Sometimes Not Sharing Is a Good Thing

Scan“In recent days the pro-life, anti-abortion movement has become divided and distracted.

That is why, in my capacity as president of the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma (BGCO), I am hoping to lead our churches toward unifying around two policy measures that would protect life, with the intent of ending abortion in Oklahoma.” (emphasis mine) —Blake Gideon, “Protecting the Life of the Unborn, Ending Abortion” in the August 1st, 2019 edition of The Baptist Messenger

[DISCLAIMER: The “you” addressed below isn’t merely Blake Gideon in particular but the leadership of the BGCO in general. In some of this I’m reading between the lines, but I think I’m doing so with great warrant and am open to reproof if I’m wrong.]

Remember that childhood friend that when it was your toy they spoke of the virtues of you sharing, but when it was their toy they spoke of the evils of your selfishness? Is something like that going on here? Why is it that when you like the bill we should be unified, but when we like the bill and raise concerns over your disapproval of it, we’re being divisive?

A bill that would have ended abortion altogether in our state was spoken against. Now we’re to be gung-ho about a couple of bills that would still allow for abortion (the first in the case of children younger than approximately 6 weeks, the second under the vague category of “the health of the mother”). Pardon? If I speak for abolition, against your recommendation, I’m being divisive. If I don’t wholly support the bills you endorse, I’m being divisive. Am I missing something?

toothbrushes-1424728-1599x1123.jpgLet’s say that it is me who is sowing division, the real question is should I be? Rather than hash things out on the level of accusations of not sharing or being selfish (meaning unity and divisiveness), let’s talk about what may be and what shouldn’t be shared. Toothbrushes shouldn’t be shared; candy, necessitating said toothbrushes, may be shared. Rather than calls for unity, let’s find out if we’re unified. Yes, we all agree abortion is evil. Yes, if we can run the ball down the field for five more yards I’m ok with that so long as you’re playing to win (and a gain of about five yards is the most I’d expect from such a play). But I’m left wondering if you really want to win this game or just run the clock into overtime again and again so as to pull in more at the concessions.

Forgive me, I do believe the BGCO has good intentions, but I am scratching my noggin trying to figure out how that is so. The reasons for not supporting a bill to end abortion coupled with the reasons for supporting bills that limit abortion don’t add up in my mind. Let’s have the conversation there. If at the end of the debate we disagree, that will prove illuminating and helpful.

Instead of shouting “Share!” when it’s convenient for your toy and “Selfishness!” when it’s ours, let’s vigorously argue for when we should share and when we’re being selfish. Paul and Barnabas departed ways over John Mark. Who was right? I don’t think there was a “right,” but it was ok for them to amiably part ways. Concerning abortion, we’re not dealing with something so innocuous. If Paul and Barnabas could argue and part over Mark, then we should certainly be able to do so concerning abortion. I believe there is a clear right and wrong here. Calls for unity are then a call for silence; a call for one party to sear their conscience. I’m not eager for a parting, but I would like a conversation (here you’ll find a series of posts with questions I’d like answers to). If we can’t come to an agreement, we might not be able to play together anymore, but we can walk away from each other like men.

The Tools You Use Tell Me What You’re Building

“WHEREAS, Concerns have been raised by some evangelicals over the use of frameworks such as critical race theory and intersectionality; and

WHEREAS, Critical race theory is a set of analytical tools that explain how race has and continues to function in society, and intersectionality is the study of how different personal characteristics overlap and inform one’s experience… be it…

RESOLVED, That critical race theory and intersectionality should only be employed as analytical tools subordinate to Scripture—not as transcendent ideological frameworks…” —Resolution 9, On Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality

The permitted is certain to be utilized. This is what frightens me.

Yes, God’s common grace pervades the world and grows in unexpected soils, but this is no reason to promote the nutritional value of radioactive apples grown in Chernobyl. Some fields devoid of saving grace are ripe with common grace. I don’t think that’s where we’re gleaning. While Paul did quote a few pagans, he didn’t commend Stoicism or Epicureanism themselves as useful tools. I may have quoted Freud once but I’m certain I’ve never commended Freudian psychoanalysis. Critical race theory has tools within it but is itself is a theory, not a tool. Trying to use it as a tool is like trying to use abortion as a tool for life. Intersectionality as a tool for racial reconciliation is about as valuable as using the morning-after pill as a prenatal vitamin. Wrecking balls make poor hammers when you want to drive nails and build something good.

life-after-the-soviet-union-2-1244693-1279x1705

But what about demo work? Racism, injustice, and tyranny are evils, but critical race theory and intersectionality are not the tools the saints should use to tear them down. When you use the devil’s tools to tear down the devil’s works, you’re still playing in his toolshed. Taking over a racist Nazi regime with a revolutionary Communist one is not the answer. Instead of destroying strongholds, we’ve built new ones and now labeled them safe playgrounds, with the qualifying fine print of playing by the rules of Scripture of course. We’ve traded our DeWalt tools for those of Playskool because we’ve been told they’re “safe” and cannot be used for oppression. This is just a ploy of Big Brother to keep potential usurpers under control. Also, these toy tools are likely coated in toxic paint.

Some tools are custom made for evil jobs such that the tool cannot be separated from the designated task. Further, to seek some redeeming use of such tools is folly when we already have that through which God is building up a new creation. He has promised to supply the power, we need only pick up the tool. Our task is simply to be faithful. The gospel is the tool. The Word is sufficient. If you want an analytical tool, it pierces and divides. If you want to build unity, it’ll do it and it alone. Why buy a dusty pagan stone axe when you’ve got a chain saw?

If I am told that such tools can help me in using or applying the tool, yes, perhaps the abortionist may have some information that can help a doctor deliver a baby. Common grace can indeed grow in such places. But the worldview ain’t that tool and that is what it seems I’m being permitted to pick up. I don’t feel as though I’m being asked to sniff the flower of God’s common grace so much as the manure pile it grew out of. The Word itself is the best lens by which to read both the Word and the world. When I breathe in the Word, I notice more clearly the stink of the world and am better able to spot and appreciate a flower when I find one growing there.

True, God’s big book of natural revelation does help in understanding His small book of special revelation, but it’s one thing to pick up a flower, another to pick up forceps. Look at the build date and the manufacturer. Creation was made good by our good God. Intersectionality was crafted by man post-fall (for some background on its forging, listen to this episode of Al Mohler’s The Briefing). It is an idol. I don’t need to learn from Baal to understand how YHWH liberates his people. A study of Baal may help me understand sinners, and in this way, what God is communicating to them; it might serve as a dark backdrop, contrasting God’s truth with this world’s lies; it cannot, however, in itself, serve as a tool in the way of righteousness.

Where others see permissible “analytical tools” I see a hammer and sickle: a hammer that cannot build but only tear down the church and a sickle that can only gather weeds and not wheat. Let us lay them down and take up again the sword of the Word.

An Empowering Reply to an Encouraging Inquiry

Dear Sister,

For the message you recently sent me I am downright grateful.. It was encouraging. I pray that you will find this empowering.

Screen Shot 2019-06-14 at 9.33.23 AM.pngRegarding women preaching, you’re correct, the current quake finds its epicenter in Beth Moore’s tweet that she would be preaching on Mother’s Day (reportedly at North Point Church where Andy Stanley is). On the heels of this, was news of her invitation to Truett Seminary for their National Preaching Conference”, being listed as a “Guest Preacher.” Many have been supportive of Moore, even out of reformed camps.

Frankly, I’m glad the cat is out of the bag and that she isn’t pretending to do anything otherwise than preach. She’s been flying under the radar for far too long. Calling a missile a bird might fool some, but now there is no excuse. Will we stand on the side of Biblical orthodoxy or join those attacking it?Screen Shot 2019-06-14 at 9.25.47 AM.png

Additionally, I would add that my biggest concern with Moore isn’t that she is a woman. She would be disqualified if she were a man. Mysticism, emotionalism, and poor exegesis permeate her teaching. You mentioned your past experience in the heretical Word of Faith movement and how this all sounds eerily familiar. I believe the Charismatic movement has been subtly making major inroads in Baptist circles for decades (i.e. the soft prosperity of The Prayer of Jabez). We came to a fork in the road way back and chose the wrong path. This is just the latest incident demonstrating that we haven’t turned around. Another disconcerting mark of her teaching noted way back was the use of word studies to find the broad semantic range of a word as leverage for eisegesis, that is, reading her desired meaning into a text. I don’t think Moore’s intent is to be unfaithful to the text, but that is the result.

Regarding the trajectory of the denomination, my biggest concern is how deeply this is tied to feminism, #MeToo, cultural marxism, and intersectionality as driving forces in the culture. The current is strong, and I’m afraid we’re not acting like salmon anymore. I agree, we need to hate all evil acts of abuse, but when you use the devil’s tools to destroy the devil’s works, you need to know you’re just playing around in his toolshed. We’ve come to another fork, and I think the disaster is going to be more severe. If at first fork we chose a path leading to false teaching, we’re now pondering one that leads to apostasy.

Yes, historically it has always been the orthodox belief that the office of elder is limited to qualified men. The main “Biblical” argument for including women is to recall the small number of prophetesses we find in the Scriptures. While there obviously are female prophets, we never find a woman who is “king.” Though Athaliah makes a run as queen and Jezebel is essentially pulling all the strings, these are not exactly positive role models. Nor do we find women acting as priests. The function of teaching is tied to the priests and Levites more than the prophets. The prophets preeminently spoke God’s word, rather than teach it. Also, in this vein, when Paul gives instructions concerning women prophesying in the New Testament, she is to do so manifesting that she is under a head, (cf. 1 Corinthians 11:2–16). This connects to Paul’s prohibition of a woman teaching men or exercising authority over a man in the church (1 Timothy 2:12).

The novel spin being put on 1 Timothy 2:12 today, making room for women preachers, is that it should be read as a hendiadys, that is, two words joined by a conjunction to express a single idea. If what was banned was a woman “teaching and exercising authority over a man” as a single idea, then a woman could be permitted to exercise the function of an elder, teaching, while being denied the office. This is what some are calling “soft complementarianism.” I think it’s rather a hardened compromise.

But this anticipates the question you asked, what of those men who teach in the assembly who are not elders? While it’s understandable that the question arises, as it is deployed by opponents of the Biblical view, it is a smoke screen. When a non-elder preaches he isn’t violating any prohibition. Let me demonstrate with a question. How is one to know if a man is qualified when one of those qualifications is being “apt to teach” if he is never able to teach until he is an elder?

Truly, all teaching in the church should be under the elder’s oversight, as part of his promoting truth and guarding against false teaching. When the elders permit a woman to preach, then automatically, in the very act, they and the woman involved have already violated the Scriptures, however orthodox the sermon may be.

I thank God for your recognizing the rightness and goodness of God’s order and recognizing the lies of the world and your desire to mortify them as they seek to take root in your own heart. “Feminism” is a peculiar word for that which is an attack on the feminine, saying that if womanhood is to have any value, it must be equivalent to manhood. I’ll allow Douglas Wilson to colorfully reiterate the point: “Ironically, we call this attempt by some women to be more like men “feminism,” which is a bit like calling an attempt by cats to be like dogs felinism.” And thus we have already tilted the hat to gender confusion in the church.

In reply to the accusation of belittling women, I believe the Biblical view bebigs them. Womanhood, motherhood, and sisterhood are glorious things in which women are immeasurably superior to men. Chesterton nailed the disparity when he said, “Nothing can ever overcome that one enormous sex superiority, that even the male child is born closer to his mother than to his father. No one, staring at that frightful female privilege, can quite believe in the equality of the sexes.” Equal in value, dignity and worth? Certainly. In roles? Heaven forbid!

Yes, the serpent is whispering in Eve’s ear again as you suggest, and the blame still lies with Adam, but at least in the Garden his sin was one of passivity. Now he is actively inciting his wife with snake’s crafty lies. “Become like me, and you’ll be like God.”

Dear sister, I thank God that you are feeding on that which is far more nourishing and empowering, the Word of truth.

A Drink from the Brooks: Avoid Sparkles

sparks-2-1553325-1600x1200.jpg

“It is impossible for that man to get the conquest of sin, that plays and sports with the occasions of sin. God will not remove the temptation, except you turn from the occasion. It is a just and righteous thing with God, that he should fall into the pit, that will adventure to dance upon the brink of the pit, and that he should be a slave to sin, that will not flee from the occasions of sin. As long as there is fuel in our hearts for a temptation, we cannot be secure. He that hath gunpowder about him had need keep far enough off from sparkles. To rush upon the occasions of sin, is both to tempt ourselves, and to tempt Satan to tempt our souls. It is very rare that any soul plays with the occasions of sin, but that soul is ensnared by sin. It is seldom that God keeps that soul from the acts of sin, that will not keep off from the occasions of sin. He that adventures upon the occasions of sin is as he that would quench the fire with oil, which is a fuel to maintain it, and increase it.” —Thomas Brooks, Precious Remedies against Satan’s Devices

Let Jezebel Fall, Let Justice Flow: A Response to the BGCO Letter Concerning SB 13 (Part 6/Conclusion)

[This post slightly expands on my remarks made at the Baptist Rally to Support SB 13 on February 25]

“The BGCO is categorically opposed to abortion, and it is our prayer and goal to see lives saved and an end to abortion in Oklahoma and beyond. Through the years, Oklahoma Baptists have championed numerous bills designed to protect life and fight abortion.” —Open Letter from the BGCO to Oklahoma Baptists

“So Solomon did what was evil in the sight of the LORD and did not wholly follow the LORD, as David his father had done. Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab, and for Molech the abomination of the Ammonites, on the mountain east of Jerusalem” (1 Kings 11:6–7).

“And he [King Josiah] defiled Topheth, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, that no one might burn his son or his daughter as an offering to Molech” (2 Kings 23:10).

Sometimes a wise man can be a fool. When the king was a fool, God sent a prophet. I hope I’m Nathan speaking to David. I pray that my motives are loving and that my brothers are repentant. At this time, I do not wish to be seen as an Elijah rebuking Ahab. As far as I can see, we all hate Jezebel and her idolatries. I think we’re debating whether or not she should be thrown down from the wall now, by whom, and how.

If the streets are clear below, let Jezebel be cast down! BGCO leaders, the time has come. The time is now. I don’t care who. I don’t care how.* Let her be cast down; let her be cast down now!

When God has spoken, let us tremble at His Word. As Jeremiah Burroughs said, “True fear and trembling at the Word is that which will settle the heart and strengthen the heart against all other fears. It will swallow up other fears that are greater.” If we fear God, we will be bold before men. I long for a Josiah, trembling at the word, zealous to extinguish the worship of Molech. I long for a Wilberforce, spending his own life, tenacious for the lives of others. I’m thankful for the kings of old whose hearts were right to the Lord yet failed to purge the land of idolatry (i.e. 1 Kings 15:4), but I want to see all the high places taken down and I’m not looking for the world to do so. If Molech is to be defiled, the church must be sanctified.

May God grant us repentance and reformation.


If you are a member or a pastor of an Oklahoma Southern Baptist Church and disagree with the BGCO, consider signing this letter and requesting to join the Facebook group Oklahoma Baptists for SB 13.

*The emphatic if that begins this paragraph is meant to indicate that justice and righteousness are assumed regarding the how.

Using the Hammer of a Co-belligerent: A Response to the BGCO Letter Concerning SB 13 (Part 5)

“In recent days, you may have read discussions about Oklahoma State Senate Bill 13, the ‘Abolition of Abortion Act.’ Regarding SB 13, after considerable prayer and careful study of the proposed policy, including direct conversations with the bill’s principle author, we have several concerns.”  —Open Letter from the BGCO to Oklahoma Baptists

I’m trying to be a faithful prophet here, but not that kind of a prophet. I do not posses any knowledge of the several unnamed concerns. I would like to hear them. I hope they are more substantial than those given. To the best of my knowledge, the particular leaders whose signatures are applied to the letter haven’t explicitly disclosed any further rational. But in the smorgasbord of the interwebs I do keep seeing two staple reasons from some Southern Baptists pastors as to why we shouldn’t support SB 13 and should support the leadership of the BGCO.

The first staple I’m hearing we must have a healthy helping of is unity and peace. I do want to fight for unity, but I also want to contend for the faith. These two battles are not at odds. The fight for true Christian unity is a fight for the truth of Christ. Unity by itself is not a virtue. D.A. Carson explains, “The Bible itself recognizes that unity is not an intrinsic good. There is good unity, and there is bad unity. Bad unity occurs in Genesis 11 when rebellious humankind unites to build a tower to heaven to defy God.”

Disagreement is not division. Uniformity is not unity. Let’s hash this out and not kill all discussion with demands for peace. If we must part ways here, as did Paul and Barnabas, I will pray both for your repentance and for your fruitfulness in preaching the gospel of Christ.

The leaders have expressed their conscience. Are we not allowed to express our own without being accused of causing division? If so, this is an easy flip. It is the expression of their conscience, as representatives of our churches, that has sown division.

If that’s the meat, here are the potatoes:* some don’t want to get behind this legislation because of radicals who may be involved with it. This is the genetic fallacy. A prophecy concerning our Lord came through pagan Balaam and was true nonetheless. I don’t care if Hitler wrote this legislation, if it would end this holocaust and do no injustice otherwise, I’m voting for it.

Protestants owe much to Francis Schaeffer for the fact that we’re fighting for life. Initially Schaeffer faced kickback for his efforts against abortion by Evangelicals who said the life of the unborn was a Catholic agenda. Schaeffer used the language of “co-belligerents” in reference to Catholics in this war. We are certain to face this battle with both allies and co-belligerents. The presence of co-belligerents with whom we have disagreements should not cause us to falter.

hammer-1187752-640x480It is naive to think that once any good legislation is put forward other persons more radical than we won’t get wrapped up in it as well. I wouldn’t fault an American soldier for using a foreign weapon. Others may be offering up this meat to an idol. We need not participate in their worship and we are free to buy their meat from the market. Meat is meat. Truth is truth. Man’s hands may dirty the surface, but if there’s truth, it’s God’s. A good hammer shouldn’t be trashed because of whose fingerprints are on it. If it is being used as a murder weapon, bring forth the evidence. Otherwise, let’s build.

Is our concern God’s justice or man’s justification? Am I hitting the nail on the head?


If you are a member or a pastor of an Oklahoma Southern Baptist Church and disagree with the BGCO, consider signing this letter and requesting to join the Facebook group Oklahoma Baptists for SB 13.

*The meat and potatoes are often served with the gray gravy of “this bill isn’t worded well.” I take this to refer to the previous concerns I’ve dealt with. If not, I haven’t found any words telling me what isn’t worded well.

The Cheese Puff Argument: A Response to the BGCO Letter Concerning SB 13 (Part 4)

“The bill even goes so far to repeal original Oklahoma laws already on the books that allows abortion only to save a mother’s life.” —Open Letter from the BGCO to Oklahoma Baptists

ad hominem: marked by or being an attack on an opponent’s character rather than by an answer to the contentions made

This isn’t so much an argument against a straw man as it is an argument of straw against the man. Methinks it is a bit like complaining that your doctor doesn’t have the smallpox vaccine on hand anymore. This is no severe measure because the need for such severe measures are an anomaly. When such anomalies do occur, we don’t need legislation that can then be twisted to kill a child for the “health” of the mother. This very play was just run with abortion legislation in New York and celebrated with applause.

Doctors are trained to preserve life. They don’t need laws for that. This bill is not about killing mothers instead of babies. There is no draconian angle here that I’m aware of. The ambition is simply for life all around. Let’s go for all the life we can every time.

It’s this simple, no mothers or babies are to be harmed in the implementation of this bill. If the fire alarm goes off, our ambition should be to save as many lives as possible. If the fireman can’t save them all, we’ll cry both with him and the family for their loss and blame no one. But let’s not talk about legislation that could be used to validate arbitrary decisions not to try to save some. If we do, we’ll likely see arsonists signing up to be firemen. As we don’t wish to legislate for firemen when negligent homicide is permissible, neither should we tell doctors when they can get away with murder.

a-bowl-of-cheese-puffs-1567201-639x426

This objection is built like a cheese puff: there’s an initial flavor explosion, but it’s really mostly air with little substance. Whatever nutritional value can be gained from this puff supports very little life. You can’t argue against a heavy block of cheddar with a cheese puff. You can’t argue against the saving of thousands of lives with the saving of a few lives that would have been saved anyway.


If you are a member or a pastor of an Oklahoma Southern Baptist Church and disagree with the BGCO, consider signing this letter and requesting to join the Facebook group Oklahoma Baptists for SB 13.