Two candidates for SBC President, 2018

[Rvaughn]

J.D. Greear to be SBC president nominee again

At the 2016 SBC annual meeting in St. Louis, neither Greear nor current SBC president Steve Gaines received a majority of votes on the first or second ballot for president. So Greear, pastor of The Summit Church in Raleigh-Durham, N.C., withdrew his candidacy and moved that the convention elect Gaines, pastor of Bellevue Baptist Church in Cordova, Tenn., on the third ballot.

Ken Hemphill to be SBC president nominee

"We desire to elect a man who is a Southern Baptist through and through, values our understanding of the Gospel, and, has an established record of affirming the cooperative work of our local churches through the associations, state conventions and national entities," Louisiana Baptist Convention executive director David Hankins said according to the state's Baptist Message newsjournal.

[William Thornton]

Mod/libs warned us about the SBC being one never ending conflict, since there is always an angry and disgruntled group. This is it. It will be ugly among the blogs, hopefully not so much among the leaders.

[Sandy]

Mod/libs warned us about the SBC being one never ending conflict, since there is always an angry and disgruntled group. This is it. It will be ugly among the blogs, hopefully not so much among the leaders.

I'm having trouble figuring out which "group" each of these candidates represents.

[Haruo]

Yeah, I haven't got a clue. Robert? William?

[JE Pettibone]

Ed : No longer being SBC I really don't care who they elect.

[William Thornton]

It's seen as Calvinist and anti-Calvinist. There is a vocal and militant anti-Cal group who is out to save the convention.

Ed cares...else why would he talk about it? Even used the magic Cal word - elect.

[Sandy]

It's seen as Calvinist and anti-Calvinist. There is a vocal and militant anti-Cal group who is out to save the convention.

Ed cares...else why would he talk about it? Even used the magic Cal word - elect.

Greear doesn't seem to me to be much of a Calvinist. I thought they'd gotten past a lot of that with some of the bloggers who've faded away.

[JE Pettibone]

Ed: And William is the only one in this discussion thus far who is currently in regular attendance in a Southern Baptist church.

[William Thornton]

It's seen as Calvinist and anti-Calvinist. There is a vocal and militant anti-Cal group who is out to save the convention.

Ed cares...else why would he talk about it? Even used the magic Cal word - elect.

Greear doesn't seem to me to be much of a Calvinist. I thought they'd gotten past a lot of that with some of the bloggers who've faded away.

Afraid not. There is a very militant anti-Cal group.

[Jon Estes]

It's seen as Calvinist and anti-Calvinist. There is a vocal and militant anti-Cal group who is out to save the convention.

Ed cares...else why would he talk about it? Even used the magic Cal word - elect.

I am not sure if that supporting Greear see it that way but I am convinced, the other side does.

I hope we can find out, for the sake of an informed vote, if Hemphill is...

1 - Not a Calvinist
2 - Anti-Calvinist
3 - Rabid - rid the SBC of Calvinist candidate.

With the rabid anti-Calvinists supporting him, I have my concerns.

[Sandy]

Hemphill came to Southwestern after I graduated. From reading his books and hearing him preach, I wouldn't say he's a Calvinist. It doesn't appear he's part of a "rabid, get rid of the Calvinists in the SBC" group, though denominational politics in the SBC can be deceiving. The Baptist Press makes it sound like they're just a couple of guys running on their denominational pedigree, one who pastors a megachurch, one with a list of denominational jobs resulting from being well-connected. Greear doesn't really self-identify as a Calvinist, and seems like he's more of the typical SBC megachurch pastor. The church has only recently left their pattern of designated giving and seems to avoid any close identity with the SBC, as opposed to Hemphill, whose endorsements talk about his loyal Southern Baptist background.

Maybe another good knock-down drag out over secondary and tertiary Biblical interpretation is just what the SBC needs to stem the accelerating decline in membership and attendance they are experiencing.

[Rvaughn]

I hope we can find out, for the sake of an informed vote, if Hemphill is...

1 - Not a Calvinist
2 - Anti-Calvinist
3 - Rabid - rid the SBC of Calvinist candidate.

Clearly, Hemphill is "not a Calvinist," or the "rabid anti-Cals" wouldn't support him. But even they are practical enough to know that a "rabid anti-Cal" from their clique couldn't get elected.

Below is a link to an Anti-Calvinist site that is supporting Hemphill (you can decide whether rabid or not).
http://sbctoday.wpengine.com/ken-hemphill-the-right-man-at-the-right-time/
From all I've heard about Hemphill, he is a great guy who is not divisive. But, at the same time, there is a lament that he would "allow himself" to be drafted by the anti-Cal group.

The title of his upcoming book gives a good idea of his soteriological viewpoint.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0578095734/

I'd also agree with Sandy, though Greear's theology is Calvinistic, he is more of a "typical megachurch pastor" than he is about promoting Calvinism. (I read his book Stop Asking Jesus into Your Heart, and very little Calvinism comes through in it.)

[Tim Bonney]

It's seen as Calvinist and anti-Calvinist. There is a vocal and militant anti-Cal group who is out to save the convention.

Ed cares...else why would he talk about it? Even used the magic Cal word - elect.

I’ll show my ignorance. Which one is Calvinist and which is anti-Cal?

[Tim Bonney]

I hope we can find out, for the sake of an informed vote, if Hemphill is...

1 - Not a Calvinist
2 - Anti-Calvinist
3 - Rabid - rid the SBC of Calvinist candidate.

With the rabid anti-Calvinists supporting him, I have my concerns.

I’ve run into a rabid Calvinist or two in my day. Are they not represented in the SBC? You know the dump Deacons and make the church look all Presby with Elder boards and then toss in some double predestination?

[Rvaughn]

I’ll show my ignorance. Which one is Calvinist and which is anti-Cal?

As far as some people are calling it:
Calvinist: J. D. Greear
Anti-Cal: Ken Hemphill

I’ve run into a rabid Calvinist or two in my day. Are they not represented in the SBC? You know the dump Deacons and make the church look all Presby with Elder boards and then toss in some double predestination?

There are some strong Calvinists in the SBC who seem a lot like immersed Presbyterians. I think the "rabid" terminology is reserved for those who seem to have excessive expressive ill-will toward those on the other side -- and I'd say that there are some of both in the SBC (i.e., Cal and Anit-Cal).

[Jon Estes]

I hope we can find out, for the sake of an informed vote, if Hemphill is...

1 - Not a Calvinist
2 - Anti-Calvinist
3 - Rabid - rid the SBC of Calvinist candidate.

Clearly, Hemphill is "not a Calvinist," or the "rabid anti-Cals" wouldn't support him. But even they are practical enough to know that a "rabid anti-Cal" from their clique couldn't get elected.

Below is a link to an Anti-Calvinist site that is supporting Hemphill (you can decide whether rabid or not).
http://sbctoday.wpengine.com/ken-hemphill-the-right-man-at-the-right-time/
From all I've heard about Hemphill, he is a great guy who is not divisive. But, at the same time, there is a lament that he would "allow himself" to be drafted by the anti-Cal group.

The title of his upcoming book gives a good idea of his soteriological viewpoint.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0578095734/

I'd also agree with Sandy, though Greear's theology is Calvinistic, he is more of a "typical megachurch pastor" than he is about promoting Calvinism. (I read his book Stop Asking Jesus into Your Heart, and very little Calvinism comes through in it.)

There are some vocal rabid anti-Calvinists on a neighboring forum and the moderation there, though they present themselves as willing to work with Calvinists, they do not tolerate Calvinists questioning them for what is seen as not Christ-like in some comments they make while at the same time let the many derogatory comments towards Calvinists to remain. Granted, it is their home - their rules - but the behavior still seems a bit (OK - a lot IMPO) hypocritical.

That they support KH is where I wonder where KH is on this subject - these days.

I like KH. Read some of his books, enjoyed his preaching... Been a long time since he has been in the spotlight so on this subject, I have no clue.

Time will tell.

[Jon Estes]

Calvinist: J. D. Greear
Anti-Cal: Ken Hemphill

I am hoping KH is simply a non-Calvinist (where I think Gaines would land). Being anti-Cal is problematic to me.

[Haruo]

Heck, far as I can see Arminius was a Calvinist. Aristotle was a Platonist.

[Sandy]

I’ve run into a rabid Calvinist or two in my day. Are they not represented in the SBC? You know the dump Deacons and make the church look all Presby with Elder boards and then toss in some double predestination?

There are "rabid Calvinists" in the SBC. William is probably more up on all of that as it stands currently. Since I moved to Pennsylvania, I haven't kept up with denominational politics in the SBC all that much. I continued to work with them in a mission ministry that I'd been involved with since the 90's up until last year, but none of the local pastors, or the students that staffed the local project were involved in that debate. But denominational politics and convention control in the SBC is not about representation, it is about control, as it always has been, even long before the conservative resurgence.

Looking at what is happening across the denomination, I can't fathom the desire for controversy. You still have megachurches that are only now emerging from a pattern of designated giving designed to starve convention agencies with leaders and trustees they don't like or don't agree with (Greear's church only recently decided to give its CP allocation in an undesignated manner) and yet, you have denominational agencies cutting spending, downsizing, and the days of "new leader, new building" are long over. The decline is symbolized by the video below, the implosion of the Lifeway building. The sprawling complex in downtown Nashville, which is next door to the SBC Headquarters, has been sold, and the company is moving to a site in the West End to property owned by Tennessee Baptists, and downsizing. They already sold and moved out of the Golden Gate seminary facility, and I'm guessing that there's still talk of relocating, merging, or closing Midwestern. But I guess they think they need another controversy over who runs the show to move things forward.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U46m5Vc6WZU

[Rvaughn]

Calvinist: J. D. Greear
Anti-Cal: Ken Hemphill

I am hoping KH is simply a non-Calvinist (where I think Gaines would land). Being anti-Cal is problematic to me.

To clarify, my point was only that is what some people are calling the choices. I have no reason to believe that Hemphill is anything other than non-Calvinist.

[Sandy]

Hemphill is the "Southern Baptist loyalist." I don't know how that plays with non-Calvinists, or Calvinists, but he's the guy with the pedigree. It's a signal about the kind of nominees that will be appointed to the committees and boards. Have the Calvinists been shut out of those kinds of things? It doesn't seem that they have.

[Jon Estes]

Hemphill is the "Southern Baptist loyalist." I don't know how that plays with non-Calvinists, or Calvinists, but he's the guy with the pedigree. It's a signal about the kind of nominees that will be appointed to the committees and boards. Have the Calvinists been shut out of those kinds of things? It doesn't seem that they have.

Your last comment is correct BUT it seems that is the goal of some who support KH.

[William Thornton]

There has been, for a long time in the SBC, a narrative that the Cals have taken over and this in spite of exactly zero SBC presidents being confirmed five-pointers. No question that younger SBCers are more inclined to be Calvinistic. No question either that the Baptist Faith and Message Statement fits both Cals and Trads. The Trads now have their own theological statement, one adopted by not one SBC entity or at any level of SBC life.

Neither announced candidate has indicated any desire or goal of advancing the cause of one side or the other although some Hemphill supporters are positively gleeful over his nomination. These have expressly stated a goal of another CR type movement in which "year-after-year-after-year" Trad-friendly presidents would be elected and work towards a wholesale replacement of non-Trad trustees, wherever they may be. Hemphill, I expect, will speak to this and deny any involvement. I like him because he did not allow himself to be pushed around as SWBTS president years ago. After he left the seminary a job was created for him at the Executive Committee. He is now a big name at a SC Baptist state school, one that was recently tarnished by scandal, that offers a Trad-friendly experience for ministerial students and others.

The choice, best I can see from this distance, is generational. Greear is 44. Hemphill will be 70 when the SBC meets in June. We dipped back into the boomers and recalled a former mega as IMB president from 2011-2014. Those were in that stretch of years where massive deficits were incurred. The current IMB head had to straighten that mess out. While the position of SBC president doesn't have any administrative duties, my thinking is that it's time for that generational change. Greear's church has more IMB mssys than any other SBC church. The church is one of those multi-site, elder led churches that has an extremely focused mission thrust. I'll vote for Greear like I would have in 2016 had I been present.

[Sandy]

While the position of SBC president doesn't have any administrative duties, my thinking is that it's time for that generational change. Greear's church has more IMB mssys than any other SBC church. The church is one of those multi-site, elder led churches that has an extremely focused mission thrust. I'll vote for Greear like I would have in 2016 had I been present.

No administrative duties, but it is still the gateway to control of boards and committees. The conservative resurgence has adjusted the rules to the point where it is virtually impossible to challenge presidential nominations. It would be visionary, reconciling, and fair for a president to reach out to all of the various "theological" political constituencies in the SBC, and nominate a committee with broad representation in age and persuasion, leaning toward new blood and away from the pattern of nepotism and favoritism that has characterized this process for decades, but that's wishful thinking. Hemphill's appointments would be traditionalists, and from the well-connected. Greear would probably appoint people from his circle, whatever that might be. I guess the question is whether either one would stack the committee with Calvinists or Anti-Calvinists intentionally.

[William Thornton]

I think, Sandy, that your view may be slightly dated. At least at this stage, a vocal militant group thinks they have a standard bearer. No evidence for it yet. I would presume stacking by either at the moment. It will be interesting to see how this unfolds.