Well-known evangelical scholar and conservative Southern Baptist Albert Mohler is expected to be nominated for president of the Southern Baptist Convention in June.
Robert Jeffress, pastor of the historic First Baptist Church of Dallas announced this week his intention to nominate Mohler, noting that the 47-year-old Baptist provides "the kind of visionary leader Southern Baptists need to communicate a missional conservatism and biblical clarity to the world," according to Baptist Press.
While many do not deny Mohler's affirmation in sound biblical doctrine and his strong leadership at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, some say Mohler isn't the leader they're looking for to lead the 16-million member denomination – the largest Protestant group in the nation.
"I appreciate and applaud his academic and theological strengths but his weakness as a unifying leader concerns me - particularly at this pivotal time in our convention," said Jason Pettus, pastor of Living Hope Baptist Church in Bowling Green, Ky. "Although I affirm Dr. Mohler’s theology and passion, I do not believe what he can offer is what this convention needs in a president," he wrote on his weblog.
Pettus believes the Southern Baptist Convention needs a unifier, someone who can gather and challenge pastors to lead their churches to cooperate together for the cause of Christ, and a pastor who gives to the Cooperative Program and is reaching the lost.
"Dr. Mohler is a good man, even a great man, but he is not the man for SBC president," said Pettus.
Jeffress, however, announced his decision to nominate Mohler on the belief that Mohler would bring Baptists together and place his focus on evangelism.
He said he believes Mohler would "motivate Southern Baptists to unite around cooperation for global missions and evangelism," he stated in a news release to the Southern Baptist Texan.
Jeffress also credited Mohler's prominent voice in representing Southern Baptists in the public square as well as his commitment to scriptural truth as reasons to elect him as president. Mohler is a popular media-go-to conservative and recognized as one of the nation's most influential evangelicals.
"When Southern Seminary seemed to be lost to liberalism and irrelevancy, Dr. Mohler put his life and ministry on the line for the truth of God's word and the urgency of sharing Christ with a lost world," Jeffress said.
If elected president, Mohler told the Texan that the greatest challenge in the denomination is to recover their passion for the gospel in evangelism and missions and to renew their determination to defend the gospel in "an age of postmodern confusion."
"I would hope to articulate a vision that would unite Southern Baptists and energize us together," said Mohler, who is expected to carry the support of the SBC's conservative establishment.
Leaders like Mohler are needed in the academy to defend the gospel, Pettus noted. But the Bowling Green pastor is not convinced Mohler should head the denomination.
"Southern Baptists need Dr. Mohler as a seminary president, but not as the president of our convention," Pettus stated. "I want Dr. Mohler at Southern Seminary and on CNN, but we need an SBC president who has led a local church, regularly participates in international mission trips, does not polarize the conversation, and is known as a 'unifier.'
"Right now we need a president that is a shepherd; one who can compassionately bring the different camps that call themselves Southern Baptists together to cooperate. This is a time to come together. We need a bridge builder."
In addition to Mohler, Dr. William L. (Bill) Wagner – president of Olivet University International in San Francisco – will be named on the SBC presidential ballot at Southern Baptist Convention's annual meeting in June.
Comments
http://www.ethicsdaily.com/article_detail.cfm?AID=9971
Maranatha--Amos refers to agreement to walk together. The context says nothing about agreeing on anything other than sticking together for the journey. I have seen that misquoted repeatedly in recent years in terms that we must agree in doctrine before we can work together. More often than not, however, details of doctrine divide, rather than unite. Jesus asked that we all be one to the extent that he and the Father are one. That demands something more than agreeing to a list of doctrinal principles. That is where CBF is coming from. We will unite for specific purposes and emphases under the lordship of Christ Jesus. There are more compelling issues to claim our energy and resources in obedience to Christ to worry about those on the fringe who decide to join us in efforts to be the presence of Christ to the world's most needy. When we get down to it, none of us agree 100% with anyone else. We can still work together to do our best to surrender our lives to Christ Jesus. In the process, we will hopefully learn from one another.
theotrek: "Many churches and individuals aligned with CBF are active in crisis pregnancy centers and such. CBF does not have membership or membership rules. If someone decides to participate in assemblies, they do so. If someone sends money to fund CBF's initiatives, it is accepted. There are certainly some who participate who are homosexual, but that is not characteristic of the whole."
Yes, I am aware there is a disparity within the group. What seems odd and even unseemly about this is that the 'poles' are contributing monetarily toward causes in which they do not believe. It brings to mind the scripture in Amos: "How can two walk together, except they be agreed?"
theotrek: "First of all, the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship is a loose gathering of Baptists who have chosen to be know for what they stand for, not against."
With all due respect (and I know what this expression is supposed to mean), it does seem to me that too many groups are using this expression these days as a knee-jerk reaction to not being willing to stand against unscriptural teachings and practices in the church. I'm referring to many groups, many of whom are not even associated with churches.
maranatha7593--First of all, the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship is a loose gathering of Baptists who have chosen to be know for what they stand for, not against. As such, they have declared themselves for essentials such as the Lordship of Christ, but have not gone into details on doctrinal specifics. Many churches and individuals aligned with CBF are active in crisis pregnancy centers and such. CBF does not have membership or membership rules. If someone decides to participate in assemblies, they do so. If someone sends money to fund CBF's initiatives, it is accepted. There are certainly some who participate who are homosexual, but that is not characteristic of the whole.
I have always referred to the "liberals" in the SBC seminaries in terms of "they kicked out all three." Sure, maybe there were some, but the purge did not end with those who were truly liberal. It went on to cast out any who would stand in the way of granting complete control to the new power structure. The same happened with the missions agencies. The news carried the fact that missionaries were told to sign a document or be terminated. What they never talked about was the rest of the control issues going on in the guise of a theological cleansing.
I found this statement by Mohler online. I agree with every word of it:
A trajectory away from the truth: How to undermine the Bible – By Albert Mohler
The great obstruction in the path of homosexual activists in the church is the Bible. This is not really a limitation on the thinking of the theological elites within liberal churches, but it is a problem at the grassroots. Liberal theologians long ago decided that the Bible is hopelessly homophobic, hostile to women, and that it presents a judgmental deity with all kinds of hang-ups.
But those unsophisticated laypersons (and their enablers, the conservative clergy) still harbor that quaint notion that the Bible is God's Word, bearing His full authority, and is therefore binding on all Christians. There are only two options for liberal theologians in dealing with the Bible's unconditional rejection of homosexual behavior in any form. The first option for neutralizing the Bible is simply to reject its authority...
...The second option is to find a way to make troublesome biblical texts appear to mean the opposite of what they really mean.
theo, are you familiar with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship? If so, where do you stand on issues such as 'gay marriage' and abortion? I can't tell from your posts exactly what it is Mohler has done - I do remember vividly problems in SBC seminaries, back in the '80s and possibly the '90s, when there was unscriptural teaching. As for women in ministry, I cannot see any scriptural precedent for them being pastors of churches. I do see scriptural precedent for them being evangelists.
kc95819--Does it take backbone to shift from supporting women in ministry to joining the growing power structure in the SBC that was growing adamant against women in ministry? Backbone normally refers to standing against the tide of power, not joining forces with whoever is most likely to win the battle.
JHS--Sorry to hear of your own tragedy from SBC sources. I keep trying to remind myself that not all SBC churches and members are like those in leadership. While I no longer associate as SBC, I try to cooperate with churches and individuals with whom I can relate under the non-political cause of Christ.
Maranatha7593--If only it had been a stand for the Bible and truth. The tactics used to wrest control of the convention were anything but Godly. Mohler has been characterized by many who knew him in seminary as an opportunist seeking power. Whether or not that is true, the overall attitude of SBC convention life has shifted to the use of intimidation, force, and coercion. Tapes were spliced of seminary classes in order to frame professors of heresy. That is not a stand for the truth. It is the promotion of an ideology at any cost.
THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION IS A JOKE AND HAS BECOME THE RELIGIOUS ARM OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, THEY ARE SLOWING IN MEMBERSHIP AND BAPTISIMS BECAUSE FRANKLY PEOPLE LIKE MY FAMILY WHO ARE DEMOCRATS AND THEY HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU UNWELCOME. I CAN SEE WHY BILL CLINTON LEFT---GOOD FOR HIM!
Correction: I meant to say:
I am aware of the struggle during the '80s and '90s to stand for the inerrancy of scripture, and remember well HEARING about such men as Dr. Charles Stanley's and Adrian Rogers' courage in doing so.
I am not now Southern Baptist, but I grew up in a Southern Baptist church. I am aware of the struggle during the '80s and '90s to stand for the inerrancy of scripture, and remember well heaing about such men as Dr. Charles Stanley's and Adrian Rogers' courage in doing so. My parents still attend a SBC, and I am aware through them (and research on the 'Net) of the CBF, that it does not stand for Biblical truth concerning nascent children and the definition of marriage, among other issues. I don't know much about Albert Mohler, but I do believe the SBC needs men who will stand strong for the inerrant truth of the Word of God and not back down from it - men who will fear no one but God alone.
As a student and graduate of Southern Seminary during the transition into Dr Mohler's presidency there, if he handles things with the convention as he did at SBTS (the dismissal of many great professors; the closing of the Carver School of Church Social Work; etc.), the SBC is in for a rough ride.
Dr. Mohler is a good man, even a great man its time men were men again, Like Jesus Dr. Mohler has backbone. Feminized men need a real leader.