Update: Task Force now wants 15-year secrecy

[gb93433]

Recordings made during deliberations of the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force are to be closed for15 years, according to an updated story in Baptist Press Wednesday.

Originally, a letter from GCR task force chairman Ronnie Floyd to Baptist Press said the committee would make its recorded deliberations unavailable for 10 years, as did the SBC Peace Committee which met for two years in a highly conflicted Convention era.

This announcement comes one week before the task force’s recommendations are to be presented for consideration by messengers at the Southern Baptist Convention annual meeting in Orlando. It comes as the nebulous nature of the task force’s “unanimous” agreement on their recommendations is leaking out. It comes as we further learn of the need for many task force members to be educated about the autonomous nature of Baptist state conventions before they realized their recommendations could be only that — recommendations and not dictates.

The rest of the story is at http://www.biblicalrecorder.org/post/2010/06/09/Task-Force-wants-10-year-secrecy.aspx

 

[Bro K]

Very interesting!

 

[TomVols]

I was wondering how long before the conspiracy theorists got their pcs turned on....

 

[sag38]

The server must be messed up at the Recorder's website because I could not access their home page. I would like to know who runs the Recorder before I make any judgments. While there are parts of the plan that I'm wary of I'm even more wary of publications run by organizations with ties to the CBF. Don't know if this is the case but there seems to be a rat in the pudding. Plus, gb has no love for the SBC either and I would question his objectivity when it comes to the Southern Baptist Convention.

 

[gb93433]

I would like to know who runs the Recorder before I make any judgments.

You could have clicked on "About Us."

 

[saturneptune]

You must have run out of theological angles to demean the SBC, so now you are using the secret agent angle. I wonder if all the members of the task force have shoe phones. Oh, I know why you are leary, the task force met under the cone of silence.

You go to great lengths to point out issues that do not exist, and if they did, what difference would it make? As both you and the article point out, each church is autonomous, each state convention is autonomous, and each association is autonomous. One vote within any local church can remedy the problem that you imagine.

It seems as if you get a hierarchy of other denominations mixed up with groups of churches that come together in cooperation with each other. There is no hierarchy here, none. There are no mandates, dictates, laws, rules, or proclamations. Every Baptist church in association the other churches (such as your favorite, the SBC) is only one vote away from being independent.

Instead of a constant publication of anti-SBC threads, maybe your time would be better spent on the following.
1. Get involved with them and change it
2. If your church is a member, and will not leave, then find another church
3. Spend the time you worry about the nonsense at the SBC spreading the Gospel

 

[Ruiz]

You must have run out of theological angles to demean the SBC, so now you are using the secret agent angle. I wonder if all the members of the task force have shoe phones. Oh, I know why you are leary, the task force met under the cone of silence.

You go to great lengths to point out issues that do not exist, and if they did, what difference would it make? As both you and the article point out, each church is autonomous, each state convention is autonomous, and each association is autonomous. One vote within any local church can remedy the problem that you imagine.

It seems as if you get a hierarchy of other denominations mixed up with groups of churches that come together in cooperation with each other. There is no hierarchy here, none. There are no mandates, dictates, laws, rules, or proclamations. Every Baptist church in association the other churches (such as your favorite, the SBC) is only one vote away from being independent.

Instead of a constant publication of anti-SBC threads, maybe your time would be better spent on the following.
1. Get involved with them and change it
2. If your church is a member, and will not leave, then find another church
3. Spend the time you worry about the nonsense at the SBC spreading the Gospel

I do not think it is out of bounds to criticize and question the decision by the committee. Dr. Malcolm Yarnell, Distinguished Professor at SWBTS, has been critical as well. I defended the committee's decision to Dr. Yarnell, yet I can see why some who support, defend, and love the SBC would be critical.

On the second point you brought up, changing the SBC is not that easy. Because of politics I chose to leave the SBC and so has some of my friends. Personally, I think the SBC is too top down and too much of a political entity for their own good. Yes, I worked with many in the SBC for years. However, I could not take some of the politics, overeaching power, and the constant "us/them" mentality within the convention. While there are some Godly people within the convention, like Dr. Yarnell, the system itself is hard to change. When pastoring, I wanted to just Pastor and so I just Pastored without the convention.

 

[sag38]

Funny, I'm SBC and 99% or more of my pastoring is without the convention.

 

[Tom Bryant]

It isn't about conspiracy theories. It isn't about whether or not we trust the godly men and woman of the task force. I am not a conspiricist and I believe they got some very godly and wise people to help form this report.

But it about openness within the convention.

• What was the argument that moved them to change what we celebrate in giving from the Cooperative Program to "Great Commission Giving"?
• Was any discussion about the IMB's and the seminary's improvement areas?
• The task force did talk about openness at the beginning, but then changed their minds. Why the change?

I would like to find out the answers before I vote on Tuesday afternoon. It's not about conspiracy, ubt an open discussion of the issues.

 

[HAMel]

Why the change?

Chances are it's all about the money. Someone had their hands in the cookie jar?

 

[drfuss]

I guess that I will show my ignorance by asking some questions about this whole thing.

1. Why record these sessions if they are not going to be made public within the SBC? In effect, 15 years is practically the same as keeping them secret.

2..Why make them public at all? If recording the sessions are only necessary for putting together the final product, then destroy them immediately.

3. Is recording the sessions an ego thing so after 15 years, someone can show them to their grandkids. After 15 years, who cares?

4. Were they directed to record the sessions? If so, isn't keeping them secret for 15 years defeating their purpose?

 

[saturneptune]

I do not think it is out of bounds to criticize and question the decision by the committee. Dr. Malcolm Yarnell, Distinguished Professor at SWBTS, has been critical as well. I defended the committee's decision to Dr. Yarnell, yet I can see why some who support, defend, and love the SBC would be critical.

On the second point you brought up, changing the SBC is not that easy. Because of politics I chose to leave the SBC and so has some of my friends. Personally, I think the SBC is too top down and too much of a political entity for their own good. Yes, I worked with many in the SBC for years. However, I could not take some of the politics, overeaching power, and the constant "us/them" mentality within the convention. While there are some Godly people within the convention, like Dr. Yarnell, the system itself is hard to change. When pastoring, I wanted to just Pastor and so I just Pastored without the convention.

Its very simple. Have your local church vote themselves out.

 

[gb93433]

Some do apply Acts 17:11. For those who hide nothing also have nothing to hide.

 

[Tom Bryant]

Chances are it's all about the money. Someone had their hands in the cookie jar?

No, I don't think anyone had their hand in the cookie jar. I know some of these men. Ted Traylor, for example, would be shouting if there was some kind of sinful wrong doing.

Money is always an issue in an organization. But I don't think anyone is taking money.

 

[saturneptune]

Some do apply Acts 17:11. For those who hide nothing also have nothing to hide.

Every human institution on this earth is operated by man in a fallen state. You, me and the people making decisions at the SBC have not reached a state of perfection. Maybe you think that we should all be Sandra Dee, Donnie Osmond, and Mother Teresa, which were all sinners anyhow. The real world does not operate like the Waltons with music brought to you by Lawerence Welk. We live in the world that we do, and as Christians, we can use salt and light with the goal of making things a more like Jesus.

If I could wave a magic wand, yes, I agree with you. I would rid the SBC, seminaries, and any other institution that claims the name of the Lord of politics and other petty human squabbles and fire everyone who participated in such. It has no place in the house of the Lord, or anywhere near it. In fact, if I dwell on it, a bunch of immature morons who are suppose to be theological giants, at the top levels of the SBC representing 16 million plus members of local Baptist churches, fighting like Democrats and Republicans in a worldly manner, it is easy to build up anger.

However, neither you or I have that power. Think about this. If you were in a denomination with a real hierarchy, you would have the same nonsense at the upper levels, except these people have real governing authority and say so over the local churches from ownership of property, to setting church policy and beliefs, to having a hand in the selection of a pastor.

It seems like we the people from the local churches have the means to solve this problem, in the fact that we are the governing authority. If the SBC is hiding something, or playing games with the cooperative money, or whatever, then we can solve the problem. If enough local churches express their disapproval by withdrawing fellowship, the money dries up. When the money dries up, they have nothing to argue about. Eventually, these clowns are without a job, and they would scatter like rats.

 

[sag38]

It think the report should be voted on in segments. Most parts I've heard about I have no problem with. But, there is one part I have a big problem with and it's a deal breaker. And, I know a good number of folks, who are going to the convention, who feel the same way. As it stands, I'm not sure it's going to pass. Another thing that bothers me is the idea that if you vote no you are voting against the Cooperative Program and the Great Commission. It reeks of manipulation.

 

[saturneptune]

It think the report should be voted on in segments. Most parts I've heard about I have no problem with. But, there is one part I have a big problem with and it's a deal breaker. And, I know a good number of folks, who are going to the convention, who feel the same way. As it stands, I'm not sure it's going to pass. Another thing that bothers me is the idea that if you vote no you are voting against the Cooperative Program and the Great Commission. It reeks of manipulation.

The first thing that pops into my mind from your post, is wondering if, the Lord returned during the SBC meeting, if He wouldn't do the same thing he did to the money changers at the temple. They may not be the exact definition of money changers, but I would think the games played with the voting at the expense of the Great Commission would evoke such a reaction.

 

[sag38]

The biggest beef that I've heard and agree that it is not good is the idea that an SBC entity can come into a local area and operate independently, establishing churches, without cooperating with the local association or local churches.

 

[Tom Bryant]

The biggest beef that I've heard and agree that it is not good is the idea that an SBC entity can come into a local area and operate independently, establishing churches, without cooperating with the local association or local churches.

Technically, they already can. Every level in the SBC is autonomous. I agree with you, that they shouldn't and that it would be very unwise, but they can do it.

 

[saturneptune]

These higher level layers only exist for the local church's ability to carry out its ministry. The work of the Lord, the governing authority, and the emphasis is the local church. Anything else is expendible.