Resolution on the Incompatibility of Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality with The Baptist Faith and Message

Presidential candidate Mike Stone, along with fifty other original signers, will jointly present the following Resolution against the use of critical race theory and intersectionality (CRT/I) at the Southern Baptist Convention, June 13-16, Nashville, Tenn. This Resolution is to be presented in order to repudiate and lessen the damage done by the 2019 Resolution 9, which affirmed CRT/I as supplemental and helpful “analytical tools” to be used along with the Bible in dealing with the race issues of our day.

I am thankful to have been one of the original signatories of this Resolution, and I am grateful for Mike Stone’s biblical, clear, and courageous leadership.

Continue reading →

We Need Consistency From Seminary Presidents on Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality

On November 30, 2020, SBC Seminary presidents affirmed that critical race theory (CRT) is incompatible with the Baptist Faith and Message. [1] While I appreciate their declaration, the message has been inconsistent, particularly from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS) where Dr. Moler serves as president, and South Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary (SEBTS) where Danny Akin serves as president. I mention only two of my concerns in this article. First, Jarvis Williams, a professor at SBTS, and Curtis A. Woods, a former professor at SBTS, endorse critical race theory. Continue reading →

How to Walk in Forgiveness without Undermining the Gospel

As Christians, we are to forgive those who trespass against us (Matt 6:12; 18:22; Mark 11:25­26). Frequently, Christians say they are seeking to be forgiving as God is by forgiving someone who sinned against them, regardless of whether the person repents or is even remorseful for his sin. They may say, well, I just love them and forgive them as God does. But the question is, is that forgiveness flowing from God’s love? Continue reading →

Why Use the Grammatical Historical Method To Study Scripture

The Grammatical Historical Method (GHM) approaches the Bible as the holy word of God and therefore strives to discover the biblical author’s initially intended meaning in the verse and passage under consideration. In other words, the interpreter asks, what did the author (like Matthew, Paul, or Peter) mean by what he said, and how did the original recipients understand his words. If correctly done, this method results in a biblically faithful interpretation, which permits us as interpreters, by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, to correctly apply the passage in various ways based upon the author’s meaning. Continue reading →

God’s Essential Omniscience Does Not Require Calvinism’s Determinism

In both Calvinism and Extensivism, God knows all that could happen, and all that will happen.[1] The difference is in how he knows. According to Calvinism, his knowledge of what could and will happen is based upon his micro-determination.[2] Another way of saying God knows what could happen is God knows what he could determine to happen. Similarly, another way of saying God knows what will happen is God knows, out of the possibilities of what he could determine to happen, what he will determine to happen. This determinism is not merely God determining to create the universe because we all believe that if God did not determine to create, creation would not exist. Continue reading →

Did God Hardening Pharaoh Damn Him? Well No! Romans 9:17–18

As mentioned in my previous article on Jacob and Esau (Rom 9:10–13), Calvinists use Romans chapters 9­–11 as the undeniable evidence of Calvinistic soteriology, defending both unconditional election and reprobation. Regarding chapter 9, B.B. Warfield says, “It is safe to say that language cannot be chosen better adapted to teach Predestination at its height.”[1] As I demonstrated, while the passage regarding Jacob and Esau does show God’s sovereignty, it has nothing to do with salvific election and reprobation, Calvinism’s doctrine of unconditional election. The same is true with regard to Pharaoh. Continue reading →

The Five Reasons for Church Discipline

I have led churches to practice church discipline for over thirty years now, and I do not see the need for church discipline to be any less today than in years past. If anything, the need has increased.

Church discipline can be understood as the biblical attitude and actions of the local church that enable her to preserve her submission to the head of the church in holiness, fellowship, testimony, mission, and doctrinal purity, with the purpose of maintaining a conducive atmosphere for following Christ and experiencing His presence and power. Church discipline includes the following purposes: redemption, correction, protection, purification, and justice. On a practical level, I would further distinguish between non-formal and formal discipline. Non-formal includes all aspects of the biblical teaching and practical application of church discipline up to public involvement of the full church body in either seeking repentance of the sinning brother or sister or removal from fellowship. Continue reading →

Church Discipline Requires a Tender Heart – Love Not Legalism

A biblical attitude is crucial to the whole process of church discipline. If the attitude of those implementing discipline is not right, then what God designed to be a beautiful act of selfless love is transformed into an ugly act of power, even if all the other instructions are followed to the letter. The offspring of that evil may shortly surface as a disuniting and judgmental spirit in the fellowship, or it may lay dormant until the next attempt to lead the church in discipline and then surface with a vengeance.[1] Continue reading →