Finally, Walker said that the idea is totally unnecessary. "There is no ground swell of enthusiasm for it. In fact, a recent survey reveals that more than half think religion and politics generally have become too closely tied (52 percent). The number is even higher when asked about the specific practice of endorsing from the pulpit.”

Thank you Brent Walker and the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty for speaking a good word about a bad idea!

This is Why I'm Not SBC Anymore

2008-09-22T16:03:00.002-04:00

I have two daughters. For the record, if either or both of them ever hear the voice of God calling them to be the pastor of a local church, they will get nothing but my prayers and support. I believe that God calls women to the pastorate. I believe that women are serving as pastors of churches and serving well. I believe that under the cross, both male and female, stand on level ground. Galatians 3:28 is the guiding principle for the way I see this issue:

"There is no longer Jew or Greek; there is no longer slave or free; there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus."

The article linked below from the Atlanta Journal and Constitution is to me a clear indication of how out of touch the Southern Baptist Convention is with the times. Instead of being a witness to a post-modern world, the SBC has become a laughingstock and is being rendered completely irrelevant.

http://www.ajc.com/living/content/living/stories/2008/09/18/gospel_magazine_pulled.html

By CHRISTOPHER QUINN
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Thursday, September 18, 2008

Smiling women on the cover of a slick magazine. Sold from under the counter. Must request it from store clerk.

That’s not something a buyer would typically find in a Christian bookstore. Not unless it’s one of the more than 100 Lifeway Christian Bookstores across the United States, including about six in metro Atlanta.

Gospel Today, the Fayetteville-published magazine, was pulled off the racks by the bookstores’ owner, the Southern Baptist Convention. The problem? The five smiling women on the cover are women of the cloth — church pastors.

Southern Baptist polity says that’s a role reserved for men.
Teresa Hairston, owner of Gospel Today, whose glossy pages feature upbeat articles about health, living, music and ministry, said she discovered by e-mail that the September/October issue of the magazine had been demoted to the realm of the risque.

“It’s really kind of sad when you have people like [Gov.] Sarah Palin and [Sen.] Hillary Clinton providing encouragement and being role models for women around the world that we have such a divergent opinion about women who are able to be leaders in the church,” Hairston said. “I was pretty shocked.”

Chris Turner, a spokesman for Lifeway Resources, which runs the stores for the Southern Baptist Convention, said, “It is contrary to what we believe.”
It bases those beliefs on their interpretation of New Testament Scriptures.
Southern Baptist representatives at national meetings have adopted statements saying women should not be pastors, but each church is independent. A few churches have selected women, such as Decatur First Baptist, where the Rev. Julie Pennington-Russell preaches each Sunday from the pulpit.

Pastor Tamara Bennett of California is one of the featured pastors on the magazine cover and talks in the article about the challenges of breaking through the stained-glass ceiling.

“God’s assignment is that no souls are lost and all are saved,” Bennett said. “Gender is not how God sees it. We are about winning souls, period.”

Southern Baptists are not the only ones to frown on women preachers. Catholics, the largest Christian denomination in the nation, do not allow women priests. And some conservative evangelical groups, such as the Presbyterian Church in America, do not ordain women.

“We weren’t trying to pick a fight,” Hairston said. “We just did a story on an emerging trend in a lot of churches.”

John and Cindy McCain Own 13 Cars!

2008-09-21T18:15:00.005-04:00

There are trivial things that come out about presidential candidates during a campaign, especially in the closing weeks and days. And, while they might be dismissed as just that, trivial, they nevertheless do seem to get into the psyche of the electorate and create a narrative that can sometimes work against the candidate.

In 1988 Michael Dukakis came out of the Democratic Convention and headed into the fall campaign with something like a 16 point lead in the polls. He ended up being defeated soundly by George H. W. Bush largely because of a photo-op with Dukakis riding in a tank (I still shudder when I think of how ridiculous he looked in that video!) and the famous Willie Horton ad. Of course, Dukakis' response in the presidential debate to the question of whether he'd be in favor of the death penalty if someone raped and murdered his wife didn't help either.

In 2000 Vice-president Al Gore was ridiculed because of a comment he made that was interpreted (or mis-interpreted) to suggest that he invented the internet. Again, this one thing did not cost the election. But it helped to play into a narrative that the electorate formed about him that he sometimes played loosely with the truth.

In 2004 video footage of Senator John Kerry windsurfing somehow played into the narrative that he was elitist and out of touch with Mainstreet.

And so we come to the current presidential election. Already we have had the flap about the number of houses that John McCain owns and his inability to remember how many. And then there was the flap during the summer surrounding McCain's longtime friend and campaign financial advisor, former Senator Phil Graham, who made light of the economic storm clouds on the horizon by saying that we were a "nation of whiners" and that the economic problems were somehow a figment of our imaginations. Then came John McCain's famous line last week about the "fundamentals of our economy are sound." He made this statement on the very day that the financial sector was experiencing the greatest crisis since the Great Depression. Might this statement be looked at in the future as the moment when the campaign turned in the direction of Barack Obama?

Finally, today there is a story out about the number of cars each candidate owns. It seems that John and Cindy McCain own 13 cars and Barack and Michelle Obama own only a Ford Escape Hybrid. Here's the article: http://www.newsweek.com/id/160091/output/print

So here's the question. Is a narrative beginning to develop that John McCain is out of touch with Mainstreet and the average voter in the midst of this terrible economic crisis? If Obama wins the election will we look back on these things and say that this narrative (whether true or false) was what turned the election?

History's Mysteries

2008-09-19T23:09:00.002-04:00

The historian in me loves this kind of story!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/19/AR2008091902217.html?hpid=artslot

Ike helps uncover mystery vessel on Ala. coast

The Associated PressFriday, September 19, 2008; 9:15 PM
FORT MORGAN, Ala. -- When the waves from Hurricane Ike receded, they left behind a mystery _ a ragged shipwreck that archeologists say could be a two-masted Civil War schooner that ran aground in 1862 or another ship from some 70 years later. The wreck, about six miles from Fort Morgan, had already been partially uncovered when Hurricane Camille cleared away sand in 1969.

Researchers at the time identified it as the Monticello, a battleship that partially burned when it crashed trying to get past the U.S. Navy and into Mobile Bay during the Civil War.
After examining photos of the wreck post-Ike, Museum of Mobile marine archaeologist Shea McLean agreed it is likely the Monticello, which ran aground in 1862 after sailing from Havana, according to Navy records.

"Based on what we know of ships lost in that area and what I've seen, the Monticello is by far the most likely candidate," McLean said. "You can never be 100 percent certain unless you find the bell with 'Monticello' on it, but this definitely fits."
Other clues indicate it could be an early 20th century schooner that ran aground on the Alabama coast in 1933.

The wrecked ship is 136.9 feet long and 25 feet wide, according to Mike Bailey, site curator at Fort Morgan, who examined it this week. The Monticello was listed in shipping records as 136 feet long, McLean told the Press-Register of Mobile.
But Bailey said a 2000 report by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers determined the remains were the schooner Rachel, built at Moss Point, Miss., in 1919 and wrecked near Fort Morgan in 1933.

He said the wreckage appears to have components, such as steel cables, that would point to the Rachel rather than an 1860s schooner.
Glenn Forest, another archaeologist who examined the wreck, said a full identification would require an excavation.

"It's a valuable artifact," he said. "They need to get this thing inside before it falls apart or another storm comes along and sends it through those houses there like a bowling ball."
Meanwhile, curious beach-goers have been drawn to the remains of the wooden hull filled with rusted iron fittings. Fort Morgan was used by Confederate soldiers as Union forces attacked in 1864 during the Battle of Mobile Bay.

"It's interesting, I can tell you that," said Terri Williams. "I've lived down here most of my life and I've never seen anything like this, and it's been right here."

Interesting Comparisons

2008-09-17T20:41:00.002-04:00

A former student emailed me the following this morning. It is probably a bit of an exaggeration but is nevertheless still an interesting read.

I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight....

If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're 'exotic, different.'Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, a quintessential American story.

If your name is Barack, you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim. Name your kids Willow , Trig and Track, you're a maverick.

Graduate from Harvard Law School and you are unstable. Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.

If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience. If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.

If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian. If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife (WHILE SHE WAS FIGHTING BREAST CANCER) and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.

McCain's Campaign of Dishonor

2008-09-16T19:28:00.007-04:00

After his gaffe yesterday of saying that the "fundamentals of the economy are strong," today John McCain spent his efforts trying to convey two messages. (1) He tried to argue that the "fundamentals" he referred to was the American worker. What a stretch!

(2) He and all his surrogates spent the day talking about how Obama would raise taxes and that anyone knows that raising taxes in a bad economy can only make things worse. Obama claims, on the other hand, that he is actually going to cut taxes for the majority of Americans. The only people getting tax increases are the very wealthy. He further clarifies that he wants to simply take the tax code back to where it was during the Clinton presidency, when the economy was arguably the best in American history since WWII.

So, I did some investigation. Who is telling the truth? Here's what I discovered from the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html

What do you think?

Paul Krugman on the Lies of the McCain Campaign

2008-09-12T10:07:00.002-04:00

John McCain and Sarah Palin are not just distorting the truth with some of their claims. They are liars. Plain and simple.

Paul Krugman, columnist for the New York Times has a good column out today about this very topic. I enclose it below. The basic theme of the article is that the way a candidate runs a campaign is a good indication of how a candidate will run the White House. And so the conclusion is that if McCain/Palin are out and out lying right now about their records and Barak Obama's records, that is a very good indication that the lies and distortions of the last eight years will continue, perhaps even worse, in a McCain administration.

John McCain has changed. He has sold out completely to the darker forces in the Republican Party. Personally, when I read that Charlie Black was joining the McCain Campaign as an advisor, I realized that the Maverick image of the 2000 presidential election was going to be gone forever. Charlie Black is a lobbyist and is about as sleazy as they come. You can Google his name and find out more about him.

Here is Krugman's column. I think he's on to something.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/12/opinion/12krugman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin

Blizzard of Lies
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Did you hear about how Barack Obama wants to have sex education in kindergarten, and called Sarah Palin a pig? Did you hear about how Ms. Palin told Congress, “Thanks, but no thanks” when it wanted to buy Alaska a Bridge to Nowhere?
These stories have two things in common: they’re all claims recently made by the McCain campaign — and they’re all out-and-out lies.
Dishonesty is nothing new in politics. I spent much of 2000 — my first year at The Times — trying to alert readers to the blatant dishonesty of the Bush campaign’s claims about taxes, spending and Social Security.
But I can’t think of any precedent, at least in America, for the blizzard of lies since the Republican convention. The Bush campaign’s lies in 2000 were artful — you needed some grasp of arithmetic to realize that you were being conned. This year, however, the McCain campaign keeps making assertions that anyone with an Internet connection can disprove in a minute, and repeating these assertions over and over again.
Take the case of the Bridge to Nowhere, which supposedly gives Ms. Palin credentials as a reformer. Well, when campaigning for governor, Ms. Palin didn’t say “no thanks” — she was all for the bridge, even though it had already become a national scandal, insisting that she would “not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that’s so negative.”
Oh, and when she finally did decide to cancel the project, she didn’t righteously reject a handout from Washington: she accepted the handout, but spent it on something else. You see, long before she decided to cancel the bridge, Congress had told Alaska that it could keep the federal money originally earmarked for that project and use it elsewhere.
So the whole story of Ms. Palin’s alleged heroic stand against wasteful spending is fiction.
Or take the story of Mr. Obama’s alleged advocacy of kindergarten sex-ed. In reality, he supported legislation calling for “age and developmentally appropriate education”; in the case of young children, that would have meant guidance to help them avoid sexual predators.
And then there’s the claim that Mr. Obama’s use of the ordinary metaphor “putting lipstick on a pig” was a sexist smear, and on and on.
Why do the McCain people think they can get away with this stuff? Well, they’re probably counting on the common practice in the news media of being “balanced” at all costs. You know how it goes: If a politician says that black is white, the news report doesn’t say that he’s wrong, it reports that “some Democrats say” that he’s wrong. Or a grotesque lie from one side is paired with a trivial misstatement from the other, conveying the impression that both sides are equally dirty.
They’re probably also counting on the prevalence of horse-race reporting, so that instead of the story being “McCain campaign lies,” it becomes “Obama on defensive in face of attacks.”
Still, how upset should we be about the McCain campaign’s lies? I mean, politics ain’t beanbag, and all that.
One answer is that the muck being hurled by the McCain campaign is preventing a debate on real issues — on whether the country really wants, for example, to continue the economic policies of the last eight years.
But there’s another answer, which may be even more important: how a politician campaigns tells you a lot about how he or she would govern.
I’m not talking about the theory, often advanced as a defense of horse-race political reporting, that the skills needed to run a winning campaign are the same as those needed to run the country. The contrast between the Bush political team’s ruthless effectiveness and the heckuva job done by the Bush administration is living, breathing, bumbling, and, in the case of the emerging Interior Department scandal, coke-snorting and bed-hopping proof to the contrary.
I’m talking, instead, about the relationship between the character of a campaign and that of the administration that follows. Thus, the deceptive and dishonest 2000 Bush-Cheney campaign provided an all-too-revealing preview of things to come. In fact, my early suspicion that we were being misled about the threat from Iraq came from the way the political tactics being used to sell the war resembled the tactics that had earlier been used to sell the Bush tax cuts.
And now the team that hopes to form the next administration is running a campaign that makes Bush-Cheney 2000 look like something out of a civics class. What does that say about how that team would run the country?
What it says, I’d argue, is that the Obama campaign is wrong to suggest that a McCain-Palin administration would just be a continuation of Bush-Cheney. If the way John McCain and Sarah Palin are campaigning is any indication, it would be much, much worse.

Remembering Charles Howard

2008-09-10T12:53:00.003-04:00

When I joined the faculty of the Religion Department at Campbell University in 1994, I believe that it was the late Dr. Don Keyser who first mentioned the name “Charles Howard” to me. I had not known Charles Howard and only vaguely recalled hearing his name before I arrived at Campbell. Dr. Keyser was the first occupant of the “Charles Howard Chair of Religion.” It didn’t take very many conversations with Dr. Keyser before I realized how much love, respect, and admiration he had for his former teacher.

In 2001, several years after Dr. Keyser’s retirement, the university bestowed upon me the honor of being the second “Charles Howard Professor of Religion.” Always, in the back of my mind, there has been an interest, a research interest, in knowing more about this man that many of you knew personally. But, there were other research projects, other articles to write, classes to teach, and sermons to prepare. So, my interest in Charles Howard was placed on the “back burner” as a project I’d tackle someday.

When Dr. Keyser passed away two years ago, my interest in Charles Howard began to rekindle. My larger concern was for our Religion majors, that they have some awareness of the great tradition of which they are a part. A very large part of that tradition is the name Charles Barrett Howard. In short, Howard is a legend among Baptists in the South and I wanted Religion majors to have an awareness of him.

Charles Howard was born in Salemburg, North Carolina on December 2, 1900. Both of his parents, two brothers, and one sister died of tuberculosis when Howard was a small child. Although stricken by tuberculosis himself, he survived and was raised by his maternal grandparents. When he was seventeen, he attended North Carolina State University for one year. In 1918 he became a Christian, and very shortly thereafter, influenced by his grandfather’s prayers, he accepted a call to preach. Salemburg Baptist Church licensed him to the ministry and the next day, June 10, 1918, he preached his very first sermon. With further education at Wake Forest College Charles Howard embarked on a career behind the pulpit that would last for 70 years.

I refer to him as a “legend” because his influence can be seen in three areas. First, he was a preacher. He served as pastor of 26 different congregations in North Carolina but he had an understanding with his churches that when an opportunity to preach a revival presented itself, he had to take it. Consequently, he led 1,263 revivals in 700 different churches over his career. He preached more than 20,000 sermons in 23 different states. He preached revivals in five different churches whose pastors had been president of the Southern Baptist Convention. Furthermore, he preached at state-wide evangelistic conferences, state conventions, Southern Baptist Convention meetings. He preached at associational events, BYPU events, and Baptist Training Union events. He preached 87 times on college and university campuses. For seven decades, the name “Charles Howard” was a household name among Baptists in the South. On a personal note, I can’t tell you the number of times when I have preached in a church here in North Carolina and introduced as the “Charles Howard Professor of Religion,” only to have one or two people come up to me at the conclusion of the service with a Charles Howard story.

Second, Charles Howard needs to be remembered as the first Religion professor at Campbell University. In 1934 he became the pastor of the Buies Creek First Baptist Church, succeeding J.A. Campbell, the founder of our university. A few years later he began teaching Bible at Campbell. This became a full-time position in 1946. In 1959 he became “Professor Emeritus” and entered evangelism fulltime, but did not end his service to the university. He remained active in the life of Campbell College for the rest of his life. When he retired from evangelism in 1973, Campbell once again recruited Howard into service as “Director of Denominational Emphasis,” a position he held until his death in 1988.

Charles Howard was a thorough professor. I have a file that contains some of his tests from his Bible class. Here are some questions from one of his final exams in May, 1958:

*“List the six most prominent characters in the Life of Jesus”
*“List the six most prominent characters in the Book of Acts, putting parentheses after each name and the number of the chapter in which it appears.”
*“List the six most prominent characters in the Life of Paul, putting parentheses after each name and an identifying phrase.”
*“List in chronological order the six persons and groups most largely responsible for the persecution of the early Christian Church.”
*“On the third blank sheet (of paper included) define, at top of sheet, “Pre-Existence,” “Logos,” “Incarnation,” and write a paragraph on the birth of Jesus.”

These are just five of sixteen questions on this final exam suggesting that he was demanding as a professor and that his students knew the Bible when they completed his class.

But that is only part of the story about Howard’s influence as a professor. The other part, the intangible is the tremendous love and respect he received from his students, a reciprocation of the love that he had for his students. I was working with the Charles Howard Papers in the N. C. Baptist Archives at Wake Forest University several weeks ago and found a folder of correspondence between Charles Howard and our late President, Dr. Norman Adrian Wiggins. Dr. Wiggins had Charles Howard as a professor in 1942. His love and admiration for Howard was obvious in the correspondence. At the bottom of one letter, as Dr. Wiggins was prone to do, he scribbled a personal note: “You and Miss Alma mean more to Millie and me than you could possibly know. We will continue to pray for God’s blessings upon you.” Don Keyser once wrote, “I never felt closer to God than when Charles Howard prayed.” Clearly, Charles Howard had that unique ability that all of us who teach college students desire: the ability to challenge both the heart and the mind and gain the love and respect of the student at the same time.

A third reason that we should remember Charles Howard concerns his work as a philanthropist. Although he and Mrs. Howard never earned a salary of more than $3000 per year together they were able to establish and manage a fund called the Howard Memorial Christian Education Fund, named after his parents Betty Cooper and Henry Bizzle Howard, which provided aid to students, faculty, churches, and other Christians who found themselves to be in need. The fund began in 1926 with a $25 gift from Charles Howard to a student who didn’t quite have enough money to enroll at Wake Forest College. Perhaps the most famous loan was in 1928 to J. Winston Pearce. Howard had finally saved up $132 to buy his fiancé, Alma Dark, an engagement ring. He received a letter from Pearce who was working three part-time jobs but didn’t have enough money to stay at Campbell. He needed a loan of $130. Howard decided to loan the money and forgo the ring.

Such were the meager beginnings of the Fund. To date the fund has distributed more than $4,000,000 in the form of loans, scholarships, and gifts to more than 4,000 students and other Christian workers such as missionaries, pastors, and employees of Christian institutions. The Fund endowed two chairs at Campbell University, the Howard Chair of Religion and the Alma Dark Howard Chair of Church Music. There are also a number of endowed scholarships which bear the name “Howard.” The Fund provided low interest loans to churches for buildings, faculty and staff for mortgages, and to faculty to pursue further education. It supported prison ministries, handicapped ministry, counseling services and the daycare center at Memorial Baptist Church in Buies Creek.

Charles Howard died twenty years ago this past February 27th. It is appropriate that his name should be remembered, not only among the Campbell University community but also among all North Carolina Baptists. Back in March, at our annual Department of Religion Lecture Series, we dedicated a portrait of Charles Howard which now hangs in the outer office of the Department of Religion here at Campbell. It is a fitting tribute to a man whose life was so closely tied to Campbell University for more than 50 years. In 1968, Memorial Baptist Church in Buies Creek, Howard’s home church, held a special 50th anniversary celebration of Howard’s ministry. In his sermon, Howard summarized his ministerial philosophy in words still relevant today:
When broad knowledge meets holy fire in the heart of a preacher one of God’s great miracles happens in our world. Knowledge without spiritual fire may make a mere pulpit technician. Spiritual fervor without knowledge may make a fanatic. The marriage of the two may make a prophet of God.

(A version of this article is currently on the website of the Biblical Recorder.
See:http://biblicalrecorder.org/post/2008/09/09/Remembering-Baptist-giant-Charles-Howard.aspx)

Of All Places to Make Such an Error

2008-09-03T08:21:00.004-04:00

If you don't live in North Carolina you are probably still aware of the intense rivalry in sports between the University of North Carolina Tar Heels and the Duke University Blue Devils. Both schools are superb academic institutions with outstanding sports programs. Many of their teams are ranked nationally in a variety of sports.

Last Saturday, the Tar Heels hired a skydiving team, from a Virginia company called "Ariel Adventures." (The irony of the name makes the story even better!). The skydivers were supposed to parachute into Keenan Stadium on the UNC campus with the game ball for the season opener against McNeese State. Unfortunately, due to cloudy conditions, the pilot of the plane got the wrong location for the stadium. Eight miles away, in Wallace Wade Stadium on the Duke campus, the Blue Devils were in their pre-game warmups for their season opener against James Madison University. Suddenly, out of the sky dropped two skydivers with a game ball who landed perfectly on the field. Unfortunately, they had the wrong stadium. The stunned crowd and shocked players must have wondered if they were under attack. The embarrassed skydivers hurried off the field. No one was hurt. As the News and Observer reported, "The men didn't hit any players on the field. They just hit the wrong field." (http://www.newsobserver.com/1565/story/1201661.html)

What an incredible mistake!

P.S. Last Saturday, Campbell University played its first football game in 58 years before a crowd of more than 5800 fans. Just before the game the elite U.S. Army Golden Knights parachuted into our stadium with the game ball. I'm sure glad they didn't end up at Gardner-Webb!

God's Will According to Sarah Palin

2008-09-02T20:48:00.005-04:00

The Republicans have been on defense this week over all the stories that are coming out of Alaska about Sarah Palin. I'm not even going to mention the issue with her 17 year-old daughter because I truly believe that is a family matter that should be left alone. However, there are other matters such as the "troopergate" story (she's currently under investigation from the Alaska state legislature for misuse of her power as governor), her ties to indicted Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, her flip-flop on the "bridge to nowhere," her membership in the radical fringe group the Alaska Independence Party, and her utter lack of qualifications to be a "heartbeat away from the presidency," etc. There are even stories now out about her time as mayor before she became governor.

All that aside, one of the most troubling revelations came late this afternoon. It surfaced in a video of her giving a speech to the graduating students at her former church, the Wasilla Assembly of God. You can hear the speech in its entirety here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/02/palins-church-may-have-sh_n_123205.html

The most troubling thing in the video, is the comment she maked about half-way into the speech:

"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure we're praying for. That there is a plan and that it is God's plan."

I have serious reservations about someone who has such a twisted theological understanding about the war in Iraq. To say the war was necessary (President Bush's argument) is one thing. To say it is a "task from God" is something that is really, really scary! Wonder if she has ever heard of Jesus' words: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the children of God."

God and Rain

2008-08-31T17:46:00.002-04:00

You may have heard of this already. It is Stuart Shepherd of Focus on the Family. Although he is joking here in asking followers to pray for rain to drench the Democrats in Invesco Field last Thursday, I think the comments look even more ironic (or moronic) in light of Hurricane Gustav's path toward New Orleans.

I do request that you pray for the people on the Gulf Coast. I have family in New Orleans. Another Katrina would be a disaster that may destroy the city forever.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohxdvio9n2Q

John McCain's VP

2008-08-30T21:05:00.006-04:00

The whole political world was shocked yesterday by John McCain's pick of Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, as his vice-presidential running mate. Many journalists are touting this as a "hail Mary," indicating that it is a sign that the McCain campaign is getting a bit desperate and felt like they needed to shake things up a bit. Certainly, it does give his campaign a certain buzz as they head into their convention next week in Minneapolis.

The next week should tell us a lot about how well Palin's pick is going to play. I suspect that Hurricane Gustav is going to steal a good bit of the Republican thunder next week, even if they delay their convention for a few days. Palin's pick will probably get lost in the shuffle.

For whatever it is worth, here are a few of my observations about Palin. (1) Democrats better not become complacent and celebrate too early about her lack of experience. Remember, George H.W. Bush won with Dan Quayle, who has got to go down as one of the worst VP picks ever. And, remember that in 1988 Dukakis came out of the Democratic Convention with a double-digit lead. The Democrats have a lot of energy right now but they need to continue to push back against the McCain onslaught.

(2) As the journalists begin digging into her background in Alaska, already they are finding some interesting things. See this article for some information about what the two leading newspapers in Alaska have to say about Palin:

www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-mitchell/2-top-alaska-newspapers-q_b_122625.html

She is currently involved in a political scandal and under investigation by the Alaska state legislature for misuse of her office. Evidently, she tried to have her brother-in-law fired from the state police. He and her sister are going through a bitter divorce right now. Palin is being investigated for firing the director of the state police for his refusal to fire Palin's brother-in-law. This scandal will probably dog her throughout the fall election season. Also, according to the article above, her popularity in Alaska is falling rapidly in the midst of the scandal.

(3) Her nomination is being touted as an attempt to win over disaffected Hillary voters. I suppose this is the most sleazy thing about the whole choice by McCain to go with Palin. It is almost as if the McCain campaign said to itself, "Let's find a woman for the ticket. Hillary's voters want to vote for a woman and they will flock to her." Do they not realize that women think for themselves? Do they honestly view women as being so stupid as to not be able to recognize that the only thing that Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin have in common is their gender? They agree on none of the issues of this election. Hillary is a moderate-to-progressive Democratic icon. Palin is a newcomer to the political scene that is the darling of the far right of the Republican Party. She is an NRA member, opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest, and believes that "creationism" should be taught in the public schools. I suspect that Hillary will campaign even harder for Obama because of this pick.

(4) The pick of Sarah Palin takes away McCain's most effective argument against Obama, namely, the claim that he is not ready and experienced enough to be president. Palin, with less than two years as governor of a state that has the population of the city of Fort Worth, Texas and before that the mayor of a town in Alaska with less than 10,000 people is woefully unprepared to occupy the oval office in the event of an emergency.

(5) Finally, if the McCain camp wanted to select a woman for the ticket (which I do applaud), is this the very best qualified female in the Republican Party for a 72 year-old presidential candidate who has battled melanoma twice? What about Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas? What about Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina? How about Condie Rice? Perhaps if he wanted to go after moderates and independents, he could have selected Christie Todd Whitman of New Jersey. All of these women are light years ahead of Palin in experience.

It is said that the most important decision that a presidential candidate makes is his/her choice of a running mate. From that choice the voting public can get a good glimpse of the candidate's judgment on important decisions. You decide for yourself. Which candidate, Obama or McCain, made the best running mate decision? This was a bold move. It certainly shook up the race. How effective it will be remains to be seen

The Beanstalk Library

2008-08-10T20:20:00.003-04:00

I just returned this afternoon from a weekend retreat with my faculty colleagues at the North Carolina Baptist Assembly at Fort Caswell. It was a wonderful weekend. We got a tremendous amount of work done in two very productive meetings Friday night and Saturday morning. We brought our families with us down there which made the time Saturday afternoon and evening especially great. We closed out the weekend with a short devotional time on the beach this morning.

On the way home, I plugged in my iPod and listened to an album by a group called "The Beanstalk Library." The leader of the group is a young man named Ryan Walker. He is the son of a good friend of mine, Brent Walker, the executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty in Washington, D.C.

I want to recommend the "The Beanstalk Library" to you. Their first album (the one I listened to) is called "America at Night." One song in particular that I really like on the album is "Fog Over My Mind." The Beanstalk Library has good variation with their music blending the best sounds of pop, rock and country in their music. The lyrics to their songs also engage your mind, a trait I always look for in good music. The best songs for me leaving me asking "What do they mean to say with this song?"

Give them a listen. You can find "America at Night" on iTunes or in your local music store. You can check out the band's website here: http://thebeanstalklibrary.net/index2.htm

The Picture Says It All!

2008-08-07T20:20:00.003-04:00

Is McCain truly the "maverick?" Or has he joined himself at the hip with George Bush in order to retain the right wing base of the Republican Party?

I don't know the event from which this picture was taken. But, it sure is telling!

The Way

2008-08-04T12:51:00.002-04:00

I found this on a blog written by Gordon Atkinson called:

http://www.reallivepreacher.com/node/293

I was so touched by it, I thought it worth sharing. Take a moment to relax and read.

The Way of Things

The way governments and businesses treat people. The way people unload their anger on the innocent. The way slick talkers get ahead and the way good people lose in the end.

The way those who believe in God can be so angry. The way people use religion to leverage power. The way spiritual things dry up and become hard and ruined. The way our best intentions still bring pain.

The way bad people take pleasure in the suffering of others. The way good people run out of energy and are consumed by apathy. The way we lose hope because everything is so big. The way innocence leaves the young and cynicism seizes the elderly.

The way the earth bleeds when you cut it. The way mothers protect their children and the way fathers respect that power. The way weeds hold the land when nothing else can. The way tender seedlings shatter concrete and water wears away stone.

The way you can follow beauty to the molecular level and still not find its source. The way all things young are tender and beloved. The way an artist pulls on your heartstrings and the way saints can make you believe again. The way the human face conveys a thousand nuanced emotions.

The way a clean baby smells and the way her feet feel. The way we laugh at everything, even the sad things. The way women cry so easily. The way men try to be strong then burst into tears. The way children trust everyone until we teach them not to.

The way everything big and small, everything physical and emotional, everything that really matters is always falling toward a center of gravity.

And the way that terrible falling to the center tickles your stomach and makes you grieve but also laugh and be so glad that you were a part of it all.

I'm No Fan of Toby Keith

2008-07-29T14:14:00.008-04:00

Evidently, the country music singer Toby Keith made a recent appearance on the Stephen Colbert Show last night. Admittedly, I have not watched Stephen Colbert, not for any other reason than I just don't have the time to watch the show regularly.

Keith performed a song last night called, "Beer for My Horses." This blog discusses the appearance and a little bit about the song.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/toby-keiths-pro-lynching_b_115526.html

Here are the lyrics:

Well a man come on the 6 o'clock news

said somebody's been shot

somebody's been abused

somebody blew up a building

somebody stole a car

somebody got away

somebody didn't get to far

yeah they didn't get to far

Grand pappy told my pappy back in my day, son

A man had to answer for the wicked that he'd done

Take all the rope in Texas

Find a tall oak tree, round up all of them bad boys

Hang them high in the street

For all the people to see

That Justice is the one thing you should always find

You got to saddle up your boys

You got to draw a hard line

When the gun smoke settles we'll sing a victory tune

And we'll all meet back at the local saloon

And we'll raise up our glasses against evil forces singing

whiskey for my man,

beer for my horses

We got too many gangsters doing dirty deeds

too much corruption and crime in the streets

It's time the long arm of the law put a few more in the ground

Send 'em all to their maker and he'll settle 'em down

You can bet he'll set 'em down

Cause Justice is the one thing you should always find

You got to saddle up your boys

You got to draw a hard line

When the gun smoke settles we'll sing a victory tune

And we'll all meet back at the local saloon

And we'll raise up our glasses against evil forces singing

whiskey for my man,

beer for my horses

whiskey for my men,

beer for my horses

He knew

Justice is the one thing you should always find

You got to saddle up your boys,

You got to draw a hard line

When the gun smoke settles we'll sing a victory tune

And we'll all meet back at the local saloon

And we'll raise up our glasses against evil forces

Singin' whiskey for my man,

beer for my horses

Singing whiskey for my man,

beer for my horses.

Here's the irony. The song claims to be about justice. "Justice is the one thing you should always find." And, it claims, "It's time the long arm of the law put a few more in the ground." But, in reality those who lynched in the old South were the true "outlaws." And, lynching a man, who under our justice system is deemed to be "innocent until proven guilty," deprives him of justice. Lynching therefore is an act of injustice rather than justice.

Toby Keith will probably make lots of money on this song because it taps into some of the deepest fears of white America and I suspect that many of his fans will love this song. But, this song is about lynching. And lynching was one of the darkest sins of the Old South. Rather than glorify the practice in a song, Toby, you ought to be repentant for the acts of your "Grandpappy" and be willing to admit the sin.

Pray for Cecil Sherman

2008-07-29T10:02:00.002-04:00

Bloggers Mike Ruffin and the Big Daddy Weave have this post this morning:

From Daniel Vestal:

"We received word today that Dr. Cecil Sherman, founding coordinator of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, has been diagnosed with acute leukemia. He is in M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, for tests and possible treatment options. His wife, Dot, continues to be in failing health in Richmond. Please join me in prayer for Cecil and Dot as well as their daughter Eugenia Brown during this difficult time."

For a short time in 1985 Cecil Sherman was my pastor at Broadway Baptist Church in Fort Worth before I moved to Waco. He's been one of my Baptist heroes for a long time. He just recently published his autobiography with Smyth and Helwys Press called By My Own Reckoning." Please keep him and his family in your prayers.

The Ghost of Tom Joad

2008-07-25T22:40:00.004-04:00

If you know me, you know it doesn't take long in a conversation with me before the topic moves to my music hero Bruce Springsteen. In 1995 he released an acoustic album called The Ghost of Tom Joad. It has some really good music on it and its theme of social justice and making the American Dream a reality for all citizens is powerful and is particularly appropriate for our current time, especially with the economy in the tank.

To be honest with you though, I have always liked the "rocker" Springsteen's music better than the "folk singer" Springsteen. So, I bought The Ghost of Tom Joad, listened to it some, but really don't listen to it as much as some of the other albums he has released.

Well, in the midst of the Magic tour, which Springsteen is currently about to wrap up with the E-Street Band, he has released another CD called Magic Tour Highlights. It contains four songs from the tour recorded live with the accompanying video of each song as well.

Particularly moving is the band's performance of "Fourth of July Asbury Park (Sandy)" with his old friend Danny Federici on the accordion. This was Danny's last appearance with the band. He died just a few months later at the age of 58 (much too young) from Melanoma. He and Springsteen had been friends and played music together for 40 years. Here's a link to Springsteen's eulogy of his old friend at the funeral:

http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2008/04/25/bruce-springsteen-pens-touching-eulogy-to-danny-federici/

All of the proceeds from this CD go to the "Dan Federici Melanoma Fund" for research into this terrible type of cancer.

My favorite song on the new CD, however, is a performance in Anaheim, CA, where Springsteen brought out Tom Morello (from the group "Rage Against the Machine"). They both played a full band version of "The Ghost of Tom Joad." It is a powerful performance.

Here's the link to the Youtube version of the performance:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Sp-oDAxx8So

Here are the lyrics to the song. It is based on the character "Tom Joad" from John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath.

Men walkin' 'long the railroad tracks

Goin' someplace there's no goin' back

Highway patrol choppers comin' up over the ridge

Hot soup on a campfire under the bridge

Shelter line stretchin' 'round the corner

Welcome to the new world order

Families sleepin' in their cars in the Southwest

No home no job no peace no rest

The highway is alive tonight

But nobody's kiddin' nobody about where it goes

I'm sittin' down here in the campfire light

Searchin' for the ghost of Tom Joad

He pulls a prayer book out of his sleeping bag

Preacher lights up a butt and takes a drag

Waitin' for when the last shall be first and the first shall be last

In a cardboard box 'neath the underpass

Got a one-way ticket to the promised land

You got a hole in your belly and gun in your hand

Sleeping on a pillow of solid rock

Bathin' in the city aqueduct

The highway is alive tonight

Where it's headed everybody knows

I'm sittin' down here in the campfire light

Waitin' on the ghost of Tom Joad

Now Tom said "Mom, wherever there's a cop beatin' a guy

Wherever a hungry newborn baby cries

Where there's a fight 'gainst the blood and hatred in the air

Look for me Mom I'll be there

Wherever there's somebody fightin' for a place to stand

Or decent job or a helpin' hand

Wherever somebody's strugglin' to be free

Look in their eyes Mom you'll see me."

Well the highway is alive tonight

But nobody's kiddin' nobody about where it goes

I'm sittin' down here in the campfire light

With the ghost of old Tom Joad

Give the song a listen. If you like it go to iTunes and get the CD. It is only $7.99 and it is for a good cause.

May it Ever Be So

2008-07-24T10:08:00.005-04:00

The Baptist World Alliance, meeting this week in Prague, is about to discuss a letter sent from 138 Muslim leaders to 32 Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant Christian leaders. The letter is titled, "A Common Word Between Us and You." It is a 29 page letter so there is no room for the entire text here. However, there is a web site where you can read the letter. The link is here:

http://www.acommonword.com/index.php?lang=en&page=option1

Robert Parham, of the Baptist Center for Ethics, has a story about the letter and its discussion at the Baptist World Alliance meeting this week. The link for Parham's story is here:

http://ethicsdaily.com/article_detail.cfm?AID=10788

Some of the key quotes from the letter are as follows:

"Finding common ground between Muslims and Christians is not simply a matter for polite ecumenical dialogue between selected religious leaders. Christianity and Islam are the largest and second largest religions in the world and in history. Christians and Muslims reportedly make up over a third and over a fifth of humanity respectively. Together they make up more than 55 percent of the world's population, making the relationship between these two religious communities the most important factor in contributing to meaningful peace around the world."

It goes on to say, "Love of the neighbor is an essential and integral part of faith in God and love of God because in Islam without love of the neighbor there is no true faith in God and no righteousness," the letter says. "Without giving the neighbor what we ourselves love, we do not truly love God or the neighbor."

Read the letter for yourself. I think this is very, very good. It is one of the most positive developments for world peace that I have seen in a long time. Many of you who have had my classes have heard me say before that if Christians, Jews, and Muslims could just come together and recognize that we have so much in common it would go a long way toward bringing peace in the world.

There will be Fundamentalist Muslims who condemn this. There will be Fundamentalist Christians who condemn this. Fundamentalism, whether Christian or Muslim, never wants cooperation. Fundamentalism only seeks domination. So, I don't expect a groundswell of support from the right wing fringe in either religion.

But, for the rest of us who seek to be more mainstream in our faith and really care about promoting peace in this world in which we live, this is a very good development. The fact that it was initiated by Muslims is also very positive. It is another example that the stereotype that many Christians have of Islam as being a violent, oppressive religion is wrong. The majority of Muslims want to live with Christians in the same way that the majority of Christians want to live in peace with Muslims. This is not calling for Christians to convert to Islam. Neither is it a call for Muslims to convert to Christianity. It is a call to stand together on the common ground that we share.

A quick story from my own experience. I had a student a few years ago who was Muslim. He was a brilliant student intellectually. He wore the traditional dress of his native country and very devoutly prayed five times per day as required by his religion. But, here at a Baptist college, he was treated harshly by some of our more conservative students who thought it was their job to convert him. They went beyond a simple Christian witness to harrassment of him in their zeal for his conversion. One day he came to me and said, "why do they hate me so much? I'm only living my faith. I respect them for their faith. Why can't they respect me?" I tried to assure him that not all Christians are like them. In the same way I now try to tell students that not all Muslims are like the 9/11 attackers.

There is a lot of common ground between Muslims and Christians. Let's celebrate what we have in common rather than fight over our differences. Jesus said, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the children of God." May God give us the grace and strength to be peacemakers in this violent world!

Is McCain Mentally Fit for the Oval Office?

2008-07-23T21:54:00.003-04:00

If it were just a misstatement or two, there would probably not be an issue here. But Republican presidential nominee John McCain, the supposed "expert" on foreign policy, has made a series of serious verbal blunders. On Good Morning America a few days ago he referred to the "Iraq-Pakistan border." There obviously is none so he must have meant the "Afghanistan-Pakistan border." On two different occasions last week he referred to Czechoslovakia, a country that has not existed since 1993. Several months ago, he got Sunnis and Shiites mixed up. On one occasion he identified Vladimir Putin as president of Germany. And, just last night in an interview with Katie Couric and CBS News, McCain mixed up the timeline related to the surge in Iraq, stating that the Sunni uprising in Anbar province was the result of the surge of American troops. Actually the Sunni uprising came before the addional troops even arrived in Iraq and most of them were sent to Bagdad not the Anbar province.

A few questions come to mind here. (1) Are these simple mistakes that anyone could make who is keeping the grueling schedule that a presidential candidate keeps? Perhaps so. But, could these mistakes also be a sign that senility is an issue with John McCain? We now know that Ronald Reagan was suffering from the early effects of Alzheimer's Disease during his last years as president. Is age an issue that voters should be concerned about?

(2) John McCain has staked his presidential aspirations on the argument that he is better suited for the presidency, indeed more knowledgeable in the area of foreign policy and therefore has what it takes to keep America safe from terrorists. Do these gaffes call that assumption into question? Perhaps not yet. However, the longer they continue, the more attention they will generate by the media.

(3) And speaking of the "media," the McCain campaign is complaining that the media is paying more attention to Obama than their candidate. Yet, these gaffes from McCain are not really getting very much attention in the media except on MSNBC and some liberal blogs. So, is there a double-standard here. The media is parsing every word Barack Obama says, particularly while he is overseas. But, it seems like McCain is getting away with these serious verbal blunders. So, who is truly the "media darling?"

A Stupid Move by a Church

2008-07-16T16:56:00.004-04:00

This story is about a church that was planning to give away an AR-15 assault rifle at a church event. It was actually a giveaway planned for the purpose of drawing people to a church youth event. The church is Windsor Hills Baptist Church in Oklahoma City. The story if below.

I don't think I need to comment much here. Any sane, rational person would have the same reaction I did when I read the story. This is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen a church do. For goodness sake, what does giving away an assault rifle have to do with the life of Christ or our lives as disciples of Jesus?

OKLAHOMA CITY, OKla. - After one of its organizers suffered an injury, a church was forced to cancel a gun giveaway at a weekend youth event.
The Windsor Hills Baptist Church planned the giveaway as a way to draw new participants to the church's annual youth conference.
The gun in question: an AR-15 semi-automatic assault rifle.
Windsor Hills cancelled the giveaway Friday evening after announcing that Pastor Emeritus Jim Vineyard, who was running the event, had suffered a foot injury and would be unable to attend.
A video posted on the church's Web site contains a shooting competition from the 2007 conference, which also included a gun giveaway.
Church leaders defended the decision to hold the event.
"I don't want people thinking. 'My goodness, we're putting a weapon in the hand of somebody that doesn't respect it who are then going to go out and kill,'" said Bob Ross, the youth pastor at Windsor Hills. "That's not at all what we're trying to do."
Past attendees also defended the conference, stating the focus is on helping teens find faith, and not on firearms.
"You make a lot of new friends down here. You get to meet new people," said Vikki Goncharenko, who attended the conference. "There's a bunch of things going on."
Ross said the gun, which had already been purchased for the event, will be given away at next year's conference.
(Copyright KUSA*TV, All Rights Reserved)

http://www.9news.com/news/watercooler/article.aspx?storyid=95647&catid=337

This Doesn't Happen Much

2008-07-16T10:17:00.004-04:00

Yesterday, something really interesting happened on the floor of the North Carolina House of Representatives. Rep. Joe Boylan, a former legislator from Moore County asked permission to speak. Moore has recently been the target of some pretty serious allegations. He was arrested on April 12 for drunken driving. He was also accused last year of making drunken advances toward Rep. Tricia Cotham, a Mecklenburg County Democrat.

Boylan lost his bid for re-election to the House this spring when he was defeated in the primary by another Republican challenger. That's what make his appearance on the floor of the House by his own request so interesting. What would he say?

Well, here's what he said. He admitted that he had a problem with alcohol. "My behavior over the past year has hurt a few of you, disappointed many of you and has reflected poorly on this House. For that I am truly and deeply sorry." He went on to say that "with the grace of God and support of his family and friends he would do everything he could to end the day without drinking." Finally, he ended his speech with the classic, "My name is Joe. I am an alcoholic, and I ask for your forgiveness and your prayers."

In a society today where people (and sometimes especially politicians) look for excuses for their bad behavior and rarely admit to any wrong-doing, it is particularly refreshing to see someone do the right thing and own up to their problems.

God bless you Rep. Boylan. You have my prayers. I hope with God's grace and the support of your family, you are able to overcome your problems.

For the fuller story see the account in today's Raleigh News and Observer (http://projects.newsobserver.com/tags/tricia_cotham)

McCain's the Real Flip-Flopper

2008-07-11T15:39:00.003-04:00

The McCain Campaign is doing all it can to portray Barack Obama as a "flip-flopper," taking a page from the playbook of the 2004 campaign against John Kerry ("“I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it”). They stumbled across this tactic a few days ago when Obama made a statement that after he visits Iraq later in the Summer he might "revise" his Iraq timetable.

Truth is, I hope the McCain Campaign uses this tactic. Because an argument could be made that he's the king of the flip-floppers. One writer has produced a whopping 61 policy reversals. Here they are:

This comes from a blog titled: http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/16124.html#more-16124

"Jukebox John changes his tune every few minutes"

National Security Policy

1. McCain thought Bush’s warrantless-wiretap program circumvented the law; now he believes the opposite.
2. McCain insisted that everyone, even “terrible killers,” “the worst kind of scum of humanity,” and detainees at Guantanamo Bay, “deserve to have some adjudication of their cases,” even if that means “releasing some of them.” McCain now believes the opposite.
3. He opposed indefinite detention of terrorist suspects. When the Supreme Court reached the same conclusion, he called it “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.”
4. In February 2008, McCain reversed course on prohibiting waterboarding.
5. McCain was for closing the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay before he was against it.
6. When Barack Obama talked about going after terrorists in Pakistani mountains with predators, McCain criticized him for it. He’s since come to the opposite conclusion.

Foreign Policy

7. McCain was for kicking Russia out of the G8 before he was against it.
8. McCain supported moving “towards normalization of relations” with Cuba. Now he believes the opposite.
9. McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Hamas. Now he believes the opposite.
10. McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Syria. Now he believes the opposite.
11. McCain is both for and against a “rogue state rollback” as a focus of his foreign policy vision.
12. McCain used to champion the Law of the Sea convention, even volunteering to testify on the treaty’s behalf before a Senate committee. Now he opposes it.
13. McCain was against divestment from South Africa before he was for it.

Military Policy

14. McCain recently claimed that he was the “greatest critic” of Rumsfeld’s failed Iraq policy. In December 2003, McCain praised the same strategy as “a mission accomplished.” In March 2004, he said, “I’m confident we’re on the right course.” In December 2005, he said, “Overall, I think a year from now, we will have made a fair amount of progress if we stay the course.”
15. McCain has changed his mind about a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq on multiple occasions, concluding, on multiple occasions, that a Korea-like presence is both a good and a bad idea.
16. McCain said before the war in Iraq, “We will win this conflict. We will win it easily.” Four years later, McCain said he knew all along that the war in Iraq war was “probably going to be long and hard and tough.”
17. McCain has repeatedly said it’s a dangerous mistake to tell the “enemy” when U.S. troops would be out of Iraq. In May, McCain announced that most American troops would be home from Iraq by 2013.
18. McCain was against expanding the GI Bill before he was for it.

Domestic Policy

19. McCain defended “privatizing” Social Security. Now he says he’s against privatization (though he actually still supports it.)
20. McCain wanted to change the Republican Party platform to protect abortion rights in cases of rape and incest. Now he doesn’t.
21. McCain supported storing spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Now he believes the opposite.
22. He argued the NRA should not have a role in the Republican Party’s policy making. Now he believes the opposite.
23. In 1998, he championed raising cigarette taxes to fund programs to cut underage smoking, insisting that it would prevent illnesses and provide resources for public health programs. Now, McCain opposes a $0.61-per-pack tax increase, won’t commit to supporting a regulation bill he’s co-sponsoring, and has hired Philip Morris’ former lobbyist as his senior campaign adviser.
24. McCain is both for and against earmarks for Arizona.
25. McCain’s first mortgage plan was premised on the notion that homeowners facing foreclosure shouldn’t be “rewarded” for acting “irresponsibly.” His second mortgage plan took largely the opposite position.
26. McCain went from saying gay marriage should be allowed, to saying gay marriage shouldn’t be allowed.
27. McCain opposed a holiday to honor Martin Luther King, Jr., before he supported it.
28. McCain was anti-ethanol. Now he’s pro-ethanol.
29. McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.
30. In 2005, McCain endorsed intelligent design creationism, a year later he said the opposite, and a few months after that, he was both for and against creationism at the same time.

Economic Policy

31. McCain was against Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy before he was for them.
32. John McCain initially argued that economics is not an area of expertise for him, saying, “I’m going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues; I still need to be educated,” and “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should.” He now falsely denies ever having made these remarks and insists that he has a “very strong” understanding of economics.
33. McCain vowed, if elected, to balance the federal budget by the end of his first term. Soon after, he decided he would no longer even try to reach that goal. And soon after that, McCain abandoned his second position and went back to his first.
34. McCain said in 2005 that he opposed the tax cuts because they were “too tilted to the wealthy.” By 2007, he denied ever having said this, and falsely argued that he opposed the cuts because of increased government spending.
35. McCain thought the estate tax was perfectly fair. Now he believes the opposite.
36. McCain pledged in February 2008 that he would not, under any circumstances, raise taxes. Specifically, McCain was asked if he is a “‘read my lips’ candidate, no new taxes, no matter what?” referring to George H.W. Bush’s 1988 pledge. “No new taxes,” McCain responded. Two weeks later, McCain said, “I’m not making a ‘read my lips’ statement, in that I will not raise taxes.”
37. McCain has changed his entire economic worldview on multiple occasions.
38. McCain believes Americans are both better and worse off economically than they were before Bush took office.

Energy Policy

39. McCain supported the moratorium on coastal drilling ; now he’s against it.
40. McCain recently announced his strong opposition to a windfall-tax on oil company profits. Three weeks earlier, he was perfectly comfortable with the idea.
41. McCain endorsed a cap-and-trade policy with a mandatory emissions cap. In mid-June, McCain announced he wants the caps to voluntary.
42. McCain explained his belief that a temporary suspension of the federal gas tax would provide an immediate economic stimulus. Shortly thereafter, he argued the exact opposite.
43. McCain supported the Lieberman/Warner legislation to combat global warming. Now he doesn’t.

Immigration Policy

44. McCain was a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, which would grant legal status to illegal immigrants’ kids who graduate from high school. Now he’s against it.
45. On immigration policy in general, McCain announced in February 2008 that he would vote against his own bill.
46. In April, McCain promised voters that he would secure the borders “before proceeding to other reform measures.” Two months later, he abandoned his public pledge, pretended that he’d never made the promise in the first place, and vowed that a comprehensive immigration reform policy has always been, and would always be, his “top priority.”

Judicial Policy and the Rule of Law

47. McCain said he would “not impose a litmus test on any nominee.” He used to promise the opposite.
48. McCain believes the telecoms should be forced to explain their role in the administration’s warrantless surveillance program as a condition for retroactive immunity. He used to believe the opposite.
49. McCain went from saying he would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade to saying the exact opposite.

Campaign, Ethics, and Lobbying Reform

50. McCain supported his own lobbying-reform legislation from 1997. Now he doesn’t.
51. In 2006, McCain sponsored legislation to require grassroots lobbying coalitions to reveal their financial donors. In 2007, after receiving “feedback” on the proposal, McCain told far-right activist groups that he opposes his own measure.
52. McCain supported a campaign-finance bill, which bore his name, on strengthening the public-financing system. In June 2007, he abandoned his own legislation.

Politics and Associations

53. McCain wanted political support from radical televangelist John Hagee. Now he doesn’t. (He also believes his endorsement from Hagee was both a good and bad idea.)
54. McCain wanted political support from radical televangelist Rod Parsley. Now he doesn’t.
55. McCain says he considered and did not consider joining John Kerry’s Democratic ticket in 2004.
56. McCain is both for and against attacking Barack Obama over his former pastor at his former church.
57. McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as “an agent of intolerance” in 2002, but then decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans “deserved” the 9/11 attacks.
58. In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending “dirty money” to help finance Bush’s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.
59. McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.
60. McCain decided in 2000 that he didn’t want anything to do with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, believing he “would taint the image of the ‘Straight Talk Express.’” Kissinger is now the Honorary Co-Chair for his presidential campaign in New York.
61. McCain believed powerful right-wing activist/lobbyist Grover Norquist was “corrupt, a shill for dictators, and (with just a dose of sarcasm) Jack Abramoff’s gay lover.” McCain now considers Norquist a key political ally.

So, Republicans, I hope you continue to use this charge against Barack Obama. Like Steve Benen says, "For John McCain to accuse anyone of excessively changing policy positions is a bit like George W. Bush attacking someone's grammar. Or Dick Cheney whining about a political figure being overly secretive."

Jesse Helms and Eternal Peace

2008-07-09T09:47:00.005-04:00

Admittedly, I was never a fan of Jesse Helms, the conservative (an understatement) longtime Senator from North Carolina that just recently died on July 4. His funeral was yesterday at Hayes Barton Baptist Church in Raleigh and was attended by the powerful politicians from both the Democratic and Republican Parties with whom he either forged alliances or did battle during his 30 years in the Senate.

I never met him personally although I did see him in a restroom once. Since guys never make eye contact in a men's room and I didn't particularly want to chit-chat with him and lie to him by telling him I appreciated the work he was doing in Washington, I did not even speak to him other than a simple "Hello."

Perhaps if I had needed the services of his office I would have had a different opinion of him. Perhaps if I had been around a dinner table with him or sat in a Sunday School class with him or even sat beside him in a pew at church, I would have felt differently. The only Jesse Helms I ever knew, from the time I was in junior high school until the present, was the public "Senator" Jesse Helms. And I never liked nor agreed with what I saw.

Simply put, Jesse Helms was a racist. He was an ardent segregationist during a time in our history when our nation needed to move beyond that evil national sin. He stood resolutely in the way of that progress. Unlike George Wallace who years before his death repented of his racism and went on to be a champion for civil rights in Alabama, Jesse Helms' segregationist ideas remained with him and he was unapologetic about them. Even Strom Thurmond, the longtime South Carolina Senator and founder of the "Dixiecrat" party comprised of Southern Democrats opposed to de-segregation, later moderated some of his views. But not "Ole Jess." He remained true to the Dixiecrat dream.

Jack Betts, an associate editor and columnist for the Charlotte Observer has a column about Jesse Helms today in the Raleigh News and Observer called "The Old Style in Racial Relations," He says:

"He used the language of the Jim Crow era to fight for a culture that kept public schools segregated, public accommodations white and that regarded any government attempt to wipe out discrimination as un-American. He once called UNC "the University of Negroes and Communists" and told reporters in Raleigh as late as 1979 that segregation was not wrong during its heyday--'Not for its time,'he said. . . . Jesse Helms followed his conscience. If he had gotten his way, there would have been no civil rights acts, no voting rights acts, no holiday for Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. And he failed."

And so, I have to say that I haven't grieved Jesse Helms' passing very much. I think he was an anachronism and thank goodness the majority of our nation has seen that segregation was an evil system that was anything but "separate but equal." Thank goodness most Christian, Baptist Americans today see racism as an evil sin that needs to be overcome. Many of us here in the South have worked a lifetime to try and overcome the racist culture we grew up in. Jesse Helms was as much as he could be a roadblock to those efforts. And now he's gone.

Rest in peace Jesse if you can find it. There will be a lot of African-Americans up there with you. Heaven is not segregated.

Will Tennessee Temple University Become an SBC School?

2008-07-02T11:10:00.002-04:00

Tennessee Temple University, one of the three schools that gave Rev. Johnny Hunt (new president of the SBC) an honorary doctoral degree has expressed desires to come into the SBC schools fold. Tennessee Temple was originally founded in the Fundamentalist tradition of Bob Jones University. From the article below, it appears as if Tennessee Temple is on its way to becoming affiliated with the Tennessee Baptist Convention, sort of a replacement for Belmont University which has just recently departed.

All are not happy though. Some of the traditionalists associated with TTU are critical that the school is compromising too much, much like they say Liberty University did in order to find academic acceptance and legitimate accreditation.

And, so we have here an interesting scenario. A school is actually being forced to become more liberal in order to join the SBC fold. Interesting times!

http://ethicsdaily.com/article_detail.cfm?AID=10692

SBC President Gives Blessing to Ties With Tennessee Temple
by Bob Allen

Southern Baptist leaders including the convention's new president Johnny Hunt are involved in a quiet move to bring the Tennessee Temple University into the fold of Southern Baptist schools.
Last fall Highland Park Baptist Church in Chattanooga, Tenn., joined the Tennessee Baptist Convention after 60 years as an independent Baptist church. According to a recent story in the Chattanooga Times Free Press, Pastor David Boulet said Tennessee Temple, founded by Highland Park's longtime pastor Dr. Lee Roberson in 1946, "is also in the process of being approved as an SBC school."

Hunt, who has an honorary doctorate from Tennessee Temple, is at the center of the discussion, along with former SBC President Jerry Vines.

"I realize that TTU desires to become a Southern Baptist School over these next five years, and I would love to see that affiliation become a reality and our ties to be strengthened, because it will take all of us to win this world," Hunt, senior pastor of First Baptist Church in Woodstock, Ga., said in a testimonial posted at the Concerned Tennessee Baptists Web site.

Vines, pastor emeritus of First Baptist Church in Jacksonville, Fla., who is now a member of Hunt's church, said both the Highland Park church and university are "coming back to their Southern Baptist roots."

"Tennessee Southern Baptists would benefit greatly by having a school such as this with which to affiliate," Vines wrote in his letter of reference. "It could provide a much-needed additional opportunity for young men and women to be trained to serve the Lord Jesus Christ. I believe Tennessee Temple would be a valuable addition to the Southern Baptist educational family."

Leaders of Concerned Tennessee Baptists would like to see closer ties develop with fundamentalist Tennessee Temple, particularly in light of the recent departure of Belmont University, a more moderate school that broke ties with the TBC over a dispute about who would elect the university's trustees.

Tennessee Temple hired Liberty Theological Seminary Dean Danny Lovett as the new president in 2005, prompting speculation that he might follow the example of Liberty University's founder Jerry Falwell and establish closer ties with Southern Baptists.

Won over by conservative theology imposed on the Southern Baptist Convention by fundamentalist leaders like his friend Paige Patterson, Falwell led his once-independent Thomas Road Baptist Church in Lynchburg, Va., to join the denomination in the 1990s.

Highland Park's current pastor has been part of an umbrella group seeking to build bridges among independent Baptist groups, as well as with the SBC. Boulet told the Chattanooga paper that what drew the church back into the SBC fold was a program that supplies Bibles to Muslims. "That program touched our hearts," he said.

Hunt, elected SBC president last month in Indianapolis, is national spokesperson for Muslim Bible Day, an organization of Southern Baptist pastors that raises money to smuggle Bibles into Muslim lands. "The Islamic extremists sent bombs and bullets," the group's Web site says. "We want to give an appropriate response by sending Bibles."

Not all independent Baptists are ready to accept SBC fundamentalists with open arms.

Traditionalists like Marty Wynn, pastor of Lighthouse Baptist Church in Columbus, Ga., view any effort to reach out to Southern Baptists as compromise.

When he graduated from Tennessee Temple in 1980, Wynn said, he was taught that contemporary Christian and pop/rock music were "wicked." Now that same music is being "condoned and promoted."

The Tennessee Temple Web site says each mandatory chapel service "includes a live, student-led band."

"By hiring the new president away from Liberty, it is apparent that TTU seeks to follow Liberty's equal compromise," Wynn wrote in a recent blog. "What is very sad is that compromise is being embraced for the sake of increasing enrollment and sustaining funds. Yet, if TTU would have returned to its historical roots, they would find an army of dedicated alumni, who would support the school with finances and students."

A longtime leader in the conservative movement in Alabama, John Killian, pastor of Maytown Baptist Church near Birmingham, says Tennessee Temple has already contributed much to the SBC.

"Tennessee Temple graduates serve in Southern Baptist churches across our convention," Killian wrote. "Numbers of Tennessee Temple graduates have held key positions in the Southern Baptist Convention and in the various state conventions. The sound theology, the biblical worldview and the strong emphasis on missions and evangelism of Tennessee Temple University will be a natural fit for Tennessee Baptists."

"As a proud graduate of Tennessee Temple and as a loyal Southern Baptist, I feel that closer ties between Tennessee Temple and Southern Baptists would be mutually beneficial," Killian continued. "May God grant wisdom as godly leaders consider any potential relationship between the Tennessee Baptist Convention and this great school."

Media contacts for Tennessee Temple and the Tennessee Baptist Convention did not respond to e-mail requests for comment in time to be included in this story.

More on Cal Thomas

2008-07-01T23:57:00.002-04:00

Check out the Big Daddy Weave's blog about the Cal Thomas editorial at:
http://www.thebigdaddyweave.com/. It seems that brother Thomas has a consistency problem. He has criticized Barack Obama and even made a judgment on the legitimacy of his salvation based on comments he said about other religions as well as some other theological ideas he espouses. The point of Thomas' editorial is that since Obama doesn't believe "the right things" he isn't a true Christian.

The Big Daddy Weave has pointed out however, that while Thomas has doomed Obama to the pits of hell for his theology, he has nevertheless in the past praised President Bush for his Christian commitment even though President Bush has said some of the exact same things. In other words, President Bush is a real Christian and Barack Obama is a counterfeit Christian even though they have both been quoted as saying essentially the same thing. Wonder what the difference is then. Could it be that Bush is Republican and Obama is Democratic? And could it be that Thomas still has that lame notion that God is only identified with one political party, namely the Republicans? Or could it be something more cynical than that? Might Thomas' real purpose with the editorial be to try and manipulate Evangelical Christians once again into thinking that the Democratic candidate is not really Christian and therefore true Christians should only vote Republican? It has worked in the past 30 or so years. It remains to be seen if it will work this year.

Cal Thomas, You Aren't God!

2008-06-30T21:02:00.002-04:00

In an editorial today on Baptistpress.org, Cal Thomas suggests that despite his confession of faith, Barack Obama is not a "real" Christian because he doesn't have the right theological beliefs. He concludes the story by saying:

"Obama can call himself anything he likes, but there is a clear requirement for one to qualify as a Christian and Obama doesn't meet that requirement. One cannot deny central tenets of the Christian faith, including the deity and uniqueness of Christ as the sole mediator between God and Man and be a Christian. Such people do have a label applied to them in Scripture. They are called "false prophets."

Cal, I have always believed that it is impossible to know the heart of another person. I don't even know if you are a Christian! I can only trust what you say. Only God knows the heart and whether it is committed to Jesus.

I can say this though. Being a genuine Christian is first about being committed to follow Jesus and his way. Doctrine is not the primary factor. I first decided to follow Jesus with my life. My doctrine developed later and is still in process. In fact, I think my doctrinal ideas will continue to evolve until I die. One becomes a Christian when one decides to follow Jesus and try to live a life like he lived. What I believe about Jesus comes as a secondary factor.

Cal, you ain't God! You can't possibly know Obama's heart. So, stop being so judgmental.

Here's the entire editorial:

http://baptistpress.org/BPFirstPerson.asp?ID=28392

WASHINGTON (BP)--Barack Obama's presidential campaign plans to strike at the heart of the Republican base by attempting to woo Evangelical Christians and Roman Catholics to his side.

The Christian Broadcasting Network's David Brody first broke the story on his blog "The Brody File." Obama's campaign for the conservative Christian vote, which has largely gone to the Republican presidential candidate in recent elections, has been dubbed the "Joshua Generation Project." Joshua, Moses' successor, led the Israelites into the Promised Land. It wasn't the group that fled Egypt in the Exodus, though. They died in the wilderness, lacking faith in God's promise. It was the next generation that Joshua led into Canaan. Apparently, if we have enough faith in Obama, he will lead us all into a new America, but if we vote for John McCain, we will demonstrate a lack of faith (in Obama) and die in the political badlands.

Obama is better at biblical language and imagery than any Democrat in modern times. He certainly beats Howard Dean, now the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, who once offered Job as his favorite New Testament book. This is cynical manipulation of the devout and it is no better when Democrats do it than when Republicans use religious language for partisan advantage.

Obama has declared himself a committed Christian. He can call himself anything he likes, but there are certain markers among the evangelicals he is courting that one must meet in order to qualify for that label.

Some insight into Obama's "Christianity" comes from an interview he gave in 2004 to Chicago Sun-Times religion editor Cathleen Falsani for her book, "The God Factor: Inside the Spiritual Lives of Public People."

"I'm rooted in the Christian tradition," said Obama. He then adds something most Christians will see as universalism: "I believe there are many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people."

Falsani correctly brings up John 14:6 (and how many journalists would know such a verse, much less ask a question based on it?) in which Jesus says of Himself, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." That sounds exclusive, but Obama says it depends on how this verse is heard. According to Falsani, Obama thinks that "all people of faith -- Christians, Jews, Muslims, animists, everyone -- know the same God." (Her words.)

Evangelicals and serious Catholics might ask if this is so, why did Jesus waste His time coming to Earth, suffering pain, rejection and crucifixion? If there are many ways to God, He might have sent down a spiritual version of table manners and avoided the rest.

Here's Obama telling Falsani, "The difficult thing about any religion, including Christianity, is that at some level there is a call to evangelize and proselytize. There's the belief, certainly in some quarters, that if people haven't embraced Jesus Christ as their personal savior, they're going to hell." Falsani adds, "Obama doesn't believe he, or anyone else, will go to hell. But he's not sure he'll be going to heaven, either." Again, that is contrary to what Evangelicals and most Catholics believe.

Here's Obama again: "I don't presume to have knowledge of what happens after I die. When I tuck in my daughters at night and I feel like I've been a good father to them, and I see that I am transferring values that I got from my mother and that they're kind people and that they're honest people, and they're curious people, that's a little piece of heaven."

Any first-year seminary student could deconstruct such "works salvation" and wishful thinking. Obama either hasn't read the Bible, or if he has, doesn't believe it if he embraces such thin theological wisps.

Obama can call himself anything he likes, but there is a clear requirement for one to qualify as a Christian and Obama doesn't meet that requirement. One cannot deny central tenets of the Christian faith, including the deity and uniqueness of Christ as the sole mediator between God and Man and be a Christian. Such people do have a label applied to them in Scripture. They are called "false prophets."

Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth at CBF

2008-06-22T18:07:00.003-04:00

In my opinion one of the most important happenings at the meeting of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship occurred Thursday morning. It has not received very much fanfare though. Each year the W.H. Whitsitt Heritage Society gives a "Courage Award" to someone within the Baptist family that has with his/her life been a model of Baptist courage.

This year the award went to Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth. If you don't know that name, I could put my professor hat on and tell you to "go look him up." However, I will provide a brief description.

Rev. Shuttlesworth was the most important leader/agitator for Civil Rights in the city of Birmingham (nicknamed "Bombingham" during that era because of all the Klan bombings that happened). He served as the pastor of the Bethel Baptist Church in Birmingham in 1953 and although a member of the NAACP, he organized the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights in 1956, specifically for the purpose of pushing civil rights for African-Americans in Birmingham.

Shuttlesworth was a firey preacher and a force to be reckoned with. His house was bombed on Christmas Day in 1956. The dynamite was placed under his bedroom window. He came out of the ruins unhurt. In 1957, Shuttlesworth was almost beaten to death by a gang of white ruffians the day he tried to enroll his children in a white school. That same crowd stabbed his wife in the buttocks. She quipped afterwards to the press that she lamented the fact that decency wouldn't allow her to show everyone the scar!

Andrew Manis wrote the definitive biography of Shuttlesworth called A Fire You Can't Put Out: The Civil Rights Life of Birmingham's Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth. It is well worth the read.

Bruce Prescott on his blog http://mainstreambaptist.blogspot.com/, has included a video clip of the presentation to Shuttlesworth. It was particularly and appropriate award giving that Dr. King was assassinated just a few blocks down the road from where this award was presented.

Johnny Hunt's Growing Number of Doctorates

2008-06-17T10:39:00.003-04:00

There have been a number of moderate Baptist bloggers who have giving attention to Johnny Hunt, newly elected president of the SBC. It seems, as you can see from my earlier post, that he is called "Dr." by admirers and is even introduced that way. However, he does not have an earned doctorate. His bio on his website only lists two honorary doctorates from diploma mills in Georgia.

But there is a new development this morning. It seems that during the night, his webmaster changed his bio on his website: http://www.itsanewdayonline.com/abouthunt/index.cfm

Now, he has three honorary doctorates. That's right! Overnight he gained a doctoral degree! Wow! That must be a record!

His bio now says that he now has honorary doctoral degrees not only from Covington Theological Seminary and Immanuel Theological Seminary (previously listed), but he has gained one from Tennessee Temple University in Chattanooga.

The question yet to be answered is when did he receive the Tennessee Temple degree? Robert Parham of the Baptist Center for Ethics has written a new editorial about this issue. http://www.ethicsdaily.com/article_detail.cfm?AID=10623 He is following the issue closely and has called Tennessee Temple to find out when they awarded the degree. No answer yet.

Tennessee Temple University is a school that originally was founded in the tradition of Bob Jones University. But, in recent years they have been trying to gain legitimacy and to a great extent have done so. Rumor is that they are trying to become a Tennessee Baptist Convention institution which would replace Belmont University which just recently left the TBC.

Pseudo-Doctorates and the New SBC President

2008-06-13T10:14:00.003-04:00

The moderate Baptist blogosphere is sounding off over the last 24 hours about the new president of the SBC, Johnny Hunt, pastor of the FBC Woodstock, Georgia. It appears that Hunt is regularly introduced as "Dr." Hunt although his only credentials for such are 2 honorary doctorates at "diploma mill" type schools. One is an honorary "Doctor of Divinity" from Immanuel Baptist Theological in Sharpsburg, Georgia and the other is an honorary "Doctor of Sacred Laws and Letters" from the shady Covington Theological Seminary in Georgia.

Examples of two blogs have gone into some more detail about this:

http://www.tonycartledge.com/

http://www.thebigdaddyweave.com/

The most complete discussion of it is by Robert Parham on Ethicsdaily.com. Here's the link:

http://ethicsdaily.com/article_detail.cfm?AID=10605

I won't repeat what they have said. However, I will say this. I have always had a little bit of uneasiness about honorary doctorates. Of course, they are meant to be just that, "honorary." They do serve as a way for a university or college to award a donor or someone who has been supportive of that university.

However, shouldn't the title "Dr." should only be used to introduce someone if that person has earned the degree from a reputable, accredited research institution of higher learning. My Ph.D. from Baylor University took me 5 years to complete. I had to do three years of seminar work, pass a language exam, take 5 comprehensive exams over the field of religion in a two-week period of time, research and produce a prospectus for the dissertation and then work for approximately a year and a half on my dissertation. Following all that, I had a 2 hour oral defense of my dissertation before a select number of faculty members at Baylor University.

There is something inherently dishonest or at least unethical when a person allows the title "Dr." to be placed in front of their name if they haven't earned the degree through the doing the hard work. And, especially this is the case if the degree is an "honorary" degree from a diploma mill!

The Most Serious Non-Action at This Year's SBC Meeting

2008-06-12T21:35:00.003-04:00

Of the bizzare things that happened at this year's SBC, which just concluded today, the most serious thing was actually its failure to act on something important. The convention refused a motion to create a national database of sex offenders who had been related in some way to SBC churches. The convention cited, among other things, the autonomy of the local church as a reason to reject this proposal.

Amazing! Many in the Convention want to identify churches which have gay members or churches that have women pastors. But they don't want to keep track of sexual predators. What this means is that a pastor could sexually harrass a church member or staff minister at a Southern Baptist church in say, Oklahoma. That pastor could be fired from the church in Oklahoma, move to another state such as Georgia and send a resume to another church perhaps not even mentioning the previous episode in Oklahoma. The Georgia church would then be hiring a pastor with a past history as a sexual predator but they would have no way of knowing.

You can also imagine how this database would be helpful to churches to prevent pedaphiles from being involved with children.

Great move SBC! Here's the story from ABPnews.com

http://www.abpnews.com/3221.article

All the More Reason to Throw the Rascals Out!

2008-06-10T13:29:00.003-04:00

This story speaks for itself. While the average American out there is struggling with these rising gas prices, the Republican Party shows its true colors. I have long contended that the basic philosophy of the Republican Party is all about corporate interests and not the average person. This makes that clear.

This is even more evidence that a change needs to happen this fall. Vote Democratic!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/10/republicans-block-extra-t_n_106282.html

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans blocked a proposal Tuesday to tax the windfall profits of the largest oil companies, despite pleas by Democratic leaders to use the measure to address America's anger over $4 a gallon gasoline.
The Democratic energy package would have imposed a tax on any "unreasonable" profits of the five largest U.S. oil companies and given the federal government more power to address oil market speculation that the bill's supporters argue has added to the crude oil price surge.
"Americans are furious about what's going on," declared Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., and want Congress to do something about oil company profits and "an orgy of speculation" on oil markets.
But Republicans argued the Democratic proposal focusing on new oil industry taxes is not the answer to the country's energy problems.
"The American people are clamoring for relief at the pump," said Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., but if taxes are increased on the oil companies "they will get exactly what they don't want. The bill will raise taxes, increase imports."
The Democrats failed, 51-43, to get the 60 votes needed to overcome a GOP filibuster and bring the energy package up for consideration

Hillary, You Lost. It's Time to Move On!

2008-06-04T12:36:00.004-04:00

You lost Hillary. You lost fair and square, unless you listen to Lanny Davis, Terry McAuliffe, Harold Ickes or the minions who have been creatively spinning your campaign. The rest of the leadership of the Democratic Party believes that the primary process all the way through the rules committee meeting Saturday was fair. You lost. It is time to face the music. You are not going to be president. Even if you were able to pull off some type of hijacking of delegates there is still no way you will be elected president this year. You may think that the nomination was stolen from you. You are free to think that. But, it was not and you would be delusional to think so. However, if you do try some ploy to steal it from Obama, who won it fairly, there will be such a backlash against you in the Democratic Party that your political career will be effectively over.

You lost Hillary. It is time to move on. You will, no doubt, find excuses. You will never admit that you got out-campaigned by a smarter Obama campaign. After all, you are a Clinton. The best in the political business. But, you made serious mistakes in your campaign. Here's my list of what went wrong for whatever it is worth.

It started with the inevitability attitude. You began the campaign last year with a strategy that you were someone "owed" the nomination. Admittedly, most Democrats believed that Bill's impeachment was unjust. But, that does not make you the inevitable candidate.

Your campaign did not spend money wisely. Thousands of dollars for do-nuts? Come on! Plus, you relied on big donors whereas Obama built an army of millions of small donors which will serve him well in the fall.

You never took the caucuses seriously while Obama did. You thought that you could cruise to the nomination by Super Tuesday. But, almost in the blink of an eye you went from inevitable candidate to a candidate who's campaign was in trouble. Then, with 11 straight losses after Super Tuesday, it became mathematically impossible for you to win.

You and your husband said a number of reprehensible things. Bill's race baiting (I was shocked that the "first black president" would make such racially charged statements). Your stupid story about the cork-screw landing in Bosnia. Did you actually think we were stupid enough to believe that the military would let the first lady and her entourage land in a hot lz where bullets were whizzing by? Give me a break! Your comments about the assassination of Bobby Kennedy? Shameless. So, you blew it in a variety of ways with verbal gaffes.

Finally, you failed to calculate how much the electorate wants change. The world is different since you and Bill captured our admiration 16 years ago. It is a younger electorate. They want to turn the page. You thought the electorate wanted "experience." (By the way, exactly what credentials do you have anyway? First lady for 8 years? Come on. Being around the president doesn't qualify anyone to be president). But, Obama realized the key word is "change." And so "change" trumped "experience." Your strategy was flawed from the beginning.

Nevertheless, you make excuses. Here's a list of excuses you have given so far.

(1) You accused your rivals of "piling on" because you were the front-runner.

(2) You said last month sexist attacks on you have been "deeply offensive to millions of women."

(3) The media was unfair to you - and too easy on Obama. Just Monday, Bill Clinton denounced an unflattering story on him as part of "the national media's attempt to nail Hillary" and railed, "This has been the most rigged coverage in modern history."

(4) Debate moderators were unfair to you. "Can I just point out that in the last several debates, I seem to get the first question all the time?" you griped in February.

(5) Caucus-state rules were undemocratic and favored Obama's activist supporters.

(6) Obama outspent you.

(7) The Clintons were unfairly accused of playing the race card.

(8) Old pals like Ted Kennedy and Bill Richardson stabbed you in the back by endorsing Obama.

(9) If only Democrats had winner-take-all rules in states like the GOP does, you'd be the nominee.

(10) Last Saturday's party ruling on the Florida-Michigan mess cheated you.

(Taken from: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/06/04/2008-06-04_hillary_clintons_got_no_shortage_of_excu.html)

So, go ahead and continue to make your excuses. But the fact of the matter is, you lost. You lost fair and square. You got beaten by a better candidate (at least in this election). It is time to move on and the unity of the party depends on you and what you do over the next 24-48 hours.

An Adopted Child's Nightmare

2008-05-29T10:30:00.002-04:00

Lynn Paddock is a name that might be familiar to those of us who live in the Raleigh, NC area. She is an adoptive mother who lived in Johnston County and is on trial for first-degree murder in the death of her four-year old adoptive son, Sean. Her trial is ongoing right now in Smithfield, NC and each of her surviving adoptive children have been called to testify against her. They have now all been placed in other foster care by social services.

From the accounts given in the testimony, Lynn Paddock is a monster. There are stories told by the children of extremely harsh punishments such as beatings with a plastic pipe or hose, being forced to eat their own feces for soiling their clothes, being forced to miss numerous meals for minor infractions at the table, and many other extreme measures. Read the testimony yesterday from some of the children in this Raleigh News and Observer article: http://www.newsobserver.com/news/crime_safety/paddock/story/1088734.html.

Her little boy Sean was found dead by EMS responders. It was determined that he suffocated after being so tightly wrapped in a blanket that he was unable to breathe. According to the charges, this tight wrapping in a blanket was another disciplinary method used by Lynn Paddock to keep the little boy from waking up in the night and roaming around the house. Essentially, it was a restraint. The autopsy revealed a host of bruises and other former wounds to his little body. When the other children were examined they were also determined to have other previous wounds.

The entire episode is much to long for me to recount here. It has played out for several months in the Raleigh newspaper. But, it has all been very troubling to me. First, one of the most troubling aspects of this case is that Lynn Paddock seems to be a follower of Rev. Michael Pearl, a Tennessee pastor who has written books and conducted seminars advocating such extreme disciplinary methods. Just do a Google search for his name and you can find out all you need to know about him. Paddock is not the first of his disciples to face the justice system.

A second thing that bothers me about the Lynn Paddock case is that she is an adoptive parent and so are my wife and I. It troubles me that a child (children in her case) who was in a really bad situation with his birth parents, was placed in a worse situation that ultimately led to his death. What a tragic, tragic story.

Someone dropped the ball in the adoption/social services involvement here. The Children's Home Society of North Carolina (which actually helped us with a part of our international adoption) was responsible for Sean's placement. This is a fine organization that has done really good work for decades in North Carolina on behalf of children. I don't think the entire organization should be blamed, although there is a lawsuit in the works against them. But, someone clearly dropped the ball in this case and subsequently created a nightmare for these children that ultimately ended up with in Lynn Paddock's chamber of horrors.

Honoring the Vets

2008-05-25T15:35:00.002-04:00

William Tanner, the president of the old Home Mission Board of the SBC (1977-86) once told a story from his childhood growing up in a small town in Texas. It was during World War II and in his town there was an insurance agent who had four sons who were in the military fighting the war. This particular insurance agent had a display supporting the war effort in his storefront window that he changed regularly. Tanner said that he liked going by the store regularly and gazing at the different displays.

One day, as he rounded the corner to look in the window, the poster that he saw caught his attention. It was a picture blown up to about 3 feet by 3 feet of a soldier lying face down in the dirt. His helmet had been blown off his head. His outstretched hand seemed to be reaching for the weapon that was just out of his grasp. But the thing that caught Tanner the most was the caption that went with the picture: "What have you done for your country today that a soldier should die for you tomorrow?"

Tomorrow is Memorial Day. Many Americans simply think of this holiday as another day off from work, a three-day weekend that traditionally marks the beginning of the summer vacation season. I enjoy Memorial Day for the same reasons. However, sometimes I think it does us good to pause and reflect about the meaning of this day. It honors the veterans who have served in the military certainly. But, more importantly, it memorializes those who have been killed in the service of our country.

If you read all my blogs you can probably tell that I am opposed to this war in Iraq. It was truly the "wrong war, fought in the wrong place, at the wrong time." One of the reasons that I am supporting Barack Obama is because he opposed the war from the beginning and is pledging to end it as soon as possible after he takes office. It may go down as the biggest foreign policy blunder in American history. I could not be any more opposed to the war in Iraq.

However, I am not opposed to the soldiers who are fighting it. They are us. Kids, moms and dads, sisters and brothers. They chose to answer their country's call and serve in the military. I believe that supporting them for me is working to bring them home soon. That's why I oppose the war.

My generation made the mistake of opposing a war and the soldiers who fought it. That scenario was a big mistake. In fact, a large part of the Vietnam Veterans were drafted; they had no choice. Nevertheless, this time we can support the soldier but oppose the war.

So, tomorrow I am going to think about and be thankful for our veterans, especially those from the American Revolution to the present who gave their lives in service to their country's call. And, I am going to continue to work to bring an end to the war in Iraq. And, I am going to re-commit myself to serving my country in every way I can.

Remember Captain Miller's words to Private Ryan on the bridge in the movie Saving Private Ryan: "Earn this!"

"What have you done today that a soldier should die for you tomorrow?"

Best Wishes Big Daddy Weave!

2008-05-24T21:51:00.002-04:00

The son of my friend Doug Weaver, who has a blog called "The Big Daddy Weave," (http://www.thebigdaddyweave.com/) was in an automobile accident Thursday evening. Things could have been worse. He came out of it, however, with a broken wrist, a strained back, a concussion, and a totaled vehicle.

I enjoy the Big Daddy Weave's blog. It is one of the best blogs out there for news among Baptists. So, here's to Aaron's speedy recovery! Hope you get well and return to blogging soon!

Check out his blog if you haven't seen it.

Obama's Not Ashamed of His Christian Faith

2008-05-16T00:11:00.003-04:00

If you haven't seen this story you ought to take a minute to scan through it. Barack Obama seems to be the first Democrat in a long time to be able to talk comfortably about his Christian faith and articulate how his faith impacts his politics. This will be good for him as he turns toward the general election in the fall. I think he is better at this than John McCain and the openness about his faith may help him win over some of the blue collar voters that he needs.

http://www.kentucky.com/779/story/404785.html

UPDATED Obama launches ads touting Christian beliefs
By Ryan Alessiralessi@herald-leader.com
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s campaign has ramped up its efforts to emphasize his Christian faith in a series of new radio and television ads, as well as in a flier that volunteers have distributed.
Lt. Gov. Daniel Mongiardo, who endorsed Obama on Sunday, narrated a new radio spot for Obama that highlights the Illinois Senator’s upbringing and values, including how Obama is “a strong Christian.”
Mongiardo said he felt compelled to make the ad after constituents contacted his office with what he called “misconceptions” about Obama.
“The negative calls have been talking about either the color of his skin or claims that he’s not a Christian,” Mongiardo said. “As I’ve listened to news casts of primaries across the country, it struck me that there is a segment of people who are not voting for Hillary Clinton but are voting against Barack Obama because of issues that don’t pertain to substance.”
U.S. Rep. Ben Chandler of Versailles recorded a similar radio ad for Obama.
Obama’s race, religious background and patriotism have become controversial subplots during the drawn-out primary season. E-mail chains circulated earlier this year questioning whether Obama was a Muslim, while talk radio shows seized on why he doesn’t always wear a flag pin on his lapel.
Obama, during his speech in Louisville Monday, dismissed such arguments as static designed to divert attention from important issues.
Campaign spokesman Clark Stevens, however, said the ads and flier weren’t “in response to any issue.” “The focus is really to let voters know what issues are important to Sen. Obama,” he said. “Part of our effort is to reach out to people of all faiths and to communicate common values.”
The flier links Obama more overtly to church than the radio spots and television commercials, which focus on Obama’s life. The pamphlet shows him speaking from a pulpit with a cross and pipe organ behind him.
“My faith teachers me that I can sit in church and pray all I want, but I won’t be fulfilling God’s will unless I go out and do the Lord’s work,” says the quote attributed to Obama on the front of the piece.
The campaign distributed similarly-designed fliers in other states, including South Carolina, where Democrats voted Jan. 26.
“There was at least one not-too veiled reference to his faith aimed at dispelling the notion that the name Obama is Muslim,” said Todd Shaw, assistant professor of political science at the University of South Carolina. “To this day you probably have some contingent in the voting public who may not be aware of his religious convictions.”
Obama attended Catholic and public schools in Indonesia, a Muslim nation, for four-and-a-half years during his childhood. He said in a speech last month in Pennsylvania that he was baptized at age 26 at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago — a church that attracted him with its social outreach and ministries for HIV/AIDS. Obama’s radio ads and flier highlight that work.
“A Christian, Barack’s first job was with churches helping communities left behind when local plants closed,” Chandler says in his commercial — a reference to his community organizing in Chicago’s South Side where several steel mills shut down.
It was Trinity’s now-retired pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., who created one of the biggest stirs of the Democratic primary when inflammatory snippets of some of his old sermons surfaced.
Last month, Obama denounced Wright after his former pastor made more public comments, such as claims that the U.S. government played a role in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and the spread of HIV/AIDS.
The flare-up didn’t help Obama in Kentucky.
A Herald-Leader/WKYT Kentucky Poll conducted last week showed that 43 percent of the 500 likely Kentucky Democratic voters surveyed said Wright’s comments were important factors in how they will vote on Tuesday.
“He stayed in his church that proclaimed hate and biases against white people. He stayed in it for 20 years to advance his own political gain,” said Miriam Picconi of Lexington in an interview last week.
Shaw, of the University of South Carolina, said the fliers and ads are ways to clarify both his faith and how church fits into who he is.
“In the aftermath of the Jeremiah Wright situation, I think he’s trying to give some context to what that means in his life — why he would stay in that church for 20 years,” Shaw said.
But too much of a concentration on religion could have a downside, Shaw warned.
“There is some risk of the problem of pandering,” he said. “If you make too strong of a pitch, are you in fact tweaking your image to fit what people want to hear?”
In Oregon, which shares its Election Day with Kentucky, Obama hasn’t highlighted his religion in ads and literature, said Robert Sahr, associate professor of political science at Oregon State University.
Oregon, Sahr said, “is among the least religious states in the country,” so such ads wouldn’t have the same effect there as they might in Kentucky or West Virginia.
All this comes on the heals of one of Obama’s most lopsided losses, which occurred in West Virginia Tuesday . Clinton defeated him by 41 points.
But Clinton aides said the campaign hasn’t tried to key in on any stereotypes or take advantage of misperceptions.
“We believe the criteria all voters should use is who is the best candidate,” said Howard Wolfson, Clinton’s communications director on a conference call with reporters Wednesday.
In addition to prominently mentioning Obama’s faith, the new TV and radio ads describe the candidate’s upbringing by a single mother and grandparents, who were from Kansas. They also detail his plan to provide tax breaks to the middle class.
Herald-Leader reporter Jim Niemi contributed to this report.

What Causes This Kind of Twisted Thinking?

2008-04-30T14:23:00.002-04:00

When I was in school (elementary, junior high, senior high, college, graduate school), never once did I ever worry for a second that a classmate might come to class one day with a bomb or with a gun and the intention to harm other students. We had bullies. They they were usually more talk than action.

Read this story below from CNN about Ryan Schallenberger and tell me what happens to a kid to make him this twisted. And, why have things changed so remarkably in the last several decades since I was a student?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/29/teen.charged.ap/index.html

FLORENCE, South Carolina (AP) -- A teen accused of plotting to blow up his high school told police that he wanted to die, go to heaven and kill Jesus, federal authorities said Tuesday.
Prosecutors argued in a federal courtroom that the statements are an indication that 18-year-old Ryan Schallenberger needs a psychological evaluation.
The straight-A Chesterfield High School senior was arrested April 19 and faces several state and federal charges, including attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction. That charge carries a possible life sentence if he is convicted.
"His conduct is bizarre," prosecutor Buddy Bethea told Judge Thomas Rogers III, who did not immediately issue a ruling. "I think it screams out in his conduct that he be evaluated."
Defense attorney Bill Nettles said the request was premature, and that Schallenberger was competent to help in his defense.
Prosecutors want Schallenberger, currently at Chesterfield County jail, moved to a federal facility because they think he may try to commit suicide. His journal writings have become increasingly violent over the past year, prosecutor Rose Mary Parham said.
An agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives testified that the teen told a sheriff he wanted to die after his arrest.
"He said death was better than life," Craig Townsend said. "He told the sheriff he wanted to die and go to heaven and once he got there, he wanted to kill Jesus."
Prosecutors also played a 911 tape of the teen's mother calling police after he smashed his head into a wall two days before his arrest. On the tape, she says her son threatened to shoot police if they came.
"He's not going to do it," Laurie Sittler told the operator. "He's just got a bad temper."
The teen left but his mother was scared he would return, she said in the call. "He's planning to go to college and everything, but I don't know what to do," she said.
Schallenberger was arrested after his parents picked up at the post office a package addressed to the teen containing 20 pounds of ammonium nitrate. They got nervous and looked through his room where they found a cassette tape he wanted played after he died, which they took to the sheriff's office, the agent testified. Authorities found his journal, which lauded the Columbine killers, after searching his room.
The 50-page journal contained notes on more than 10 types of explosives that Schallenberger experimented with and evaluated a year ago, the agent testified. It had a black cover and "Pisces" written on the front, and authorities have said it contained detailed plans to bomb Chesterfield High School.
Schallenberger's parents were at the hearing but would not comment.
Townsend also testified Schallenberger's mother called police to the home in April last year, when the teen was arrested for breach of peace. He said the teen became enraged and knocked over furniture after his mother asked him to walk with his sister to a grandparent's home.
Authorities also seized a computer that shows he searched Web sites for making bombs, a shotgun, carbon dioxide canisters, "hundreds and hundreds" of matchsticks, and more cassette tapes that they have not yet heard, Townsend said.

Hoping for an Elitist

2008-04-24T09:21:00.002-04:00

The following letter to the editor appeared in the Raleigh News and Observer several days ago. It is written by Rich Weems of Cary. I think he's on to something.

"I don't know whether Barack Obama is an elitist, but I hope so.

I'm tired of having some dumb cowboy mussing up the White House carpet with his dirty boots and ridiculous policies. I want someone who's smart and knows what he's doing in the White House.

I want the guy who's leading the strongest nation on earth to be better than the average guy. I don't care whether he bowls, but I want the next president to know the difference between Sunni and Shia; to understand the economy, and not just leave it to the "budget guy;" to speak in complete sentences with proper grammar and to be concerned about the here and now as opposed to waiting for history to judge him.

So, yeah, I want an "elitist" to be in the White House 'cause I already know what having a nonelitist in there has done for us."

Well said Rich!

It Takes a Springsteen Fan to Understand

2008-04-23T11:21:00.002-04:00

If you are around me much, especially if you are a student in my classes, you know that I am a huge Bruce Springsteen fan. I love his music. I draw a lot of strength from his lyrics which I find in many respects to be deeply theological in some places. He is currently touring to promote his new album "Magic."

I and my oldest daughter Hannah are making the trek Friday to Atlanta to see Bruce at Phillips Arena. I suppose that I am just about as excited to be taking her to her first Springsteen show as I am attending the show myself. My wife and I will then be seeing him in Greensboro on Monday evening. I hope to see him at least once more over the summer or next fall. Friday night will be my 9th concert with Bruce over the last 20 years, not nearly as much as other die-hard fans who boast of hundreds of shows, but nevertheless a good number. I am at least not a "newbie" to his music and shows and with only a few exceptions, can sing the lyrics to most of the songs that I will hear. So, it portends to be a fun weekend.

I found this article today which really caught my attention. It shows the extent that a "true fan" will go to to spread the message of the quality of Bruce's music and concerts. Enjoy!

http://www.hickoryrecord.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=HDR/MGArticle/HDR_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1173355345273

Style, simile and ... Springsteen?
Teacher ties in academics, fun with middle school trip to concert
By Ragan Robinson
Contact me
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Computer teacher Mike Telesca (center) bought 35 tickets (and had 15 donated) for students to see Bruce Springsteen in concert in Greensboro. To tie it in with academics, they're having three seminars to talk about language arts and Springsteen songs. ROBERT C. REED (RECORD PHOTOGRAPHER)

GRANITE FALLS - Mike Telesca might be the computer teacher at Granite Falls Middle School, but in his classroom, Bruce Springsteen is still The Boss.
Telesca plays Springsteen for background music in class. Sometimes he sings along in a gravelly Connecticut accent that’s close enough to a New Jersey brogue, at least in Caldwell County, to make his principal introduce him as a native of Springsteen’s home state.
Once, when he was at Catawba Valley High School, he taught an entire thematic unit on his favorite musician, using the songs for language arts, calculating stage square footage and area for math, figuring out the cardiovascular benefits of running around as much as Springsteen does in concert.
Telesca, who will tell you he’s going to fib about his age before he fibs about it, has seen hundreds of Bruce’s shows. His book of ticket stubs is a good 5 inches thick. He will be in Atlanta for a concert Friday, Charlotte on Sunday and Virginia on Wednesday. He would’ve gone to two shows in Florida if the death of longtime E Street Band member Danny Federici hadn’t postponed them.
To put it plainly - something his rock idol never does - Telesca loves The Boss.
He loves him so much that this year, he decided his kids needed to see a show. And they needed to see one so much that Telesca shelled out about $3,000 to buy 35 tickets before Springsteen’s management company kicked in 15 or so more. Add Greensboro to that concert list.
Mr. T, to use the student vernacular, doesn’t want to talk about the money. He all but jumps out of his chair talking about the experience his students will get.
“People ask, “How can you justify it?’” he says. “Well, the goal of art is to make you think. There is no artist of our generation who makes you think and examine your beliefs more than Springsteen.”
Then there’s the fact that a lot of his kids never get out of Caldwell County, Telesca says. He wants to show them something new, something bigger than Granite Falls.
He’s not so blinded by Springsteen’s light he can’t see that reasoning might not fly. To supplement, he and English teacher Kim “he’d better play Thunder Road” Story are holding after-school and Saturday “Socratic discussions” on the man and his music this week. They’ll talk about Springsteen’s cultural significance and use his songs for lessons on expressive language.
By the time the show starts Monday night, they’ll have a few Springsteen-themed homework assignments under their belts. They went home Tuesday looking for personification, metaphor and simile in the lyrics.
Students had to do some extra work for the privilege of going on the world’s coolest field trip. Telesca had them write letters explaining why they are deserving.
Their answers are classic middle-school genius.
“Kids once in our life need to have fun,” wrote seventh-grader Erica Haas. “We cannot be treated like animals all the time.”
From eighth-grader Jarret Walker: “I share the same love that you share, the love of rock.”
Eighth-grader Austin Sigler’s mom is a fan and the show is on her birthday. He figures his getting to go would be a great present for her.
And sixth-grader Eric Smith put a needle in his forever young teacher’s side with this one: “My nana is one of his fans and she never got to go to one of his concerts.”

Missouri Baptist Editor and the Confederate Flag

2008-04-03T23:52:00.003-04:00

This is so outrageous that I'm just going to copy the article from Ethicsdaily.com. You read it for yourself. I am amazed and outraged that in 2008 there are still racist idiots like this who have prominent positions in Baptist life in the South. The article is by Brian Kaylor.

The link is: http://www.ethicsdaily.com/article_detail.cfm?AID=10301

Missouri Baptist Editor Supports Confederate FlagBrian Kaylor04-03-08

The editor of the Missouri Baptist Convention's in-house publication, "The Pathway," has strongly defended the controversial Confederate battle flag and aggressively attacked those who challenge it.
In his book Embattled Banner: A Reasonable Defense of the Confederate Battle Flag, Don Hinkle called himself "an unReconstructed Confederate" and dismissed critics of the flag as "a small group of malcontents and bigots."

MBC interim Executive Director David Tolliver, recently condemned the flag in a column in The Pathway because it "represents hate" and "depicts deep-rooted racial bigotry and hatred." As a result, Tolliver argued that Christians should not fly the flag. Meanwhile, a Web site run by his organization is promoting Hinkle's decade-old book defending that very symbol.

Hinkle argued in his book that the flag is actually a Christian symbol because it features St. Andrew's Cross and because the Confederate Constitution acknowledged God while the U.S. Constitution does not. His book even included a photo of the flag flying next to the Christian flag.

In his book, the Confederate's fight becomes a religious mission, and this fight is not yet over. He even argued that those attacking the flag should remember that Southerners "will 'draw their sabers' in a second if they feel their honor has been questioned" and pointed to Union cemeteries as proof.

After asking if the flag is a "racist relic," Hinkle declared, "Absolutely not!" He added that "the battle flag was not--nor will ever be--symbolic of slavery or racism."

Rather than seeing the Confederate battle flag as a symbol of hate, Hinkle asserted that it is the "anti-flag minority" who are trying to "bully" the South through "character assassination." He also accused critics of using "petty politics based on distortion and bigotry."

He declared the attacks to be "cultural genocide" and even argued that Missouri was among the states hurt by the attacks on the flag. Among his examples of "attacks being launched against Southern culture" is criticism of William Jewell College, which at the time was affiliated with the MBC, for not allowing the flag flown during a ceremony in the school's chapel.

Hinkle claimed that many of critics of the Confederate flag are actually also opposed to the American flag. He suggested that this movement would result in "feeding the Constitution to a shredder" and remove American historical artifacts "like what the Communists did to rewrite Russian history after the fall of the Czar."

Hinkle even compared the NAACP to the KKK and asserted that it was "closer to becoming just another hate group." He claimed the NAACP's opposition to the Confederate flag was an attempt to "whip blacks into an emotional tizzy."

African-Americans peacefully requesting a Confederate flag be taken down are called "[r]adical blacks" and a "mob" by Hinkle.

He argued that since many African-Americans fought for the Confederacy, "there is no reason why blacks shouldn't view the Confederate battle flag with as much pride as anyone if they so choose." He claimed that the slaves who fought for the Confederacy did so because most slave owners "took good care of them." He insisted that critics of slavery "wrongfully apply today's moral to a world that was vastly different."

"Many white Southerners were trying to figure out a way to end the 'peculiar institution' when the intolerant abolitionists went nuts over the issue," Hinkle wrote.

Hinkle also described slavery as "the misfortunate of blacks" and claimed that Reconstruction actually produced greater injustices than slavery or Jim Crow laws.

"The only connection I can see between Jim Crow and the war, much less the flag, is that it may have been the white Southerners' way of retaliating against some blacks who took advantage of them during the most corrupt and disgraceful period in our nation's history, Reconstruction," Hinkle asserted. "Such wrongful retaliation occurs whenever the majority regains control after the minority has abused the majority."

Dr. W. Scott Poole, assistant professor of history at the College of Charleston, offered a devastating critique of Hinkle's book. Writing a chapter in the book National Symbols, Fractured Identities, Poole argued that Hinkle's book "represents a bizarre outcropping of the 'neo-Confederate' movement."

"Hinkle's diatribe makes frequent use of class language, often couched in the vocabulary of Confederate nationalism," Poole wrote. "The tract resists easy analysis. Poorly written and edited, it is a farrago of ahistorical meandering, tendentious claims, and a disturbing number of unctuous threats. The author employs a rhetorical strategy of verbal violence against the elites who are allegedly marginalizing white southerners."

Poole also noted that that "Hinkle insists on condemning Lincoln to hellfire." Hinkle gleefully suggested that Lincoln is in Hell, which he sees as justified punishment for a man that waged war against the South.

Since working for The Pathway, Hinkle has briefly praised Confederate General Robert E. Lee. He also launched an attack on the Baptist World Alliance that included criticism of former Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu, a black religious leader who won the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to end apartheid in South Africa and bring racial reconciliation to the nation.

Obama is Looking More Presidential

2008-02-22T13:15:00.002-05:00

I am now in the Obama camp. I have given up on my hopes that somehow Al Gore might find a way to come into the presidential race. I do like what I'm hearing from Barak Obama. My wife likes Hillary Clinton. We have both said to each other, however, that whichever one gets the Democratic nomination, we will vote for the Democrat. That's a given.

No way do we want a continuation of the devastating Republican policies in our nation. So many things need changing. But, Tony Cartledge in his blog today (http://www.tonycartledge.com/), hits the proverbial nail on the head with the real issue in this race. It is America's place in the world that is more important than anything else. Read Tony's blog. I agree with him.

Remember after 9/11 how the entire world grieved with America as we mourned the loss of more than 3000 of our citizens. The world would have been solidly behind us in our efforts to destory Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden. We would have found global support in the intelligence area. We had the world on our side.

But, President Bush, along with his Neocon advisors chose a devastating path of invading Iraq, a nation that was of no threat to us at all. For the first time in American history, we invaded a nation that was not a threat to us. Furthermore, we have destroyed our moral integrity in the world by torturing prisoners and a host of other things. In short, the world hates America now.

That's why we need a president like Barak Obama. He thinks globally. His father was African. He lived a part of his childhood overseas. He knows the world community. Say what you will about his lack of experience. Those qualifications alone put him head and shoulders above either Senators Clinton or McCain for the world situation America faces now.

The New Baptist Covenant

2008-02-10T16:57:00.002-05:00

It has taken me about a week, but I have put together my thoughts and feelings about the New Baptist Covenant meeting in Atlanta below. I serve as interim pastor at a church in eastern North Carolina and I incorporated my thoughts into my sermon this morning. Admittedly, I am not a journalist. So, if you want the actual events of the meeting, go to some of the other Baptist blogs such as John Pierce, Tony Cartledge, or the Big Daddy Weave. These are just my own thoughts.

From Despair to Hope
Ezra 3: 10-13

One of the most remarkable worship sites that I have ever visited was Coventry Cathedral in England. I visited this cathedral on a Sunday morning in 2006. On the night of November 14, 1940 the German Luftwaffe completely destroyed the city of Coventry with a ferocious bombing campaign that included a number of incendiary bombs. The old cathedral, which had stood for almost a millennium was completely and utterly destroyed. The very next day the people of Coventry vowed to rebuild their cathedral. However, they determined that the rebuilding would not be an act of anger or defiance. They would rebuild in the spirit of reconciliation and peace as a sign of their faith, hope, and trust in the future.

Shortly after the destruction, the cathedral’s stone mason discovered two burned out medieval timbers from the roof of the old cathedral which had fallen to the floor in the shape of a cross. He set them up on a make-shift altar in the ruins and later the words “Father Forgive” were inscribed behind the altar in the sanctuary wall. Also, three nails were found in the rubble and were fused together to form a “cross of nails” which has become the symbol of the cathedral’s Ministry of Peace and Reconciliation to the world.

The new cathedral was started in 1956 and completed six years later. Today it stands as a beautiful testimony that in the midst of despair can come hope. From the ashes of the old Coventry Cathedral has arisen the new Coventry Cathedral with an international ministry promoting peace and reconciliation.

You have heard me mention before about how devastating the 6th century B.C. was for the Jewish people. Indeed, it is impossible to understand ancient Israel without being aware of this monumental event in their history. In 587 B.C. the Babylonians completely destroyed Jerusalem and more importantly, their temple. For 400 years it had stood as the heart of their worship community. It was dreamed of by David, dedicated by Solomon, drawn attention to by Jeremiah, dedicated again by Josiah, and destroyed by the Babylonians. Now it was gone.

But it got worse. The people themselves were taken into captivity into Babylon. Talk about despair! They lost their land. They lost their temple. They lost their way of life. And they lost their faith. They were devastated!

But a wonderful thing happened about 50 years later. In 538 B.C. the Babylonians were defeated by the Persians and the Jews were allowed to return to Jerusalem. Ezra led one of these waves of returning Jews. But when they arrived back home things had changed drastically over the last half-century. The city of Jerusalem lay in ruins. The walls were destroyed. The temple itself was destroyed. All the important objects of the temple were gone. Everything of value had been looted. The Ark of the Covenant was gone. The temple lay in ruins, a picture of utter devastation.

Led by Ezra, the Jews began the slow task of rebuilding their temple. First they rebuilt the altar (vss. 1-6). Then they laid the foundation for the temple (vss. 7-9). Finally, we come to our text for the day. After the foundation was completed, the people began to celebrate. It was something of a pause, a respite. They celebrated the fact that they were beginning to move from despair to hope. It was dawning on them that their exile was coming to an end.

As most of you know last week I attended the meeting of the New Baptist Covenant in Atlanta. A number of you have asked me my impression about the meeting. I have promised that I would share my thoughts with you. But first, I need to give you some information about my own pilgrimage in the Baptist world.

Unlike many of you, I did not grow up Baptist. I grew up in the Methodist tradition. While many of you were going to Training Union on Sunday evenings, I was going to MYF. Most of you grew up hearing about Ridgecrest. For me it was Lake Junaluska. I am not Baptist by birth. I am Baptist by conviction. I was introduced to the Baptist tradition by two people, my best friend in high school and my girlfriend (whose father was a Baptist preacher). I was 18 years old when I was baptized in October, 1977 by Dr. Billy Cline at Merrimon Ave. Baptist Church.

By the time I was baptized I had decided that I was going to prepare for ministry in the Baptist tradition. I was a freshman at Mars Hill College where I completed my Religion degree then continued on at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary where I completed my Master of Divinity degree.

But, in the midst of my preparation for ministry I became acutely aware of “the Controversy” when it broke out in 1979. Some of you were at one of the six SBC seminaries during this time. The Controversy for many of us became sort of like a sport. Conventions came and went and we attended if we could and pulled for “our side.” I went to seminary with no idea what a Fundamentalist was but graduated knowing exactly what a Fundamentalist was. I knew that Fundamentalism was not the lens through which I viewed the Christian life.

And so I eventually became a pastor in Texas and did what many others like me did. I began to devote time to organizing and working for the Moderate network in Texas Baptist life. If I wasn’t directly involved in vote counting or trying to woo an “uncommitted” pastor to our side, I was talking about “the Controversy” with friends over lunch and speculating about what might happen at the next convention meeting.

All of this was a very poisonous environment. Looking back on it, it was almost addictive. Gossip about various leaders would spread like wildfire. Conventions were like football games. We cheered and booed, jeered and wooed. I had become addicted to the Controversy.

The year 1990 marked a turning point. That was the year that most Moderates realized that the SBC was gone and would never again be the same. But still the fight continued in state conventions and associations. I continued to discuss and debate. Now, after 20 years of participating in the Baptist Battle, I am weary. Many of my generation of ministers and theological professors are tired of the Controversy. I don’t disparage the Conservatives in Baptist life. I just want to do the ministry and work that God has called me to do and not be hindered by that mindset.

But although I don’t go to SBC meetings anymore and I am completely affiliated with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, the “Controversy” has still remained with me. The outcome of 30 years of in-fighting between Baptists in the South has been the demise of the Baptist name. Now, the name “Baptist” is a caricature. So many times I introduce myself as “Baptist” but have to qualify it and say, “But I’m a good kind of Baptist.” Or, “I’m not that kind of Baptist.”

The Baptist name has lost much of its luster and no longer holds a positive witness in many places today. In the early 21st century, to the non-Baptist world that doesn’t understand the different kinds of Baptists, our name is associated with things such as total identification with the extreme right wing of one political party, boycotting Disneyworld, telling women they need to “graciously submit” to their husbands, telling women that God will allow the church to baptize you but not allow the church to ordain you, or telling certain people that they are not welcomed in our churches because of a specific sin or lifestyle they may lead.

Another sobering fact is that the generation behind me is less interested in denominational affiliation with the Baptists than previous generations. That is going to have a tremendous impact on the well-being of Baptist churches in the future. It is also going to have an impact on the ability of Baptist churches in the future to attract ministers. The generation behind mine simply is not as interested in our denomination as their parents and grandparents. At Campbell, the class that I teach that always has the smallest enrollment is my Baptist History class. But, I get a good number of students who sign up for my Religion in America, Early Christianity, or Reformation classes.

Because the Baptist name has suffered greatly in the last 30 years, there is a sense in which I and many like me have felt like we were in exile in Babylon. I have felt feelings of despair. I have been sorrowful that the good things that Baptists have historically championed such as devotion to freedom of conscience, religious freedom, freedom of the local church, freedom to read and interpret scripture for ourselves, all good aspects of the Baptist tradition, have been overshadowed by our fighting, hypocrisy, and pharisaic spirit. God forgive us!

That is why I was very excited about the New Baptist Covenant and why I returned home last Saturday from Atlanta with a hope that I have not had for the Baptist witness in the world in a long time. In the short time I have, let me try and describe to you what this meeting was about and why I am so excited.

I. First, let me tell you what the meeting was not.

A. This Meeting Was Not a Political Rally Designed to Support the Democratic Party in this Election Year.

It is true that the meeting was organized by former President Jimmy Carter and was supported by former President Bill Clinton. But in the plenary sessions there were no campaign speeches. In fact, the only person who mentioned a candidate for president was Bill Clinton who, in his speech, spoke of his admiration and friendship with Governor Mike Huckabee, a fellow Baptist. Admittedly, former Presidents Carter and Clinton and former Vice-President Al Gore are Democrats. However, Senators Charles Grassley and Lindsey Graham, both Republicans, were on the program (although Senator Graham had to cancel). And, Governor Mike Huckabee was originally scheduled to be on the program but withdrew because he is a presidential candidate. This was not a political rally. I think if it had become that, many of us (perhaps thousands) would have left early.

I saw a letter to the editor in the Raleigh News and Observer yesterday that was criticizing the meeting as being political. The writer said:

It is most unusual that liberal and moderate Baptists would join with former U.S. Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore to discuss issues of national interest. Although the leaders of the group claimed that they had no political agenda, the themes of the meeting—“poverty, diversity, peace, immigration and prisoners”—are the same prominent topics used by all the high profile candidates in today’s national political arena.[1]

To this I would simply respond by saying (1) There were plenty of Baptists at this meeting who would not necessarily fall into the category of “moderate and liberal Baptists,” and (2) I think Jesus spoke a lot about “poverty, diversity, peace, immigration, and prisoners” long before any political candidates for president talked about them. I wondered if the writer had ever read Matthew 25?

B. This Meeting Was Not Designed to Include Only Moderate and Liberal Baptists.

On the contrary, Baptists from all over North America were invited to participate in this meeting. A total of 30 different Baptists groups responded. One of the major Baptist groups in North America, indeed the largest, refused to participate. And representatives from that group as well as their publicity arm have been most critical of the New Baptist Convenant. But, their exclusion was not the doing of the organizers of the New Baptist Covenant. They were invited and asked to be involved. They chose instead to stay away.

To bring us back to the text in Ezra this morning, you recall that when the Jews, led by Ezra, laid the foundation of the temple, they celebrated. They rejoiced. They worshipped and praised God. And, yet, if you read further in the chapter, you will discover that a group eventually began to work against the rebuilding of the temple. Those that speak negatively about the New Baptist Covenant, whatever it was and whatever it will be, remind me of the naysayers in Ezra 3:12.

C. The New Baptist Covenant Was Not the Beginning of a New
Denomination.

Again, some have claimed that organizing a new Baptist denomination is the real motive behind the organizers. I heard nothing about this at all. In fact, there were questions from the podium and in the hallways about where does this movement go from here. No one, and I mean no one has any desire to create a new denomination. This meeting represented no attempt to build a new Baptist body. Buddy Shurden said it this way, “The New Baptist Covenant is not an effort to form something together, it is an effort to say something together about what we ought to be doing together.”[2]

II. Finally, I Will Tell You What I Believe this Meeting Accomplished.

A. This Was, Perhaps the Most Diverse Gathering of Such a Large Number of Baptists, in the Four Centuries of Our History

I can’t stress too much how diverse this gathering was. There was theological diversity. They was racial diversity. There was cultural diversity. There were close to 20,000 people registered for this meeting from 30 racially, geographically and theologically diverse Baptist groups in North America. These 30 Baptist denominations (Southern Baptists, Cooperative Baptist Fellowship Baptists, American Baptists, National Baptists, Progressive National Baptists, Canadian Baptists, Hispanic Baptists, Seventh-Day Baptists, Japanese Baptists, Laotian Baptists, just to name a few) represented 20 million Baptists in North America.

Forty-Five years ago, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. stood on the steps of the Lincoln Monument and declared in his famous “I Have a Dream” speech, that “one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave-owners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood.” There is no doubt in my mind that on the red hills of Georgia from January 30-Feburary 1, 2008, King’s dream came to fruition. It was truly one of the most exciting meetings I have ever been to because of the incredible diversity.

B. This Was a Meeting that Called Baptists Back to Our Task of Missions.

For too long, we have gone to Baptist meetings and politicked. This meeting was about being like Jesus in the world. We heard a lot about Luke 4. In that chapter, Jesus declared to his hometown folks in Nazareth what he believed to be his mission:

The spirit of the Lord is upon me because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.

Baptists are a people who believe that we should be like Jesus in the world. I wish I had time to recount for you all the speakers we heard from: Marian Wright Edelman who opened our hearts to the plight of poor children here in our own nation. Naw Blooming Night Zan, a registered nurse and Baptist missionary in Burma who works with the Karen people in refugee camps on the Thai border. Tony Campolo, the closest thing America has to an Old Testament prophet, who challenged our hearts about the need for social justice in our nation and world just to name a few.

All of the speakers spoke to us and encouraged us to have a prophetic Baptist witness to the world to call for promoting peace with justice, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, caring for the sick, welcoming the strangers, promoting religious liberty, and respecting diversity. Buddy Shurden said it this way: “the purpose of the New Baptist Covenant is to hand out towels to every Baptist in North America and ask them to become a servant to the least and the last and the lost.”[3]

In conclusion, I’ll just say that I left Atlanta excited about the future for Baptists in the 21st century. Our tradition as Baptists is 400 years old next year. Baptists are perhaps the most diverse denominational group there is. But, I left Atlanta convinced that God has much in store for Baptists during this next century. There is an old Baptist hymn that I thought of this week in relation to the New Baptist Covenant. It goes like this:

We’ve a story to tell to the nations,That shall turn their hearts to the right,A story of truth and mercy,A story of peace and light,A story of peace and light.
For the darkness shall turn to dawning
And the dawning to noonday bright
And Christ’s great kingdom shall come on earth
The Kingdom of love and light.

[1] Raleigh News and Observer, 9 February 2008, p. 20a. Letter by Henry Morgan.
[2] http://www.baptiststandard.com/postnuke/index.php?module=htmlpages&func=display&pid=7387.
[3] http://baptiststoday.org/. Blog by Tony Cartledge.

My Daughter's Writing Skills

2008-02-06T11:38:00.000-05:00

I am very proud of my two daughters, Hannah (age 11) and Gracie (age 6). Hannah has a voracious appetite for reading. She read the entire Harry Potter series, thousands of pages, in only about 5 months. She will read 100 or so pages before she goes to sleep. That devotion to reading bodes well for her as she continues to develop.

Hannah also likes to write. She has always done well with stories she writes for school assignments. But, every now and then, she likes to write a story on her own. Below, with her permission, I have included her most recent story.

Paint the Sunset

There was once a time long ago when dinosaurs roamed the earth and the Indian tribes traveled with the wind. There was a small ten year old girl with long beautiful hair that shone in the darkest times. Her tiny black beetle eyes were blind and her muteness separated her from all the other girls in the tribe. Her name was Surya.

Surya spoke in a way like no other, Surya danced. She was an orphan with no parents or friends.
Every evening Surya climbed up the mountain and watched the birds paint the sunset over the blue misty ocean as she felt the wind push against her and the mist splash her beautiful face. During that time the other Indian girls braided their hair. One girl asked Surya why she wasted her time trying to find the sunset when she couldn’t even see it. Surya replied “Yes, I do not see it, but I can feel it rush in my veins and I can feel the birds rushing towards the sun. The girl laughed and didn’t know that some day she would regret that she laughed.

As Surya grew older she learned many great things from the sunset. She learned how to communicate with the animals. She learned how to whisper to the trees. And she learned how to dance with the rivers. But she didn’t know that on her sixteenth birthday something extraordinary would happen to her and the girl named Hema who always made fun of her.

On a cold and dreary day Surya woke up to the sound of song birds and robins. It was her sixteenth birthday. Hema jumped into Surya’s teepee and sang “Ha Ha it’s your birthday, too bad nobody cares!” And then she was gone with the wind. Surya groaned. The very last thing she needed was Hema to tease her. Suddenly she thought of something to look forward to today. She would be able to go and watch the sunset and have him teach her another thing about nature. Finally when it was time to go and climb the mountain something caught her eye. It was a dead mockingbird! The mockingbird was one of the fifty sunset painters. On the oak tree beside the motionless bird a note written in blood said “Surya beware at 12:00 midnight on your birthday you will have to make a choice between the life of your friend Sunset or the life of your self.” Surya panicked. Sunset was her only friend. He taught her everything she needed to know about life. She looked up into the bright sun. Sunset was coming for the last time in history.

Sunset came that evening and Surya told him about the message on the oak tree and Sunset was very worried. He told Surya to listen to the sound of her heart to make the right choice. At twelve a clock on Surya’s birthday Sunrise came into her teepee and she said “I was the one who killed the mockingbird and it was I who wrote the fretting message on the oak. Now it’s your turn to chose between yourself or Sunset.” That moment Hema came into Surya’s teepee. Sunrise said “Matter of fact I can kill your other little friend instead of you.” Hema said “Surya go ahead and let her kill me I deserve it I have been so mean.” Surya said “Ok kill me” The next moment Sunrise shot a blinding red light out of her finger tips. Surya silently fell into a deep rest. Sunrise laughed in a cold icy tone and disappeared.

So when you look at Sunrise you see her red light shining to remind us of her beauty, but now you know she was jealous enough to kill Surya. Now when the Sunset comes early every autumn he is looking for Sarya and every night when it rains at night you know he is crying because he can not find Sarya. So remember to paint your sunset the colors of your heart.

By: Hannah Jonas

The Election

2008-01-25T20:53:00.000-05:00

People who know me well know that I enjoy politics. I like to read op/ed. columns. I like to watch the discussions on shows like Hardball, Meet the Press, etc. I am a politics junkie.

I am also proud to be a Democrat. Yes, there are real Christians in the Democratic party. In fact, all during the 1980s when it seemed like every Christian in America had become a part of the Republican Party and joined the Reagan "revolution," I held out and refused to participate. I always believed that the Republican Party leadership manipulated millions of good Christian people into voting for them and played on the basic ignorance of many people in America about how our nation was founded, what the founders were really like, and how our nation works today. I also think they played on the race issue to pull many southern Democrats into the Republican Party, the so-called "southern strategy first used by Nixon. But, that is another blog!

I am following the election of 2008 very closely. I believe that for the good of the nation the Democrats need to win this election. I have been supporting John Edwards to get the nomination. I still believe he is the "real deal," and as a Christian I am very interested in his populist message and his desire to elevate the working poor in our nation to give them opportunity. That is the American dream. That is also Jesus-like. I like John Edwards.

I also like Barak Obama a lot. I think he is inspiring. I think he has a great message of change, a desire to move the country beyond the cut-throat politics of the last 30 years into a new era. He is the closest thing to Bobby Kennedy (who was shot in 68 when I was only 9) that has come along in my lifetime. He gives speeches that give me goose bumps and inspires me to see America for the good that it can be.

Hillary Clinton is also a good candidate. She is tough, perhaps tougher than her husband Bill. He has taken the best of the right-wing warriors and absorbed it all to emerge stronger. If she is the nominee she will be a force to reckon with and if the Republicans think she is an easy mark for them to defeat, they'd better re-evaluate things.

My real hope for the Democratic Party though is for none of these three to get the nomination. I would like to see a vigorous debate through the primary season with no one getting the clear majority of delegates which would lead to a brokered convention. Then, I would like to see Al Gore come into the picture, unify the party and get the nomination. He may be the only person who can unify the party right now because just about every Democrat I hang around with has a basic suspicion that Al Gore really won the 2000 presidential election. I think he would be a formidible candidate.

Who knows what will happen. It is fun to watch. It is also good to see that even many Evangelical Christians are starting to move beyond their basic social concerns relating to abortion and gay marriage to some social issues that they can join hands with more progressive Christians on such as the environment and global warming, poverty, peace, death penalty, and a host of other things.

It is truly an interesting time in the life of our nation!

All Saints Day

2007-11-04T17:34:00.000-05:00

Today is being celebrated by many Christians as All Saints Day. I think a very appropriate passage of Scripture to commemorate this day is from Hebrews 11, the famous "roll call of faith." However, since Hebrews 11 was originally written in the late first century, there have been 2000 years of Christian history. Therefore, at the risk of leaving out someone's favorite, I submit here my addendum to the "roll call of faith" from Hebrews 11.

By faith, two Christian women named Perpetua and Felicitas were able to stand strong and firm in their faith even to the point of martyrdom.
By faith, Athanasius of Alexandria became a theological giant against the heresy of Arianism at the Council of Nicea.
By faith, Augustine of Hippo, the great theologian of the west was able to overcome his base temptations, live a life devoted exclusively to service to his Lord and give Western theology its primary focus for the next millennium.
By faith, John Chrysostom was able to stand in the high altar of the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople, look the Empress Eudoxia in the eye and publicly censure her for her resistance to his attempts at moral reform in Constantinople and the Eastern Church.
By faith, Thomas Aquinas was able to withstand the rigors of the Dominican monastic order and rise to academic prominence as Roman Catholicism’s greatest theologian and philosopher.
By faith, Martin Luther, a terrified, neurotic, sometimes irascible German monk, was able to experience the grace and forgiveness of God and initiate a movement which forever changed the face of Christianity.
By faith, Balthasar Hubmaier found strength to face a gruesome martyr’s death because of his convictions concerning believer’s baptism and liberty of conscience.
By faith, Thomas Helwys was able to lead a little band of brand new Baptists from Amsterdam back to England and courageously tell King James I that he was a mere mortal and had no authority over the conscience of another human being.
By faith, Roger Williams was able to endure banishment from Massachusetts Bay and establish the colony of Rhode Island, the first colony in the New World exclusively devoted to complete religious freedom and separation of Church and State.
By faith, John Wesley was able to breathe vitality into the Church of England because of his insistence that true religion must be of the heart, not the mind only.
By faith, Jonathan Edwards was able to give theological understanding to the Great Awakening.
By faith, John Leland, an uneducated Baptist preacher, was able to lead the Baptists of Virginia to pressure James Madison into supporting a Bill of Rights to the Constitution of the United States which includes as its first statement a guarantee of complete freedom of religion and ultimately the doctrine of separation of Church and state.
By faith, William Carey was able to leave the comfort of England for the rigors of the mission field in India because of his unwavering conviction that the people of India needed to hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
By faith, Lottie Moon expended her little body in the cause of Southern Baptist missions and gave birth to a passion for missions among Baptists in the South that remains with us today.
By faith, Walter Rauschenbusch was able to minister to the poor and down-trodden in Hell’s Kitchen and then awaken the social conscience of the Church.
By faith, William J. Seymour was able to feel the wind of the Spirit move and found the Azusa Street mission from which the Pentecostal movement sprang.
By faith, Dietrich Bonhoeffer was able to challenge the evil of the Nazi regime.
By faith, Martin Luther King, Jr. had a dream that our great nation would live up to its creed that “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal. . . and that one day the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.”
By faith, Archbishop Oscar Romero was able to challenge an oppressive regime in El Salvador and bring empowerment to the poor of Latin America through a theology of Liberation.
Every believer has their personal "roll call of faith," those individuals whose names may not have made the history books, but who nevertheless serve as inspiration to us in our Christian lives. My grandmothers would be on that list. Dr. W. R. Estep, my church history professor in seminary would be on that list. Who is on your list?

Gideons Can't Pass Out Bibles in Harnett County Schools

2007-11-01T21:51:00.000-04:00

The enclosed story from the Dunn Daily Record describes a decision reached by Harnett County Schools Superintendent Dan Honeycutt. There has been a long-standing practice of allowing the Gideons to distribute bibles in the elementary schools here in Harnett County. Someone complained to the ACLU which contacted Honeycutt to inform him that the practice was illegal. In short, the Harnett County School system has now been notified that the practice of passing out religious literature in its public schools is a violation of federal law. The case, a 1998 Supreme Court case (Peck v. the Upshur County Board of Education) determined that it was a violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment for schools to allow Bibles to be passed out to the students. It constitutes an endorsement of religion, a clear violation of decades of case law argued before both conservative and liberal supreme courts. If Harnett County Schools wanted to fight this, it would eventually have to be carried to the U.S. Supreme Court, a very lengthy, expensive process. It would have drained millions away from our school district in a time when we have so many very critical needs, not the least of which is over-crowding and the need for new schools.

This is a no-brainer but there will probably be a loud, vocal outcry from citizens of Harnett County who disagree with this. Most of them will not understand the intent of the First Amendment, that while guaranteeing freedom of religion, it also guarantees freedom from religion. The First Amendment reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof." There are two clauses here: (1) the "free exercise" clause that says that in America, people should be free to practice their faith unhindered by government intrusion; and (2) the "establishment" clause which says that the government (in this case the school system) cannot establish religion or formally endorse one religion over another.

Fifty years ago, the vast majority of children in public schools in the South were reared in Christian homes and attended church regularly. No problem with these kinds of things. No complaints. But, during recent decades, even in rural areas, the religious landscape has changed drastically. Now, even in Harnett County, it is not unusual to find neighborhoods with children from many different religious traditions such as Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and a good number of children growing up in homes that are expressly non-religious. The reasoning behind these legal opinions that have remained fairly consistent over the last 4 decades is that if one religious tradition (in this case Christian) is allowed to distribute their literature, it is a discrimination against those other religious groups.

One may say, "Well, Christians are in the majority and the majority rules." Majority rules is certainly the case in elections. However, when it comes to the Bill of Rights that is certainly not the case. The Bill of Rights exists specifically to protect the rights and voice of the minority opinion. The Founders were concerned with tyranny by the majority and wisely included the Bill of Rights in the Constitution to allow for the minority voice always to have an equal place at the table.

But, there is an even more important issue here. Where is the best place for religious instruction to take place anyway? The logical answer should be in the home. Quite frankly, I don't want public schools teaching my children religion or even influencing them in religious matters, unless it is perhaps a course on world religions which is taught from an objective point of view. In short, there is a fine line between teaching religion and indoctrination. I know this because I teach religion for a living. So, I'd rather the public schools teach my children reading, math, science, social studies, health and p.e. etc. and leave the religious instruction to our home and family.

So, really, while there will be dismay on the part of many citizens in Harnett County. This is a no-brainer and I applaud our superintendent for making this call.

http://www.dunndailyrecord.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=91678&TM=58017.65

Rest in Peace Dr. Wiggins

2007-08-06T22:00:00.000-04:00

Baptists in the South who read ABP News and particularly those in North Carolina who read the Biblical Recorder, no doubt heard of the death last week of Dr. Norman Adrian Wiggins, the Chancellor of Campbell University. Dr. Wiggins had been the president of the university from 1967-2003. He retired from the presidency and was named chancellor in 2003 because of his battle with cancer, which finally took him after a valiant struggle.

If you want to read more about Dr. Wiggins, you can find the story on the Campbell University website at http://www.campbell.edu/.

If you want to read a good analysis of his funeral service yesterday, see this site:
http://dunndailyrecord.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=89557

I am grateful to Dr. Wiggins for several things. First, he was president of Campbell University in 1994 when I was hired to teach in the Religion Department. I am grateful that he had enough trust in me to allow me to stand in the classroom and do what I sincerely love to do: teach college students about religion. Then, in 1999 he had enough confidence in me to approve my promotion to chairman of the Religion Department. Finally, even though Dr. Wiggins was very conservative theologically and politically, he had a very strong sense of academic freedom.

Dr. Wiggins was always kind to me and cordial whenever I saw him around campus. But there is one story about Dr. Wiggins that I will forever appreciate. During my first or second year (I can't remember now), when I was just getting my feet wet as a religion professor, I encountered a problem that many religion professors at Baptist colleges and universities have to deal with. Several students got it in their minds that I was too "liberal" in my theology and didn't belong as a professor at Campbell. One of the students made an appointment with Dr. Wiggins to discuss me. Of course, I was not invited to the meeting, but a friend of mine, our campus minister at the time, was present.

The conversation went something like this:

The student lodged his complaint about my theology and teaching with Dr. Wiggins. Dr. Wiggins responded by asking the student if he was currently in my class or had had me for the class in the past. The student responded that he had not. Dr. Wiggins then inquired about whether the student had ever sat down with me to talk with me about these concerns. The student responded that he had not. Dr. Wiggins then asked the student how he knew that I believed and taught such things. The student responded that he had a few friends that were in my class that were talking about me. Dr. Wiggins then said, "you mean that you have not personally heard Dr. Jonas teach those things and have not personally talked with him about your concerns?" The student said, "No." Dr. Wiggins then said, "Son, do you know what slander is?"

This was all told to me by my campus minister friend. And, I will always appreciate Dr. Wiggins' defense of me. He could have responded to the student's concern in another way. But, he chose to trust me and defend me.

Rest in peace Dr. Wiggins. Campbell is going to miss you!

Prayers for the Hokies

2007-04-19T14:39:00.000-04:00

I have been in shock over what happened Monday morning at Virginia Tech. Being a professor on a college campus makes this tragedy even more frightening for me and my colleagues. This could have happened anywhere. In fact, we've had some scares over the last few years (one episode with me personally), always dealt with well by our campus and administration here at Campbell University. Nevertheless, we have all been just a little bit "jumpy" this week.

As I have processed this though, there are four thoughts that I have:

(1) How in the world was this troubled young man able to purchase two handguns and the ammunition for them? I know, he didn't violate any laws. That's precisely my point. Why can the N.R.A. at least not support some kind of national registry and at least a 15 day waiting period with requisite background checks before allowing someone to purchase a firearm? We all know that we live in a world with some people who do not need to own guns. And that has to be balanced with the law-abiding citizen who wants to purchase a firearm for hunting or even for protection. Could there not be some type of balance here? It would seem to me that this would be reasonable.

Related to that, unless I am mistaken, the shooter at Virginia Tech was not a U.S. citizen. He was a permanent resident alien. Should there not be again a federal law that would require all people who want to purchase a firearm to prove U.S. citizenship? Would that not be prudent, especially in a post-911 world?

(2) Why was the shooter still a student at Virginia Tech given all that has come out recently about his psychological condition? There was a 2005 court ruling which determined that he was a potential threat. And, there were faculty members and students who several times sounded the alarm and raised red flags about him. Was there not some procedure in place for removing him from the student body before it ever came to this? Did someone "drop the ball" here?

(3) Why did NBC feel that it needed to broadcast the "Cho Manifesto" to the nation yesterday? Oh, I know. They had a "scoop." They had something none of the other news agencies had and they knew they'd have a ratings winner. So, they promoted it all afternoon yesterday and finally broadcast those disturbing photographs and video yesterday evening. But, I fail to see how any of that really added to the story. I fail to see how any of that was journalism. No reporter went out there and "got" the story. It was a package that came to them that no other news agency had. All that was accomplished was to allow a troubled mass murderer to wreak havoc once again on grieving family members and the entire Virginia Tech community. NBC got it right with Imus (although I suspect that the decision to fire Imus was motivated more by financial issues rather than ethics) but made a serious mistake yesterday.

(4) Finally, I have a student here at Campbell University whose sister is a student at Virginia Tech. She was supposed to have been in that infamous building for class on Monday morning, but as it turned out, she overslept and missed class that morning. However, her two suitemates were both killed. Please keep this young woman in your prayers.

Also, I receive an email from a man named Brent Cloyd each week. He is a used theological books salesman. On Monday afternoon I received an email from him (which went to his entire list) requesting prayer for his niece, Austin Cloyd. She was a student at Virginia Tech. He said that his brother had not been able to raise her on the phone or via email and she was not admitted to any of the hospitals. They were fearing the worst. Finally, I got a follow-up email from him on Tuesday that they had confirmation that she was one of the victims that had been killed. Please pray for the family of Austin Cloyd.

At 11:00 this morning the tower bells on our campus tolled 32 times as we all observed a moment of silence for the victims and their families. I was struck by how long it took for the bell to ring 32 times. It was truly an unimaginable loss for the family members.

Don Imus' Troubles

2007-04-09T13:13:00.000-04:00

I have never been a fan of Don Imus. I don't like his show. I particularly have disagreed with some of his political points of view in the past. I don't like the way he makes fun of people. In short, I confess that I simply do not like him. However, the fact that I don't like him gives me no reason to call for his removal from the airwaves. Like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, both radio talk-show hosts with whom I vehemently disagree, Imus has every right in the world under the first amendment to have a show on the public airwaves and to say anything he wants. I am an ardent defender of the first amendment. I believe freedom of speech is the bedrock freedom of our society in America. This includes everything from political disagreeements to calling political leaders various names in mocking humor.

However, I also believe that freedom of speech entails a certain level of responsibility. If you are speaking to an audience of millions, you need to show some wisdom not only in what you say but also in how you say it. If you are going to yell "fire" in a crowded theatre, you'd better be prepared to accept the consequences if people get hurt in the rush to get out.

Which brings me back to Don Imus. On his show last Wednesday morning, he made fun of the Rutgers University Women's basketball team by saying first:

"That's some rough girls from Rutgers," Imus said. "Man, they got tattoos ... ."

He then followed up that comment with: "That's some nappy-headed hos there, I'm going to tell you that."

Finally, his producer Bernard McGuirk said, made reference to a Spike Lee movie and characterized the game as being between the "jigaboos and the wannabees."

Here's where the consequences come in. This is nothing short of hate-filled, racist speech. It is not tolerated except in the very sleaziest of places in our society such as Klan meetings, and back room conversations in the South (or North for that matter). And, so I believe that Don Imus and Bernard McGuirk ought to be summarily fired for this outburst. Other radio talk show hosts have been fired for less. I don't care how popular Imus is. I don't care how much money he makes for CBS Radio. I believe these comments are totally unacceptable for the public airwaves.

For a complete video of the episode last wednesday see this link:

http://www.wnbc.com/video/11537836/index.html

Mega Churches and Shady Finances

2007-04-02T13:43:00.000-04:00

If you are a member of a church which does not fully disclose all financial information, you perhaps ought to be suspicious. This has been an on-going dispute at Bellevue Baptist Church in Memphis, TN recently with a group in the church demanding financial and other records in light of several scandals which have erupted in the congregation surrounding the successor to Adrian Rogers, Steve Gaines. You can read about Bellevue's woes here: http://savingbellevue.com/

Now, here's another story about still another mega-church whose pastor refuses to disclose how he's spending the church's money. Church member beware. Just because a flashy, smooth-talking person claims to have a "call from God," that does not entitle that person to no accountability. Pastors are accountable. In an episcopal system of church governement, they are accountable to the bishop. In a congregational form of church government, they are accountable to the membership of the local church. Hold them accountable!!!

The story below is from: www. Ethicsdaily.com

Shell Games and Secrecy Keith Herron04-02-07

When The Kansas City Star published an investigative story a few weeks ago about the secretive financial oversight of one of the Baptist mega-churches in the area, it was as if a bomb went off in the community.
The news story reported that several hundred members had left the First Family Church of Overland Park, Kan., in the last few years because of the church's refusal to provide members with financial reports of the church income and expenses and the enforced secrecy surrounding the salaries and benefits of the pastor and those family members who are paid staff members.

Accountability issues also involved the broken promises of how funds raised to fund one capital campaign were apparently used to pay for another campaign, while other funds raised for particular projects were either mysteriously delayed or never spent for their stated purpose. Additionally, false explanations were given to the church about how a land deal was consummated according to court records. The members have left over their inability to get answers to their questions about these matters.

Pastor Jerry Johnston exercises tight control over financial disclosure policies by hiding behind the claim that all church financial records are accountable to a board of trustees. According to the story, a lawyer listed in church corporation papers as a board member acknowledged he hadn't been to a board meeting in years, didn't know he was a board member and hadn't attended the church in years.

Former members of a building committee for a recent project left the church out of frustration in obtaining financial reports in order to apply for loan approval to fund the project. They were repeatedly denied the reports and in the end, Johnston covered the loan himself. It is unknown whether he utilized the financial resources of others or underwrote the loan himself. The details are unknown to the members of the church. Within weeks, the entire building committee resigned. It should be noted that Johnston disagreed with the facts of the new story on this point. "Respectfully, I disagree," he said about these accusations.

Members are not given access for the salaries or benefits given to the pastor and staff. Complaints criticize the exorbitant life styles of the pastor and his family listing expensive cars, homes, clothing and the use of an exclusive and high-priced American Express card. Johnston has recently hired a public relations specialist from Dallas to handle all responses to the news stories.

The pastor responded defensively with the warning a few weeks before the story broke that the congregation should expect adversaries to attack them and their ministry. "Whenever God's work is being built, Satan sends opponents, and he energizes opponents," Johnston said. "Beware of Satan as he speaks through different people."

Johnston was apparently referring to the upcoming news story implying that the reporter, a member of another large church in the area, had an ulterior motive to hurt the credibility of the church and its pastor in order to benefit her own church.

The news story also highlighted the duplicity of claims the pastor has a doctoral degree. Johnston uses "Dr. Jerry Johnston" publicly and in all church publications and media, but in fact he does not have such a degree other than the honorary doctorate received when invited by Jerry Falwell to preach the baccalaureate service at Liberty University in 1998.

Johnston was a high school dropout from the Christian high school he attended in Kansas City in the 1970s. He later passed the general equivalency degree but has not earned college or graduate degrees beyond that. He claims he will graduate this spring with a bachelor's degree in biblical studies from the Midwestern Baptist College (SBC), the undergraduate program of Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Kansas City.

While the letters to the editor in The Kansas City Star have been numerous and polarized, it's clear the issue of trust and integrity are central to the story. Many have defended Johnston and the First Family Church as being the victim of a scathing news story that was unfair in light of all the good the church has done in the community while others have voiced their opposition to the strange need for absolute control of such matters.

The news report on First Family's secretive control of their finances has created a community-wide conversation on the issues of trust, disclosure and integrity. In a follow-up article on this issue, a number of local pastors and congregations were asked about their practices regarding financial accountability.

The majority of responses were openly counter to the practices of Johnston at First Family. Nodell Dennis, director of missions for the Blue River-Kansas City Baptist Association said, "The first thing I tell pastors is 'Don't touch the money.'" By that he meant the church should hold itself responsible for creating a system of accountability where the funds are appropriately protected and spent according to a budget system that's open to all members for approval and regular review. Such an open system would create a safe barrier between the minister and the money.

The open accountability of a church's financial reports are a form of sacred trust. Some call it a "covenant" between church members and God that is mutually shared between all members, including the pastor and other ministers.

Dan Busby, vice-president of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability, says the best way to engender trust in a congregation is to be open about its money. "If there isn't that basic appropriate transparency, then people in and out of the congregation will tend to believe that something is being hidden, whether it is or not," he said.

Churches cannot be healthy where secrets abound and refusing to answer the hard questions has the appearance of being its own answer.

Keith D. Herron is senior pastor at Holmeswood Baptist Church in Kansas City, Mo.

More on "Hollywood" Bob Reccord

2007-03-28T10:51:00.000-04:00

This article from Associated Baptist Press speaks for itself. How a church could fall for this line is beyond me. And "Hollywood" Bob just keeps raking in the bucks, bilking from good-hearted Christian people.

Church's offering for Reccord raises questions about six-figure severance

By Greg Warner
Published: March 27, 2007
SALISBURY, N.C. (ABP) -- Former missions leader Bob Reccord preached a revival last week in a North Carolina church where congregants were asked to give a sacrificial "love offering" because preaching is Reccord's "only source of income" -- one year after leaving his top Baptist missions post with a six-figure severance deal.

In a March 1 letter to his congregation, Rick Cockerham, pastor of Calvary Baptist Church in Salisbury, N.C., appealed for members to give generously to support their revival preacher. "Since he is no longer with NAMB, this ministry is Dr. Reccord's only source of income to support his family," Cockerham wrote three weeks before the March 23-25 revival. "He also is supporting his aging mother, who is in a nursing home near his home."
Reccord left the North American Mission Board in Spring 2006 after allegations of financial mismanagement and conflicts of interest.

While it's customary for a visiting preacher to benefit from a voluntary offering from various congregations, few itinerant ministers receive severance pay from their last job. In Reccord's case, the severance was reported to be two-year's worth of his estimated $250,000 annual salary as president of NAMB.

A second letter 10 days later from Calvary's deacon chairman Kirby Sells admitted the love offering had not been successful and pleaded for more money. "Since Dr. Reccord left NAMB, he has not had a salary from anybody," the letter said. "He is totally dependent on meetings like ours for his livelihood…."

Trustee leaders who negotiated the severance agreement never revealed the details. When asked in April 2006 about the report of two-years' salary, NAMB trustee chairman Bill Curtis said "there is precedent at other SBC agencies" for such a settlement.
A member of the Salisbury church, who asked not to be identified, said "it makes me mad" that, after receiving a $500,000 severance from NAMB, Reccord "is now preying on small Baptist churches in our state."

Asked about the letter and revival, Cockerham said he couldn’t be happier with the three days the Reccords spent with his church. “I’ve never had anybody come who was more gracious and kind than Bob and Cheryl,” he said.

He said he never spoke with Reccord about Reccord’s personal finances, and he said Reccord didn’t know about the letter.

Cockerham said his church always asks for “love offerings” for guest speakers, and he sent the supplication letter only to the most “faithful” members to give them additional opportunities to give, he said.

“We’ve had just a very, very positive response with our people, and nobody to my knowledge at Calvary ever even mentioned anything other than a super positive response,” Cockerham said. “We were very pleased with the meeting and very pleased with the Reccords, and I was very pleased with the love offering.”

Reccord did not respond to two e-mail messages and was not available by phone. But his wife, Cheryl, said the couple was not aware of the fund-raising letter. "We never discussed financial things with the pastor," she said March 26. "We focus on the positive aspects of ministry, and we hope you would do the same."

She said the three-day revival provided "wonderful opportunities to minister to people and wonderful stories of people’s lives that were changed."

Preaching a revival at a 500-member church is a far cry from Reccord's heyday, when he spoke to Promise Keepers crowds of 10,000-plus people and flew around the world in a private plane.
His extravagant spending and self-aggrandizing earned him the nickname "Hollywood Bob" at NAMB and prompted an expose by the Christian Index newspaper and a trustee investigation, both of which led to his resignation under pressure in April 2006. They also were the subject of a tell-all book, Spending God's Money, by former NAMB administrator Mary Branson.
Curtis, the NAMB chairman, declined again to discuss the severance agreement March 26. "You know I can't answer those questions," said Curtis, pastor of Cornerstone Baptist Church in Florence, S.C. But he added "it is generally known" that Reccord received a severance.
As for the appropriateness of the Calvary Baptist appeal, he said, "I can't interpose myself into a local-church situation."

The results of the trustee investigation, released in March 2006, faulted Reccord for poor management, autocratic decision-making, extravagant spending on failed ministry projects, apparent conflicts of interest in no-bid contracts for a friend, and creating a "culture of fear" that prevented staffers from questioning the abuses. The trustees also said Reccord spent time and money on events and projects on the periphery of NAMB’s mission and was absent so much he couldn't provide consistent oversight "to properly manage the agency," which directs Southern Baptist mission work in the United States and Canada.

Confederate Heritage Month?

2007-03-21T13:48:00.000-04:00

If I were a citizen of the state of Georgia, I would be ashamed of this effort described below in an Ethics Daily story. The NAACP of Georgia had proposed that the legislature issue a public apology for the state's role in supporting slavery in the 19th century, in hopes of following the action taken recently by the Virginia legislature. Instead, it looks as if the Georgia legislature wants to perpetuate the myth of the Confederacy.

By the way, for all those who believe that the Civil War was not about the issue of slavery, but was instead about states rights or confederate independence, you need go no further than to read the documents of secession written by several of the Confederate States' legislatures which spell out in black and white that the issue causing the separation is indeed slavery. For the document related to the state of Georgia, see this link:

http://patriotpost.us/histdocs/georgia_secession.asp

The Southern states went to war to defend the institution of slavery. End of case. I can't believe Georgia has legislators who want to celebrate that!

Georgia State Senate Considering Confederate Heritage Month Bob Allen03-21-07

After being asked by black leaders to apologize for Georgia's role in slavery, the state Senate instead moved forward with a bill designating April as Confederate Heritage and History Month.
The bill's sponsor, Sen. Bill Mullis, R-Chickamauga, said his proposal is not a reaction to a call by the Georgia state conference of the NAACP for the legislature to follow Virginia's example. Virginia's General Assembly unanimously passed a resolution in February atoning for "involuntary servitude of Africans" and calling for reconciliation among all Virginians.

Georgia's Republican governor, Sonny Perdue, said he was skeptical about his state following Virginia's lead in apologizing for slavery. "Repentance comes from the heart," he said, according to the Associated Press. "I'm not sure about public apologies ... as far as the motivation for them."

Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle, also a Republican, broke ranks with Perdue, saying he would support the effort to acknowledge the state's role in slavery, which has biracial and bipartisan support. A top Republican leader, Senate President Pro Tem Eric Johnson (R-Savannah) said he would introduce such an apology, increasing its chance of passage.

In the meantime, the Senate Rules committee on Monday voted unanimously to send SB 283, setting aside each April "to honor, observe, and celebrate the Confederate States of America, its history, those who served in its armed forces and government, and all those millions of its citizens of various races and ethnic groups and religions who contributed in sundry and myriad ways to the cause of Southern Independence…."

Mullis' district is home to Chickamauga Battlefield, scene of the last major Confederate victory of the Civil War in September 1863. Mullis said he introduced the bill as a favor to John Culpepper, commissioner of the Georgia Civil War Commission and a personal friend, and because he believes children need to know the state's history.

His proposal encourages the Civil War Commission to develop curriculum for elementary and high schools about Georgia's Confederate heritage.

Mullis told the Walker County Messenger in LaFayette, Ga., he filed his bill before the NAACP made their demand for an apology, and the timing made it more controversial. He said he is open to having "reconciliation language" added to the bill but not an apology.

"If I had done something personally, yes, I would apologize," he told the Associated Press.

Sen. Kasim Reed (D-Atlanta), an African-American, told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution the timing of Mullis' proposal is troublesome.

"I think that in light of the conversation we've been having about Georgia accepting responsibility for its history as it relates to slavery, this is not appropriate," Reed said. "If we're not going to address that issue in a candid way, I find it inappropriate to be passing a measure such as this."

Reed also said he is disappointed that lawmakers have not yet approved a proposal to hang a portrait of civil rights figure Coretta Scott King in the state Capitol.

Several Southern states observe Confederate Heritage and History Month in some form. April is the month the War Between the States both began in 1861 and ended in 1865. Georgia already celebrates Confederate Memorial Day on April 26.

The Georgia Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans is working in all 159 counties in the state requesting proclamations by county commissions.

Mullis said his measure would help promote tourism in the state. State officials are already working on plans to promote tourism for the 150th anniversary of the Civil War in 2011.

This year marks the 145th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation, an 1883 executive order by President Abraham Lincoln declaring freedom for slaves in confederate states.

Bob Allen is managing editor of EthicsDaily.com.
Copyright © 2002-2005 EthicsDaily.com

A Promising Future for Baptists

2007-02-15T13:36:00.000-05:00

I am very excited about the New North American Baptist Convenant and its forthcoming celebration in January, 2008. I plan to be at this historic meeting. For the first time in a very long time, I have hope that the name "Baptist" might be able to be rehabilited. For the last several decades the Baptist name has been increasingly viewed in a negative light. Now, I have hope that with this Covenant signed by the leaders of 18 other Baptists groups, the name "Baptist" might be able to be viewed positively again. Below is an article about the Covenant and the celebration next January written by one of the premier Baptist historians of our day, Buddy Shurden. The link is found at: http://www.centerforbaptiststudies.org/bulletin/2007/february.htm

"Living History: The New North American Baptist Covenant and Its Celebration"By Walter B. Shurden

I believe . . .
that “The New North American Baptist Covenant and its Celebration” that is presently in the planning stage for early 2008 in Atlanta, GA is one of the most exciting things that has happened in my half-century of traipsing around the Baptist yard of America.

By now, most Baptists and many other Christians are aware that “A New North American Baptist Covenant” has been adopted by Baptist leaders representing an estimated twenty million Baptists, and probably more. It all started with the majestic dream of one of the good and prophetic Baptists of our time, evangelical President Jimmy Carter. Without him, the Covenant would not be a possibility. President Carter wisely chose Mercer President William D. Underwood to help him spearhead the movement.

What is “The North American Baptist Covenant Celebration?” Foremost, it is a “covenant,” a good biblical word. It is a covenant that eighteen Baptist leaders adopted on 10 April 2006 in Atlanta, GA at the Carter Center “to speak and work together to create an authentic and genuine prophetic Baptist voice in these complex times. They reaffirmed their commitment to traditional Baptist values, including sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ and its implications for public and private morality. They specifically committed themselves to their obligations as Christians to promote peace with justice, to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, care for the sick and the marginalized, welcome the strangers among us, and promote religious liberty and respect for religious diversity.”

A second strategic planning committee convened at the Carter Center on 13 June 2006. At this meeting several significant developments occurred. One, the Covenant was reaffirmed. Second, those present underscored the necessity of celebrating the Covenant by crossing racial, ethnic, and gender barriers among Baptists. Third, these Baptists wanted to project an image of Baptist unity among those who represent prophetic and traditional moral values, especially themes of religious liberty and equality in the service of Christ. Fourth, two committees were appointed. The first, led by President William Underwood of Mercer University, would seek to find a time and place for a Baptist convocation that would be a massive Celebration of the North American Baptist Covenant. Dr. Jimmy Allen was appointed chair of the Program Committee of the future Celebration.

The last meeting for the Covenant planning celebration, now much publicized, met on 9 January 2007, again at the Carter Center in Atlanta. President Bill Clinton was present to endorse and affirm the Baptist Covenant and its celebration.

Why do I think that the Covenant Celebration is one of the most exciting things that has happened in my half century of traipsing around the Baptist yard of America?

First, it puts Baptists on the road to healing. Tragic wounds have scarred the Baptist landscape over the years. These wounds have divided white Baptists from white Baptists since the mid-nineteenth century issue of slavery. White Baptists, North and South and East and West, are now sitting around the same table talking to each other, listening to each other, embracing each other.

Second, it puts us on the road to healing some sinful wounds in Baptist life. These are the wounds of slavery itself, wounds that divided black Baptists from white Baptists since before the nineteenth century. I cannot put into words the thrill of sitting with black Baptists, names that I have known for some years, but who are now becoming friends. One element of our conversation that I have most enjoyed is the absence of playing to an audience. Deference is out. Honesty is in. People are not afraid to say what they think, and others are not afraid to disagree.

Third, it puts Baptists of North America on the road to integration of smaller ethnic groups into the larger Baptist family. Japanese Baptists, Laotian Baptists, Korean Baptists and Hispanic Baptists were all gathered around the table at the Carter Center on Tuesday, 9 January 2007.

Fourth, it puts us on the road to greater awareness of our Canadian and Mexican Baptist friends.

Fifth, and most important, it puts us on the road to working together on issues that unite rather than issues that divide. Those who signed the Covenant and who will be part of its celebration are not a monolithic group. Like good Baptists, we still differ on a number of issues. But we have decided to work in areas of agreement, and most of these have to do with the hurt and suffering of humankind. The best definition of “church” that I have ever heard is: “All who love Christ in the service of all who suffer.” The North American Baptist Covenant Celebration is not a “Church,” but the Covenant leaders certainly plan to act in a churchly manner.

A word simply must be said about what the “New North American Baptist Covenant Celebration” is NOT.

First, it is NOT an effort to construct a new mammoth Baptist denomination in America. The NABC is an informal Baptist network, not a new Baptist corporation. Baptists don’t need a new Baptist Denominational Corporation in this country. We need cooperation, not Corporation. We need to talk to each other. We need not tread on each other’s turf, and we certainly do not need to tear up turf securely planted. We need energy from each other. We do not need a phony Baptist ecumenism, and we do not plan to have such.

Second, the NABC is NOT an anti-SBC movement. It was not designed to embarrass the SBC. It was not even designed to call attention to the SBC in any possible way. That the Covenant represents some commitments lacking in fundamentalist SBC leadership minds since 1979 has not been a major issue. Most of the Baptists involved in the Covenant group have had very little, if any, historical relationship with the SBC for over a century. Only the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship people, a very small portion of the Covenant group, has had SBC relations within the last 30 years.

Third, the North American Baptist Covenant and its celebration in early 2008 is NOT an anti-Republican movement to get a Democratic candidate elected president of the United States. Indeed, the Covenant Baptists are looking for Republicans and Independents that share the values of the Covenant itself. Unfortunately, a kind of political conspiracy theory quickly developed in some suspicious minds that this was an anti-SBC, anti-Republican movement. However, that talk has never been uttered in any of the meetings that I have been in with the New Covenant planning groups, and I have been present at every one of them, including some of the subcommittee meetings. On the other hand, I have witnessed efforts to include people of all political and theological stripes who can commit to the Covenant.

The New SBC Leadership: Do You Know Where Your Money is Going?

2007-02-12T12:58:00.000-05:00

I have been a critic of the leadership of theSBC since they began to move into power in 1979. My experience, talking to people who have been hurt by these demagogues is that they can be very mean and hurtful people and that they have a very high opinion of themselves at times. Furthermore, many of them have an attitude of "entitlement," especially when it comes to financial arrangements. In other words, I have long suspected that they may be doing some really unethical things with money and the budgets at the institutions they control.

Below is an article from Bob Allen at Ethicsdaily.com about "Hollywood Bob" Reccord and how he fleeced the coffers of the North American Mission Board while he was president. It is worth reading. And, I think every person who remains loyal to the SBC ought to read it and begin to question what is being done with their money.

The article is located at: www.ethicsdaily.com

Author Describes Culture of Waste at Baptist Agency

Bob Allen02-12-07

A radio interviewer Sunday dubbed it "Branson's Law:" The extent of misuse of mission dollars is directly proportional to the distance between the giver and the spender.
Mary Kinney Branson, author of Spending God's Money: Extravagance and Misuse in the Name of Ministry, uses the following analogy: If a preschooler brought a jar of coins to church and desired to give it to the Lord's work, most everyone would take care to make sure it is spent wisely. As those small gifts are combined through collective giving into multi-million-dollar budgets of denominational entities, however, it becomes easy to forget it's made up of many small sacrifices.

Branson worked 16 years for the Southern Baptist Convention, primarily as editing and marketing director of the Home Mission Board and its successor North American Mission Board, formed in a denominational reorganization in 1997.

Not long after arriving at the HMB, Branson said, she began hearing stories about "old timers" and how rigid they were with approving expenditures. Arthur Rutledge, HMB president from 1964 to 1976, once refused to approve a U-Haul trailer rented to carry supplies to a conference in Florida, saying staffers already driving to the conference could have packed supplies in the trunks and backseats of their personal cars.

After an uninitiated new worker mistakenly listed a massage taken to relax after a hard day's work on a line in an expense form labeled "entertainment," Rutledge took up all the expense forms and issued new ones without an "entertainment" category.

While the environment was somewhat more relaxed when Branson arrived--not long after Larry Lewis became president in 1987--the appearance of extravagance was still strongly discouraged. Traveling staff members were told not to accept free upgrades at rental car counters, because people observing them would assume they paid full price. Lewis once refused to ride in a stretch limo sent to an airport to pick him up.

That culture changed, she said, after formation of NAMB and election of President Robert Reccord, a former mega-church pastor whose extravagant lifestyle soon earned him the nickname "Hollywood Bob."

"Dr. Reccord came from a mega-church, and he brought with him a mega-church mindset," Branson said Sunday on "Religious Talk," a weekly radio program hosted by Bruce Prescott, executive director of Mainstream Oklahoma Baptists.

"Dr. Lewis had been a church planter," Branson said. "Some of the things a mega-church pastor feels entitled to do became part of our culture."

One of the first things to go, she said, was full financial disclosure. A half-inch-thick budget that had been presented to HMB trustees was reduced at NAMB to a few pages. As a result, she said, trustees didn't know what questions to ask.

"We are finding that in a lot of mega-churches," Branson told Prescott. "People are standing up and saying, 'We want the information. We want to know what the salaries are.'"

"I've actually received e-mails from some people asking for advice on how to receive that information from their church," she said. Some have set up Web sites, because they feel too intimidated to ask their pastor for the information.

"We are not children," she said. "This is our money. If we are paying for it, we have a right to know how it's being spent."

Branson said her book's focus is not on individuals but on a system that promotes waste and rewards hubris.

"Most of us, if we were in a position of entitlement, and we had no checks and balances, would do the same thing," she said. "It's very difficult to spend that kind of money with humility."

Branson said she left NAMB under positive circumstances and had no intention of writing a book. She probably never would have, she admitted, if--like about 100 people let go during Reccord's administration--she had been offered a couple of thousand dollars of severance in exchange for never saying or writing anything negative about NAMB. Branson said she has long wondered about a Christian organization that would require former employees to sign such a statement.

She said she also wonders about the leadership of 41 prominent SBC leaders who signed a letter unconditionally supporting Reccord after he stepped down, despite knowing about his spending practices. After Reccord left, auditors found that two of those signers, evangelist Jay Strack and Reccord's pastor, Johnny Hunt of Woodstock Baptist Church, were paid a total of $392,000 without written contracts through verbal agreements with Reccord, who at one time had $1 million in discretionary spending cleared by auditors.

At least one of 31 employees laid off as a result as Reccord's lucrative contract with InovaOne, a business owned by a member of Reccord's former church in Norfolk, Va., ended up on food stamps. When he decided to resign, Reccord reportedly took a lawyer with him to negotiate his own settlement. It was supposed to be secret, Branson said, but word leaked out it was in the neighborhood of $500,000 with additional funds for a headhunter to help him find a new job.

Branson said not everything that occurred at NAMB was bad, but much of it was not part of the agency's primary assignment. Directors were repeatedly told to cut budgets and reduce staff, even while money was coming in, to make room for entrepreneurial ideas of leaders without input from church planters on the field.

"I do feel it's important to bring these things to light," she said. "I've heard people say 'you could hurt the cause of Christ.' I believe it could hurt the cause of man, but not the cause of Christ. If you look in the Bible, sin is confronted."

Another change when she moved to NAMB, Branson said, is that on at least two occasions part of her job was to "brand" Bob Reccord. One poster displayed in NAMB's chapel promoted a meeting with Reccord as a featured speaker that identified him only as "author" without any mention of NAMB.

Reccord contracted two outside PR firms, despite having a public relations department on staff at his service, at a cost of $12,000 a month with a goal of "getting him on CNN."

Asked by Prescott if Reccord ever made it onto CNN, Branson quipped: "I don't know, but maybe Spending God's Money will get on CNN."

Bob Allen is managing editor of EthicsDaily.com.

I Am Proud of My Church

2007-02-04T15:35:00.000-05:00

I am a member of Memorial Baptist Church in Buies Creek, NC. As I was sitting with my children in church today, there were several thoughts that occurred to me which illustrate why I am so proud of my church. I'd like to share them with you. In a day and time when there are many churches in turmoil, and people frequently complain about their church, I'd like to say a positive word about the community of faith where my family worships.

First, we have a wonderful pastor, Dr. David Whiteman. He has been our pastor for more than 20 years. He is beloved by the membership of our church, indeed the "marriage" between pastor and parish has been very good. It is a healthy relationship and the fact that he is such a good pastor means a lot to my family. He is always there when we need him to bring a "pastoral presence." He leads the staff well as they plan and conduct the worship services and his sermons always have a tremendous amount of depth to them. He makes me think. And any pastor worth his/her salt should do that every Sunday. Furthermore, I consider David to be one of my closest friends. I always feel at ease around him. I never feel like he's judging me for my weaknesses. I always feel accepted by him, which is how I think people probably felt around Jesus, again a trait that any pastor worth his/her salt should possess. Pastors should welcome people to their presence, not repel people away by their arrogance.

Second, our church has a wonderful program for children. My children are happy at Memorial Baptist Church. There are lots of activities for the children. The Sunday School is good. And, children are treasured at our church. Our Childrens' Minister, Rev. Robin Hardison, is the best in the business. Even though she is a busy mother herself, she always finds time for the children in our church. I have always admired how patient she seems around the children and every child is valued and loved the same by her.

Third, we have one of the best atmospheres of fellowship that I have ever experienced in a church. Our church has one of the most diverse congregations that I have ever been a part of, yet we celebrate that diversity and it becomes our strength rather than an impediment. Let me illustrate what I mean. Some churches are like blankets. They are all one color, all one depth, and all one pattern. They might keep the congregation warm, but there is no diversity. In fact, diversity is not encouraged and is even threatening in a church like this. The leadership of churches like this would prefer that the church remain like a blanket because diversity could lead to change or a least might lead to challenging the status quo. But, our church is like a quilt. We have lots of color, lots of different edges, lots of shapes and sizes. But in spite of that diversity, we are all united in purpose. Our church's statement of purpose "Celebrating Christ, Growing Together and Serving Others," unites us as one body with different parts, all important for our mission. Do we always agree? Absolutely not. But, we're Christian about it. We discuss things in committees, in business meetings, and in Sunday School classes, but no one goes away mad. We respect one another. We have different theological perspectives from liberal to conservative. We have different political perspectives from conservative Republican to liberal Democrat and everything in between. Sometimes our discussions are passionate. But, we are always there for each other and our diversity becomes our strength. I like belonging to a "quilt-style" church rather than a "blanket-style" church! Furthermore, quilts are prettier than blankets. They take more work to make and they even keep you warmer on a cold, dark night! Our church is one of the best I have ever seen at celebrating its diversity.

Fourth, our church prays for and cares for those in need. My family has experienced this firsthand over the last several months. My wife has had a long history of chronic back pain. Finally, she had an accident last August which ultimately led to a very extensive back surgery just before Christmas. I can't even begin to express how helpful our church community has been to our family. Several people kept our children overnight during the time that my wife was in the hospital. Others have made meals for us. Still more have prayed for Pam. And, there has been an outpouring of love and concern that we'll never be able to repay. Perhaps the way we repay is simply to return the love and sharing of resources to someone else who is in need.

Fifth, our church understands the essence of the Baptist tradition. We are a church that celebrates freedom. Early Baptists understood the value of freedom. They celebrated the freedom of the individual believer within the community of faith. They valued the freedom of the local congregation to govern itself without any kind of coercion from the outside. They cherished the freedom to interpret Scripture for themselves. And they worked tirelessly to secure religious freedom from the government, both for themselves and for others. They understood the nature of the Golden Rule, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." They understood that if they needed freedom to practice their faith as they were led to do so, they in turn had to work for freedom for others with different beliefs as well. If freedom of religion is repressed for one group, ultimately there is no true freedom of religion. Our church is a "Baptist" church and as such we value the freedom to be whatever God's Spirit leads us to be.

Sixth, and this is a little bit more specific, I am very proud that our church celebrates that God can call and use both women and men in ministry. I am so proud that our church has just recently been named to receive the "Church Award" from Baptist Women in Ministry of North Carolina. This means that we have been selected as the church of the year by this fine organization for our promotion of women in ministry. Today, we celebrated "women in ministry Sunday," an emphasis promoted by the Baptist History and Heritage Society. Our Minister to Youth and College Students, Rev. Jenny Folmar, shared an outstanding message with our congregation today from I Corinthians 15 entitled, "I Am What I Am." It was a very good message that challenged us. As good as the sermon was though, the thing that stood out the most to me was how much attention my ten year-old daughter Hannah paid to it. The fact that a woman was proclaiming the Gospel from the pulpit of our church today and held the attention of my daughter made quite an impression on me. And, it also sent a message to my daughter and to any other young girls in the congregation that if they hear God's voice calling them to ministry someday, our church will celebrate and encourage God's call on their lives, not try and convince them that they are mistaken.

That leads me to one final thought. Our church is in the process of trying to make some decisions about the entities it is going to affiliate with beyond itself. More specifically, we are trying to decide whether we need to continue in fellowship with the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina or are we going to alter that relationship in some kind of way. For me, the decision becomes a matter of conscience. How can we continue to associate with a Convention which seems to be moving so rapidly in the direction of becoming a de facto auxilliary of the Southen Baptist Convention? And, anyone who has followed, even from a distance, the direction that the Southern Baptist Convention has travelled, should be concerned. The SBC is now one group of Baptists which are defined on the basis of what they are against rather than what they are for. And that is a terrible p.r. problem! The SBC has made it clear in its Baptist Faith and Message 2000 statement that it has no room for women serving God in ministry positions, most especially the pastorate. In other words, they want to try and limit whom God will call to the ministry. Furthermore, there is a mean spirit prevalent in the SBC which comes across in a militant tone. It turns people away rather than invites people in. So, if this is the direction that the Baptist State Convention seems to be going, does our church really need to be affiliated with it? What can I say to my daughters some day if either or both of them should feel the call of God to preach and our church is formally affiliated with a Convention that not only does not celebrate her call, but would want us to tell her that she is mistaken? Additionally, how can a church that celebrates its diversity (a "quilt-style" church) find commonality with a Convention that seems bent on encouraging more "blanket-style" churches? Or, put another way, can a "quilt-style" church find a place at the table in a Convention full of "blanket-style" churches?

If you live in the Buies Creek area and you are looking for a church, I encourage you to come by Memorial Baptist Church. Our quilt will keep you warm! Check out our website at:

http://www.memorialbaptistchurch.net/PublicPortal/

Hypocrisy in the Evangelical and Republican Ranks

2006-11-04T20:44:00.000-05:00

O.K. So, I am driving home from my nightly workout at the gym Thursday night (I walk 3-5 miles on the treadmill) and I hear on the radio the breaking news that Rev. Ted Haggard has resigned as the President of the National Association of Evangelicals and temporarily stepped aside as pastor of the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado. To give you an idea of how powerful this man was in the Evangelical community, the NAE boasts a membership of more than 30 million Evangelical Christians. His church alone has a membership of 14,000. And, Evangelical Christians have been the centerpiece of Karl Rove's strategy to win elections on behalf of George Bush ever since Bush first ran for Governor in Texas. Haggard himself had regular contact with the White House and for the last several elections, the Rove-Bush political machine could always count on millions of Evangelical Christian voters to turn out on election day. They pushed Bush over the top in 2000 and again in 2004.

I cannot predict what will happen on Tuesday in the election. But, I think Evangelicals need to do some serious thinking and reevaluation of their true allegiances. Evangelicalism is a movement which can trace its beginning back to the 19th century in America. It gets its name from the Greek word for "good news." Though it encompasses a variety of different Christian traditions, everything from Fundamentalists to Pentecostals, it has two central ideas shared by all: the importance of a personal conversion experience with Jesus Christ and supreme devotion to the Bible as the only source of authority for a Christian.

Evangelical leaders such as James Dobson, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson, became enamoured with secular political power back in the 1970s as a way to foster change in America. And that is where I would argue the movement needs correction. Randall Balmer, a professor of American Religious History at Barnard College in Columbia University, who grew up in the Evangelical tradition and still identifies with it, has written a new book that I recommend. It is called Thy Kingdom Come, an Evangelical's Lament: How the Religious Right Distorts the Faith and Threatens America. The first sentences in the Introduction of the book is hard-hitting:

"I write as a jilted lover. The evangelical faith that nurtured me as a child and sustains me as an adult has been hijacked by right-wing zealots who have distorted the gospel of Jesus Christ, defaulted on the noble legacy of nineteenth-century evangelical activism, and failed to appreciate the genius of the First Amendment."

Which brings me back to Rev. Haggard. When the male prostitute who claims to have had a sexual relationship with Haggard for three years and provided a contact for drugs went public with the story Thursday night, Haggard was interviewed and he denied everything. He denied evening knowing the man. But Then, yesterday he admitted that he had gone to the man for a "massage" and had purchased methamphetamine once, but he "threw it away." Does anyone think that sounds a bit like Bill Clinton's assertion that he tried marijuana once but he didn't inhale? Who believes that? And besides, why would he call a male prostitute and go meet him in a motel for massage? There are plenty of legitimate massage therapists (reputable) out there.

The reason that Rev. Haggard is news is that he has taken such a strong stand on gay marriage and homosexuality. And so, what do I think Evangelicals need to do? Well, I certainly don't think they need to give up their crusade for better morals in America. One of the bedrock principles of the Gospel is that when a person meets Christ, that person's life will change. We are to become more like Jesus. And, in doing so, we experience transformation. The old life passes away and all things become new. I believe that Evangelicals should continue to speak out in favor of life. Of course, I would broaden the anti-abortion rhetoric to include anti-war and anti-death penalty. And, I also believe Evangelicals should work for better ecological principles to be practiced by large corporations. And, I believe Evangelicals should continue to encourage stronger families. So, although I disagree with Evangelicals on some of the issues for which they strive, I do not want them to stop.

What Evangelicals need to do, however, is get out of bed with the state. They need to completely reevaluate their priorities and realize that ultimately the things they seek can only come through changed hearts and lives and not through secular politics. Jesus eschewed the secular politicians of his day. Evangelicals should concentrate on preaching the Gospel and let God change the lives, not the government.

Pray for the Amish Community in Nickel Mines, PA

2006-10-05T11:07:00.000-04:00

A couple of days ago, I wrote a post about the Amish in Nickel Mines, PA, and the horrific loss of life of the little girls in the shooting at their school. As I predicted, the Amish response to their grief is the answer to the question "What would Jesus do?" They have responded by offering forgiveness rather than hatred and resentment.

Hatred is like a cancer that will ultimately eat a person up from the inside out. Back in the 1980s Don Henley, after he left the Eagles for a solo career, wrote a song called "The Heart of the Matter." It is a song about a love affair between a man and a woman that went wrong and is over. The refrain of the song says,

'Been tryin to get down
to the heart of the matter
But the will gets weak,
and my thoughts seem to scatter,
But I think its about, forgiveness, forgiveness
Even if, even if,
you don't love me anymore."

There is another line in the song that says, "You keep carrying that anger, it will eat you up inside."

Although it is unimaginable to most of us, the way of Jesus is not the way of hatred and revenge. And, the world was reminded of that yesterday as the grandfather of one of the little girls stood over her lifeless body and said, "forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us."

Pray for the Amish community today as they bury these innocent little girls. Pray that the grace of God will sustain them in this horrible moment. But, also pray for your own community, state, nation and the world. Pray that the way of Jesus will be followed in the face of evil rather than the way of violence, hatred and revenge.

"And the world will live as one!" --John Lennon

The Pennsylvania Amish School Shooting

2006-10-03T15:49:00.000-04:00

The nation has been horrified once again by a shooting at a school. While all of the school shootings in recent years have been horrible and should remind us that there are way too many guns out there for people with psychological problems to use, this particular case is especially disturbing. It is especially disturbing because the Amish are a very close-knit community of Christian believers who have pacifism as one of the hallmarks of their faith. Therefore, to have this level of violence instigated by an outsider who came into their community is indeed a major tragedy for their community.

Violence is not new to the Amish tradition though. They are the descendents of the 16th century Anabaptist tradition. The Anabaptists (who got their name from their refusal to accept infant baptism and their decision to "re-baptize" themselves as adult believers in Christ) were perhaps the most biblical of all of the 16th century reformers, yet were the most persecuted of that century. They denied the biblical validity of infant baptism. Whereas the other reformers went a long way toward reforming the church on the basis of sola scriptura, the Anabaptists took sola scriptura to its logical conclusion denying infant baptism. With the church and the state tied together as closely as it was in the 16th century, to deny infant baptism was tantamount to denying one's citizenship. As a result, Anabaptists became the scourge of both Protestants and Catholics in western Europe. They were hunted down, tortured and hundreds were executed for their religious beliefs by burning at the stake and even drowning (a cruel method of mocking their emphasis on adult baptism).

The Anabaptists were distinctive for several important beliefs. (1) They believed that baptism was reserved for adult believers who had experienced a personal conversion. (2) They placed great emphasis on Christian discipleship, instructing that Christians should live like Jesus lived. (3) They were pacifists, refusing to take up arms even to defend themselves. (4) The practiced separation from the world, meaning that their communities tended to be separate and to themselves, a tradition that the Amish practice today. (5) They were strong supporters, perhaps the most vocal in the first 16 centuries of Christianity, of the notion that the institution of the church and the institution of the state should be separate. (6) They had a very strong sense of community, again a concept practiced by the modern-day Amish. (7) They had a distinctive ecclesiology, meaning that they believed that the church is not made up of every citizen of society (the belief in Europe in the 16th century) but the church is only made up of those baptized believers who have had an experience of personal converstion. (8) They believed in restoration of the NT ideal of the church rather than in a reformation of the 16th century church.

The modern-day Amish (as well as the Mennonites) are the inheritors of this Anabaptist tradition. Pacificism, living like Jesus lived, strong sense of community, etc. has characterized the Amish for centuries. These were peaceful people. They did not look for trouble. They kept to themselves as much as possible. And, so that is what makes the killings of these little girls in one of their schools so tragic.

But even more interesting is the question of how the Amish in Nickel Mines, Pennsylvania are going to respond to this. In fact, their response which will probably be articulated only in their community and not to the world, will most like be to simply return to their simple lives and deal quietly with their grief in their community with the loving support of their neighbors.

We live in a very violent world. And the foreign policy of our president has not contributed to peace in the world, but rather has stirred up the anger of many people in the world toward each other and toward the United States. In such a time as this, it is sobering to be reminded of the simple question "What would Jesus do?" I suspect that if we watch the Amish of Nickel Mines, Pennsylvania, we will get a good indication of how that question is to be answered.

The Incompetence of President Bush

2006-09-26T16:06:00.000-04:00

The anger exhibited by former President Clinton toward Chris Wallace this past weekend on a FoxNews interview has been news itself for the weekend and the first of this week. I can't really blame President Clinton for reacting angrily to what many of us perceive is a deliberate distortion of history in order to sway public attention away from the incompetence of the Bush Adminstration. In fact, the same idealogues who continue to attack the Clintons now (did you see Jerry Falwell's comment yesterday about Mrs. Clinton?) are the very people who have absolutely loathed them since they first stepped into the public arena in 1991. So, I don't really expect anything different from them. Ultimately, they will probably get their wish and Hillary Clinton will not run for president, or at least not be elected if she runs. She will remain in the Senate as a very powerful force for years to come though. And, if she ever becomes majority leader, watch out!

But, what President Clinton said in his anger with Chris Wallace must be kept in mind. Here's a quote from the transcript:

"What did I do? What did I do? I worked hard to try to kill him. I authorized a finding for the CIA to kill him. We contracted with people to kill him. I got closer to killing him than anybody has gotten since. And if I were still president, we'd have more than 20,000 troops there trying to kill him. Now, I've never criticized President Bush, and I don't think this is useful. But you know we do have a government that thinks Afghanistan is only one-seventh as important as Iraq. And you ask me about terror and Al Qaeda with that sort of dismissive thing? When all you have to do is read Richard Clarke's book to look at what we did in a comprehensive, systematic way to try to protect the country against terror. . . And so, I left office. And yet, I get asked about this all the time. They had three times as much time to deal with it, and nobody ever asks them about it. I think that's strange."

He tried to get Bin Laden and when he bombed Bin Laden's camp, Senators and Representatives from Ashcroft to Coats, to Specter blamed him for trying to take the national attention off of the Lewinsky scandal ("Wag the Dog"), a scandal created I might say by the extreme right wing in the country.

All that aside, let's assume Clinton didn't do all he could to get Bin Laden. Let's assume everything said about him is completely true. The fact of the matter is that when President Bush became president in January, 2001, the nation knew that Bin Laden was an imminent threat. They were getting daily intelligence briefings indicating that he was a dangerous risk. And, the one person in the govt. who knew more about it than anyone else was Richard Clarke, certainly not a partisan politician. And, they demoted Clarke and paid no attention to the Cole matter or to anything related to Bin Laden. When 9/11 happened, instead of embracing the world's compassion toward the U.S. and asking their help in going into Afghanistan to get Bin Laden, President Bush and his administration turned the nation's attention toward Sadaam Hussein, who had no direct ties to Al Queda. And, it as it turns out now, had absolutely no weapons of mass destruction. And, then after 9/11, even to this day, we have more troops in Iraq fighting a war that now the NIE says is creating more terrorists rather than less terrorists, and not nearly that many troops in Afghanistan trying to kill Bin Laden. So, who is the real incompetent president?

Go figure!

The Gospel According to Archie Bunker

2006-09-16T21:50:00.000-04:00

(Hebrews 11: 1-4)

During the 1970s one of the most popular critically acclaimed television shows was “All in the Family,” starring Carroll O’Connor, Jean Stapleton, Rob Reiner, and Sally Struthers. “All in the Family” was indeed a ground-breaking television show, because, it brought to audiences a hard-hitting, realistic satire, rather than the naïve comedy escapism of the 1960s.

The main character of the show was “Archie Bunker.” I have always enjoyed the show. But, what I have particularly enjoyed is the theology of Archie Bunker. From time-to-time the show brought in themes of religion because Archie’s son-in-law, Mike Stivic was an agnostic. Although Archie himself never attended church in the storyline, he was an opinionated expert on theology. Here are just a few of his theological “Archieisms.”

In the famous episode which guest-starred Sammy Davis, Jr., Archie said, “Now, no prejudice intended, but I always check with the Bible on these here things. I think that, I mean if God had meant for us to be together he’d a put us together. But look what he done. He put you over in Africa, and put the rest of us in all the white countries.” Then, Sammy Davis, Jr. said, “Well, he must’ve told’em where we were because somebody came and got us.”

Once, in an argument with his son-in-law Mike, Mike reminded Archie, “Remember that Jesus was Jewish.” To which Archie replied, “Yes, but only on his mother’s side.”

Concerning the divinity of Christ, he said, “All over the world they celebrate the birth of that baby, and everybody gets time off from work. Now if that ain’t proof that he’s the Son of God, then nothing is.”

On the nature of God, Archie said, “God don’t make no mistakes, that’s how he got to be God!”

Concerning the inferiority of women (in Archie’s theology), he said “God made Adam first, and then he made Eve out of Adam’s rib—cheaper cut.!”

But my very favorite Archieism that leads to the point of this sermon is the one statement theologically that I believe Archie got right. Talking to Edith on one episode about faith he said, “It ain’t supposed to make sense; it’s faith. Faith is something that you believe that nobody in his right mind would believe.”

What a profound statement! “Faith is something that you believe that nobody in his right mind would believe. The passage of scripture cited above is the Bible’s definition of faith. “Faith is the assurance of things hoped for and the conviction of things not seen.” The NIV puts it this way, “Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we cannot see.” The CEV translates it “Faith makes us sure of what we hope for and gives us proof of what we cannot see.”

There are two points to this definition of faith.
I. What Faith Has

The first part of the verse explains to us what faith “has.” “It already possess in the present what God has promised for the future.” (Tom Long, Interpretation (Hebrews), 113).
There are two aspects to this, both an inward and outward aspect according to Tom Long. Long says, “Inwardly, people of faith have a confidence today, here and now when all hell is breaking loose around us, that the promises of God for peace, justice, mercy and salvation can be trusted.” (Long, 113). Faith therefore becomes a response to the trustworthiness of God. It is like swinging “out on the vine of God’s promises over the chasms of life, trusting that the vine will hold.” (Long, 113)

But, faith is more than just an inward assurance. It is the very being of God’s promises. “It is more than the inner confidence that the powers of the world that press down and destroy human life will eventually yield and that God’s promises will be fulfilled someday; it is the reality of those promises moving as an advance force and operating behind enemy lines.” (Long, 113).

Therefore, “faith inwardly sings “We Shall Overcome.” Faith as an outward reality marches at Selma. Faith as an inward reality trusts God’s promise that “mourning and crying and pain will be no more (Rev. 21:3). Faith as an outward reality prays boldly for those who mourn, serves tenderly those who weep, works tirelessly to ease the pain of those who are wounded. Inwardly, faith moves hearts; outwardly, faith moves mountains.” (Long, 113)

I read once about a woman who was called to serve as a missionary to the Apache Indians out west. She packed her belongings and drove out in the desert to her post. She was so excited that she drove past the last gas station for hundred miles without noticing that she needed fuel. She ran out of gas about a mile down the road past the station.

She walked back to the station. The attendant came out of the office and met her to see what he could do to help. She explained that she had run out of gas about a mile down the road and didn’t have anything to transport the gas back to her car in. The attendant went around back of the station to an old shed to see if he could find anything with which she could carry her gasoline. The only container he could find was an old hospital bedpan. She told him that it would work just fine and that it would give her enough that she could get back to the station.

So, she carried it back down the road to her car careful not to spill any of the fuel. When she got to her car, she carefully poured the contents of the bedpan into the tank of her car. A truck driver pulled alongside the car just as the lady was emptying the bedpan into the tank. He rolled down his window and shouted to her, “Lady, I wish I had your faith!” (SermonCentral.com, Sermon by Michael Luke, www.sermoncentral.com/sermon.asp?SermonID=62412&ContributorID=6734)

The great theologian Augustine once said, “Faith is to believe what we do not see, and the reward of this faith is to see what we believe.” Clement of Alexandria said, “Faith is voluntary anticipation.” Faith is that quality of assurance that when life tumbles in on us, that ultimately there is still a God on control. And, that while we do not have the answers right now, we can still trust that God will bring about calm in the midst of the storm.
II. What Faith Perceives

The second aspect of faith is the evidence or conviction of things not seen. This points to the capacity of faith to see things beyond the naked eye. In 2 Corinthians 4:18 and 5:7 Paul says it this way: “What can be seen is temporary, but what cannot be seen is eternal.” “We walk by faith, not by sight.” (Long, 114)

To the person of faith, the universe has purpose. It is not just a random swirl of matter. John Calvin says, “If God should withdraw His hand a little, all things would immediately perish and dissolve into nothing.” (Quoted in Long, 114)

The naked eye sees trouble all around. But to the eye of faith, through toil and adversity another reality can be perceived. “What the naked eye can see is a world of suffering and setback, violence and hardship. Given the harsh realities of the world, faith is the ability to see with the inner eye, to see what cannot be seen with the natural eye.” (Long, p. 114)

Martin Luther said it this way in the 3rd verse of “A Mighty Fortress is Our God:”
And tho’ this world, with devils filled, Should threaten to undo us
We will not fear, for God hath willed His truth to triumph thro’ us,
The Prince of Darkness grim
We tremble not for him;
His rage we can endure,
For lo, his doom is sure,
One little word shall fell him.

Charles Swindoll, in his book Living Above the Level of Mediocrity, tells the story of a man lost in the desert, about to die from thirst. He came upon an old, run-down shack and went inside to try and find some shade. As he looked around he saw an old water pump on the other wall of the shack. He grabbed the handle and began to pump up and down. But nothing came out. Disappointed, he staggered back to a corner, but then noticed an old jug off to the side. He looked at it, wiped away the dirt and dust and read a message on the jug that said, “You have to prime the pump with all the water in this jug. P.S. Be sure to fill the jug up before you leave.”

He popped the cork, and the jug was full of water. Now he had a decision to make. If he drank the water, he’d have his thirst quenched and he would live. If he poured the water into the old rusty pump to prime it maybe it would bring fresh, cold water from down deep in the well, perhaps all the water he wanted, and even enough to allow him to complete his journey. But, what if the pump no longer worked? And, how long had the jug of water sat in the old shack anyway.

He studied his options and reluctantly decided to pour all the water into the pump. Then he grabbed the handle and began to pump. He pumped, he pumped, and he pumped. Finally came a little trickle of water and then it all began to gush. Cool, fresh water from deep in the ground below. He filled the jug and drank from it. He filled it again and drank it again. Then he filled the jug to the top for the next traveler. He put the cork back on and added this to the note, “Believe me, it really works. You have to give it all away before you can get anything back!”

Baptists and Religious Freedom: The Courage to Confront the Establishment

2006-07-01T22:20:00.000-04:00

Introduction

Tuesday, we celebrate the birth of our nation. The United States is a nation that stands for freedom. One of our most basic freedoms that we cherish is the freedom of religion. Within the first sentence of the first amendment to the Constitution, we find the words that spell out the doctrine of the separation of church and state. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” For more than two centuries Americans have enjoyed the fact that they can exercise their faith any way they please and can even have no faith at all, all without any coercion from the government. That, in my opinion, is one of our most basic of freedoms and it has served us well. It certainly explains why religion thrives so well in America.

There is a very long tradition of Baptist attention to religious liberty and separation of church and state. In his book, The Baptist Identity, Walter Shurden indicates that frequently, Baptists have been a “Romans 13 people,” recognizing that God ordains the government and they have been supportive. Other times, Baptists have been a “Revelation 13 people,” living under political circumstances where they consider the government to be the “Beast” and having to “oppose the state with their very lives.” But, most of the time, Baptists have been a “Matthew 22 people,” able to “render unto Caesar what is due to Caesar and to God what is God’s.”[1]

One of my favorite Baptists was Thomas Helwys, a member of that very first congregation of Baptists established in Amsterdam by John Smyth. Eventually, Helwys took part of the group back to England and helped establish the first Baptist church on English soil. The little band of Baptists ran into great difficulty in England, though. King James was not accommodating to dissent from the Church of England. Baptists were not free to promote their faith. And, so Helwys wrote a wonderful little book called The Mistery of Iniquity. Listen carefully to these clear, concise, and prophetic words Helwys used to address the king:

We still pray our lord the King that we may be free from suspect, for having any
thoughts of provoking evil against them of the Romish religion in regard to
their profession, if they be true and faithful subjects to the King, for we do
freely profess that our lord the King hath no more power over their consciences
than ours, and that it is none at all; for our lord the King is but an earthly
King, and if the King’s people be obedient and true subjects, obeying all h
human laws made by the King, our lord the King can require no more. For
men’s religion is betwixt God and themselves; the King shall not answer for it,
neither may the King be judge between God and man. Let them be heretics,
Turks, Jews, or whatsoever, it appertains not to the earthly power to punish
them in the least measure.[2]

Two important things should be noticed here. First, Helwys wrote this document and sent a personal copy to King James. He was immediately arrested and spent the rest of his life in Newgate Prison. Second, notice that Helwys was arguing not only for Baptist freedom, but also freedom of religion for Roman Catholics, Muslims, atheists, and Jews, a concept almost considered blasphemous in their day! But, we need to understand that it is the Baptist way!

My great fear today is that religion in America is so free, that we have been lulled to sleep and are not able to recognize threats to religious liberty that are all around us today. Even many Baptists are unaware of the danger of some of the things they say and advocate. There is a philosophy going around today in Religious Right circles that basically argues that the founding fathers were all Christians (in the way that we define Christian) and that the philosophical underpinning of the founding of our nation is Biblical Christianity. That is almost totally false. It cannot be denied that the Founding Fathers were “Christian” to some degree or another. But, coming from 18th Century Enlightenment ideals, they conceived of a nation and a government that would be totally “secular” and “neutral” when it came to matters of religion. But, many fail to recognize this today.

In 1984, in an interview with Bill Moyers that was televised nationally, W. A. Criswell, longtime pastor of FBC Dallas made a historical blunder of epic proportions. He made the statement that the notion of the separation of church and state is “the figment of some infidel’s imagination.” In that one statement, W. A. Criswell was casting off centuries of Baptist witness, including that of his own predecessor George W. Truett, as being full of “infidels.” Wrong, Wrong, Wrong!!!

The passage that we read a few moments ago from Amos is a story about one prophet and his refusal to go along with the establishment. It was the 8th century B.C.E. The nation of Israel had been divided between the northern kingdom, which retained the name “Israel” and the southern kingdom which was called “Judah.” Amos was a farmer, a layman, from the South who was called by God to go to the North and prophesy. Following his conscience, he did just that. And, his prophecy was pointed, harsh at times, and for the most part rejected. The northern kingdom was doing well financially and politically. The shrine at Bethel where Amaziah served as priest had good attendance. And here came this “doom and gloom” prophet, an outsider, claiming that God’s judgment was coming upon Israel for its mistreatment of the poor and its general disobedience. This was a message they did not want to hear.

This encounter between Amos and Amaziah represents the conflict between priestly religion and prophetic religion.[3] I want to suggest to you today that we do not truly have freedom of religion until there is the freedom for the “prophets” to challenge the “priests.” And, I would contend that this dynamic is at the heart of the Baptist tradition when it comes to matters of the state and our faith. Can this story teach us anything today about the freedom of religion we enjoy in our nation? Indeed I believe it can.

I. Priestly Religion: Comfort But No Freedom

In this passage of scripture we see an encounter between Amos and Amaziah. Amaziah was on the king’s payroll. He represented state religion, the establishment, the majority opinion. He was a priest at Bethel, the religious center of the Northern Kingdom. Amaziah seems to have had some type of personal acquaintance with King Jeroboam II by the fact that he reported to the king what Amos was prophesying and he seemed to speak for the king in forbidding Amos to prophesy any further. He was paid to keep the king happy. He dared not cross the king! Furthermore, one could say that a part of his job was to sponsor the state religion. He exemplifies “establishment” religion. He was a prototype of John Calvin of Geneva, John Cotton of Massachusetts Bay and Henry VIII. Amos spoke his conscience and dared speak against the establishment.

The kind of priestly religion as exemplified by Amaziah is always accountable to someone other than God. It is never truly free. It is either controlled by a governmental power, some type of social structure, or its own spokesperson. Roy Honeycutt says, “Whenever religion is institutionalized there is always a “Jeroboam” rather than God to whom it is responsible.”[4]

Priestly religion always demands that things stay as they are and is chaffed by criticism. In fact, it frequently does not allow for criticism at all. When Amaziah encountered Amos he reported to the king that Amos was “conspiring” against Israel. Then, he told Amos in verse 12, “flee away to the land of Judah, earn your bread there, and prophesy there; but never again prophesy at Bethel, for it is the king’s sanctuary, and it is a temple of the kingdom.” In other words, go back home and do you prophesying but leave us alone!

On July 16, 1651 John Clarke, pastor of the Newport Baptist Church in Newport, Rhode Island, along with Obadiah Holmes and John Randall, made a pastoral visit to the home of a man named William Witter in Lynn, Mass. Witter was elderly and near death and was probably a member of the Newport church. John Clarke apparently led a worship service and preached at the home. The established religion in Mass. was Puritanism and the Puritans forbid Baptist preaching. Clarke, Randall, and Holmes were arrested for illegal preaching. They were tried and sentenced to be fined or publicly whipped.

Clarke’s fine was paid by an anonymous donor. Randall paid his own fine. A donor offered to pay Holmes’ fine but he refused and insisted on taking the whipping. And so, after several weeks in jail, on September 5, 1651 Obadiah Holmes’ hands were tied to the post in Boston Commons. He was stripped to the waist and he received thirty lashes across his back. It was reported that throughout the whipping Holmes continued preaching to the crowd as a witness. He was so brutally injured that he was unable to leave Boston for several weeks and for much of that time he could rest only crouched on his elbows and knees. His back remained scarred for the rest of his life.[5]

What was their crime? What had Holmes done to deserve such brutal treatment? Holmes, Randall, and Clarke dared challenge the establishment. One of the hallmarks of the early Baptists is that they dared to challenge the establishment, whether in England or in the American colonies. Baptists were at the forefront of efforts to secure religious freedom, not only for themselves, but also for all. Early Baptists were opponents of established religion.

It concerns me that many modern Baptists tend to be part of the establishment rather than the challenge to the establishment. I’m not advocating here that we all go out and become gadflies. However, I do think Baptists need to remember that our tradition was born in the fires of controversy and that the earliest Baptists were courageous enough to challenge the standing order.

There is a certain religious mindset in our culture today that seems to want the government on its side to do its bidding. Priestly religion! Regardless of political party, when the church starts courting government support and vice-versa, we find ourselves in danger of becoming more and more like Amaziah. Religion in America has thrived because it has had the freedom of Amos rather than the government identity of Amaziah!

Martin Marty once said that the Southern Baptist identity was so closely identified with Southern culture that the Southern Baptist Convention could be described as the “Catholic Church of the South” because of its pervasive influence on Southern culture.[6] We all know the sins of slavery and segregation that many Southern Baptists one time were guilty of. Perhaps it took Baptists such a long time to recognize their sin because like Amaziah, our religion had become too identified with the standing order.
II. Prophetic Religion: Freedom But No Comfort

The kind of religion exemplified by Amos is free. The only authority that Amos had to respond to was God. In verse 14 Amos made it clear that he was not a member of the “prophetic guild.” He was not a professional prophet. Other places in the Old Testament indicate that there was indeed a guild of professional prophets that the kings of Israel kept on the payroll. They functioned in ways similar to Amaziah. They were hired to keep the king happy. They never challenged the king. They never critiqued the king. And, they kept the king thinking that he was within the will of God.

Amos was different. “I am no prophet nor a prophet’s son; but I am a herdsman and a dresser of sycamore trees, and the Lord took me from following the flock, and the Lord said to me, “Go prophesy to my people Israel.” Amos let it be known that he was beholden to no one except God. He was not on the king’s payroll so he could say what he believed God wanted him to say. And, this freedom allowed him to speak God’s true word to the people in the Northern Kingdom.

One of the most powerful images I have ever witnessed on television occurred in June of 1989. It was the image of that one, lone, Chinese man, unknown to this day, who stood in defiance in front of Chinese tanks and held his ground, holding up the progression of those tanks in the street near Tiananmen Square in Peking, China. There had been days of rioting and student protests. Hunger strikes had taken place. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese students wanted one thing: Freedom. Ground Zero was Tiananmen Square. Finally, fearful of losing complete control, the Chinese government ordered tanks into the Square to put down the rioters. What happened to this man, no one will know. Who he was no one will know. But, that one image completely captured the essence of the Baptist tradition of dissent. There used to be a time when Baptists were symbolized by that one lone man standing in the face of insurmountable odds.

Like Amos 800 years before Christ, and this one man in Tiananmen Square, Baptists have a tradition of being prophetic when we need to be. I don’t know of a time in my life when a Baptist prophetic voice of dissent is more needed. We need to remember that God loves the entire world, not just America. And, when the temptation comes to identify God only with America, good Baptists need to stand up and say “no!”

As we celebrate our nation’s birth tomorrow, let us be reminded that in this great land we have the freedom to challenge the standing religious order. And let us also be reminded that we should never get too comfortable in our religion to the point where we become like Amaziah and are unable to listen to the Amoses of the world!
[1] Walter B. Shurden, The Baptist Identity: Four Fragile Freedoms (Macon: Smyth and Helwys, 1993), p. 45.
[2] H. Leon McBeth, A Sourcebook for Baptist Heritage, (Nashville: Broadman Press: 1990): p. 72. (I have “Americanized” the English wording and spelling from the original quoted by McBeth).
[3] See Roy Honeycutt, Amos and His Message, Broadman, 1963, 132-144.
[4] Ibid., 133.
[5] Taken from Leon McBeth, The Baptist Heritage, p. 140.
[6] Bill Leonard, God’s Last and Only Hope, p. 3.