Southern Baptist Megachurch Makes History Electing Woman to Pulpit

[Baptist Believer]

I sorta expected better from y'all southern baptists, this is more along the lines of us american baptists

Southern Baptists can neither be blamed nor congratulated for this event. SBC churches are independent, so the SBC has no control over what happens. Furthermore, the majority of voters of the 2000 Southern Baptist Convention voted to say that they don't believe women should be senior pastors of churches, and no convention since has modified that position.

Full Disclosure: I consider myself a former Southern Baptist (although my church still gives a small portion of our receipts according to the way our members designate gifts, so we are technically in fellowship with the SBC) and this woman's leadership does not bother me. I do not know her, so I can't speak to her character, calling or abilities.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Hmmmmmm. I am wondering why her nane is hyphenated? Typically and IMO ; women who hyphenate their name do not want to take their husband's name fully because they wish to remain an individual rather than becoming one flesh WITH their husband.

While that may be your typical experience, that does not necessarily mean your assertion is true. I know a few women who hyphenate because they want to still affirm their heritage as a member of their birth family.

And before you become critical of women for that, think about what it would mean to you if our culture's tradition was for the man to change his family name to bride's family name. Remember, the scripture speaks of a man leaving his father and mother and cleaving to his wife to become one flesh. If any case can be made for name changing scripturally (I don't think there is any strong teaching on it), there seems to be more weight on the side of the man changing his name since he is specifically called to leave his parental family ties behind for the sake of his wife.

In my case, my wife didn't want to change her name because she was proud of her family's heritage (and I was fine with her not changing it), but I did not want her to hyphenate because you run into a problem when you have children... which name(s) do they take? If you give them all of the names, the children's names become unwieldy.

Ultimately, I let my wife make the decision without any pressure from me, and within a month or so she began the process of changing her last name to my family's name. And if that makes her happy, I support it.

 

[LorenB]

If anyone doubts that there is rock-throwing going on on this forum, then here are two examples:







It must be nice to be so absolutely sure that you're right, that you have special knowledge of a situation. I'm sure you folks can quote mountains of scripture to support your opinions. However, I want to mention a couple of passages that speak against your views. First, there is the passage I taught in SS this morning, For my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways. This is the word of the Lord. [Isaiah 55.8]

Second, Stop dwelling on past events and brooding over days gone by. I am about to do something new; this moment it will unfold. Can you not perceive it? [Isaiah 43.18-19a]

I would remind you that the Bible, among other things, is a record of the new things that God did among the children of Israel. A short list would include the creation, the vision of Abram, Moses, the Promised Land, the Exile, the Restoration, the sending of Jesus, etc.

I am wary of any position that limits God's ability to act in order to realize God's plan for this world and God's people. We will only know whether any pastor, male or female, is God's person for any church over time as we watch how their ministry prospers or declines. No human being can make a true judgment as to whether God has or has not called a pastor to a church. That is between that church and God. My church is in the process of looking for a new pastor. We have talked about the possibility of calling a woman. Some members are absolutely opposed to the idea. Some hope we will call a woman. I think I stand with the largest group which wants to find the person God wants us to have. If that means a woman, then I will be comfortable with that.

Tim Reynolds

With that line of reasoning, one could justify anything.

 

[EdSutton]

link

:laugh:

I sorta expected better from y'all southern baptists, this is more along the lines of us american baptists

Julie Pennington-Russell was voted on Sunday to become senior pastor of an Atlanta-area megachurch. The historic decision that went without dispute makes the congregation the largest church of Southern Baptist heritage to be led by a woman.

"Without a doubt, this is a major development," commented the Rev. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and one of America's pre-eminent Evangelical leaders, in a blog post when initial reports about Pennington-Russell's near-confirmation as head of First Baptist Church of Decatur, Ga., came out.

Oh well! There goes the neighborhood! :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

If anyone doubts that there is rock-throwing going on on this forum, then here are two examples:







It must be nice to be so absolutely sure that you're right, that you have special knowledge of a situation. I'm sure you folks can quote mountains of scripture to support your opinions. However, I want to mention a couple of passages that speak against your views. First, there is the passage I taught in SS this morning, For my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways. This is the word of the Lord. [Isaiah 55.8]

Second, Stop dwelling on past events and brooding over days gone by. I am about to do something new; this moment it will unfold. Can you not perceive it? [Isaiah 43.18-19a]

I would remind you that the Bible, among other things, is a record of the new things that God did among the children of Israel. A short list would include the creation, the vision of Abram, Moses, the Promised Land, the Exile, the Restoration, the sending of Jesus, etc.

I am wary of any position that limits God's ability to act in order to realize God's plan for this world and God's people. We will only know whether any pastor, male or female, is God's person for any church over time as we watch how their ministry prospers or declines. No human being can make a true judgment as to whether God has or has not called a pastor to a church. That is between that church and God. My church is in the process of looking for a new pastor. We have talked about the possibility of calling a woman. Some members are absolutely opposed to the idea. Some hope we will call a woman. I think I stand with the largest group which wants to find the person God wants us to have. If that means a woman, then I will be comfortable with that.

Tim Reynolds

The onmly thing coherent about this is that you are pretty sure you are absolutley right. About what I have no idea. There isn't one passage of scripture that lines up with anything you have said. It appears you are disgruntled that anyone would take stand on doctrine based on the Word of God but then you make a failed attempt to do the same. You may want women in the pulpit but God has been clear on this issue. Nothing new about that.

 

[StefanM]

I do not agree with this decision. However, they are an individual autonomous body and have the right to call whomever they desire as pastor.

Legally, yes. Spiritually, no. A church does not have the right to violate God's commandments. It merely has the ability.

 

[Conservative Christian]

hey I've got an idea for a great Sunday topic...let's throw rocks at people we don't like (or have a clue about)...

Anyhoo, I'll say for the record I'm SBC and stinking proud of it! The SBC is doing more the reach people for the Kingdom of God than most.

Also, I've been by FBC Decatur and frankly I doubt the Mega-Church label. If you've never been in Decatur, Georgia you'll not understand the dynamic of the area. This isn't a surprise and won't be a huge issue.

I'm more worried about the people around this board who are more than ready to throw rocks before looking to see what is really happening.

Well said!

I'm also very skeptical of the so-called "mega-church" label. They've got less than 2700 members TOTAL. On a typical Sunday, most churches that size generally don't draw more than a third of their total membership. It's a good-sized church, but far from a "mega-church".

 

[Conservative Christian]

Hmmmmmm. I am wondering why her nane is hyphenated? Typically and IMO ; women who hyphenate their name do not want to take their husband's name fully because they wish to remain an individual rather than becoming one flesh WITH their husband.

In other words, she's obviously a feminist.

 

[Baptist Believer]

In other words, she's obviously a feminist.

Not necessarily... But what do you mean by "feminist?" Does that mean she is "concerned with the welfare of women" or that she is somehow promoting a certain certain set of political/social positions? And if the latter, what are the positions that this pastor is promoting?

 

[ShotGunWillie]

Remember, the scripture speaks of a man leaving his father and mother and cleaving to his wife to become one flesh. If any case can be made for name changing scripturally (I don't think there is any strong teaching on it), there seems to be more weight on the side of the man changing his name since he is specifically called to leave his parental family ties behind for the sake of his wife.

There is no calling to leave your family ties behind. It was Jewish custom, before the wedding, the groom was to go back to his father's home and build on to his house, and when the work was complete the wedding took place.

Hence the reason Christ said that in His Father's House are many mansions, I go to prepare a place for you.

Jewish custom. You did not leave your family ties, that wasn't the calling.

 

[ShotGunWillie]

If anyone doubts that there is rock-throwing going on on this forum, then here are two examples:







It must be nice to be so absolutely sure that you're right, that you have special knowledge of a situation. I'm sure you folks can quote mountains of scripture to support your opinions. However, I want to mention a couple of passages that speak against your views. First, there is the passage I taught in SS this morning, For my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways. This is the word of the Lord. [Isaiah 55.8]

Second, Stop dwelling on past events and brooding over days gone by. I am about to do something new; this moment it will unfold. Can you not perceive it? [Isaiah 43.18-19a]

I would remind you that the Bible, among other things, is a record of the new things that God did among the children of Israel. A short list would include the creation, the vision of Abram, Moses, the Promised Land, the Exile, the Restoration, the sending of Jesus, etc.

I am wary of any position that limits God's ability to act in order to realize God's plan for this world and God's people. We will only know whether any pastor, male or female, is God's person for any church over time as we watch how their ministry prospers or declines. No human being can make a true judgment as to whether God has or has not called a pastor to a church. That is between that church and God. My church is in the process of looking for a new pastor. We have talked about the possibility of calling a woman. Some members are absolutely opposed to the idea. Some hope we will call a woman. I think I stand with the largest group which wants to find the person God wants us to have. If that means a woman, then I will be comfortable with that.

Tim Reynolds

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever (Hebrews 13:8)

God and his teachings never change, what God said years before is what He means for today. Are you saying that God changes with the times and goes with the flow? Do you think He never saw this coming or He would have mentioned male and females in the position of senior pastor? He must of changed His mind and we failed to get the 2nd Edition.

The above statement is what is wrong with so many churches in so many denominations. This view and some of the others that have been posted is what causes the beginning of compromise in churches and the continuing of it.

 

[mcdirector]

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever (Hebrews 13:8)

God and his teachings never change, what God said years before is what He means for today. Are you saying that God changes with the times and goes with the flow? Do you think He never saw this coming or He would have mentioned male and females in the position of senior pastor? He must of changed His mind and we failed to get the 2nd Edition.

The above statement is what is wrong with so many churches in so many denominations. This view and some of the others that have been posted is what causes the beginning of compromise in churches and the continuing of it.

Right! The something new that God will do (as quoted from IS 43) doesn't mean that He will do something contrary to His word.

 

[FBCPastorsWife]

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever (Hebrews 13:8)

God and his teachings never change, what God said years before is what He means for today. Are you saying that God changes with the times and goes with the flow? Do you think He never saw this coming or He would have mentioned male and females in the position of senior pastor? He must of changed His mind and we failed to get the 2nd Edition.

You took the words right out of my mouth and nailed it right on the head!!!

 

[AF Guy N Paradise]

I am IFB but noticed that the SBC convention was held here recently where I live. Isn't there still a definite division of the SBC in general between the liberals and conservatives?

 

[Baptist Believer]

There is no calling to leave your family ties behind.

Please note that I didn't say that I thought there was good scriptural justification for forcing anyone to change their family name, but I was simply making a point that if anyone wanted to make a case regarding leaving behind family, they could easily cite Genesis 2:24: "For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh." There is a sense in which men are called to establish their own households with their brides, leaving behind the dominance of their parent's rule.

I don't know if the Jewish tradition you cite was uniform or not. In any case, the biblical teaching stands on its own. Just as divorce was rarely handled properly in Jewish society, and there seems to be no record of the celebration of the Year of Jubilee, the practices of ancient Judaism do not overrule explicit biblical teaching.

 

[Baptist Believer]

I am IFB but noticed that the SBC convention was held here recently where I live. Isn't there still a definite division of the SBC in general between the liberals and conservatives?

Most of the people that were maligned as "liberals" (most of them weren't) left more than a decade ago. Recently, I believe the old guard of the SBC tried to apply the label of "liberal" to the younger pastors of the convention who were known for blogging about the hypocrisies of the small group of people who control the denominational structure, but, because of the ability to get their points out to a large audience through the internet, everyone knew it was a lie.

If the internet had existed the way it does now back in the late 1970s - early 1990s, the so-called "conservative resurgence" would never have happened. The lies would not have held up under scrutiny.

 

[EdSutton]

There goes the neighborhood.

But seriously, this is a matter of grave doctrinal error and should be answered everywhere it exists by excluding these churches from the fellowship of other Baptists.

Zenas, when re-reading the thread I see what you posted. And I apologize to a fellow Kentuckian for "stealing your line", albeit unwittingly. I did it as a joke. But I would like to ask, "What exactly is the matter of grave doctrinal error, here?" I do see a doctrinal error, myself. It may not be all that 'grave', but it is an error, nonetheless. That 'error' is confusing and confuting the office of bishop/elder, which is by definition limited to men, and has a host of qualifications involved, with the spiritual gift of pastor and teacher which is not limited, save at the discretion of the Holy Spirit, to any qualifications or gender, the same as for any of the other spiritual gifts, and all gifts are irrevocable, as well. (Rom. 11:29)

The offices are not necessarily irrevocble either, for if one does not fit, or no longer fits the qulifications given, then one is no longer qualified, and should not hold that office, in the local church, IMO.

Get it, gang! There is absolutely no Biblical prohibition or hint that a woman cannot have any one particular gift, including the gift of pastor and teacher, vs any other spiritual gift, or that gifts are ever gender specific.

And, by the same token and in the same vein, there is absolutely no room, Biblically, for a woman to be a bishop/elder, for that office is, in fact, limited to men, among the other limitations.

A person can do the work of a particular gift, without necessarily having the gift. For example, Timothy was told to "do the work of an evangelist". There is no hint, Biblically, that Timothy had that gift, unlike Philip, the deacon. Likewise, one qualification of an elder is "being able to teach". Again, there is no hint that an elder ever has to have the 'gift', only that he be able. Also, I believe the Scriptural model is that of a church to have a plurality of elders, not some "Big Behunah" so-called "Senior Pastor". Paul actually wrote to the church at Phillpi and greeted all the saints, along with the bishops and deacons. Apparently he was ignoring what we often today perceive as the most important person in most churches, the "Senior Pastor".

Sure seems rude of Paul, don't you think?

Again!

Not trying to get a row started; just presenting what I believe Scripture teaches.

Ed

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

I am IFB but noticed that the SBC convention was held here recently where I live. Isn't there still a definite division of the SBC in general between the liberals and conservatives?

Yes, and the libs are still working to call those who restored the biblical doctrine of inerrancy to our colleges as liars. The new division is created by the Emerging Church movement. Guess who supports that.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Yes, and the libs are still working...

What is your definition of "liberal"??? Is it merely someone who does not support everything that Paige Patterson does? The bloggers are NOT liberals by any sane and honest definition.

...to call those who restored the biblical doctrine of inerrancy to our colleges as liars.

Actually, the whole so-called "conservative resurgence" concerned the seminaries and convention agencies, not colleges. I don't think Southern Baptists had colleges until sometime in the mid-1990s when Southeastern started their program.

The new division is created by the Emerging Church movement.

Huh? Wade Burleson is a representative of the emerging church movement?

Guess who supports that.

Emergent Christians?

 

[ShotGunWillie]

Rick Warren