Wednesday, May 24, 2006

The Commissioning Service, Election of Officers and Why I Can't Stand the Longhorns

The Commissioning Service at Hoffmantown Baptist Church in Albuquerque

Rachelle and I enjoyed a wonderful evening as we celebrated the appointment of 94 missionaries to bring our total to over 5,100 around the world. This is really a very moving time, made all the more special for us because of some people we personally helped through the appointment process. I say again, if you have never had the privilege of attending one of these services, you need to make plans to go. It is the highlight of my week. Though this was the last event of Tuesday (7:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m.) , I covered it first because of its importance!

The Election of Trustee Officers

The election of officers for the International Mission Board was the first item of business in the public session at 2:00 this afternoon. John Floyd of Tennessee was elected chairman over Wayne Marshall of Mississippi by a 39 to 34 margin, with sixteen trustees either absent or abstaining.

Dr. John Floyd may turn out to be the best Chairman the IMB has ever had. I would have raised two questions today prior to the election, but since I don't know the answers to the questions myself, I did not want to influence the election one way or the other. Obviously, the Lord intended Dr. Floyd to be elected for a good purpose.

The two questions regarding John Floyd as Chairman are not a criticism of his election, but rather, just questions that I believe should be asked and ultimately answered by either the Executive Committee of the SBC or the SBC in Greensboro.

Question One: Is there a conflict of interest when a former staff administrator of the IMB becomes the Chairman of the Board. If the trustees are called by our policy guidelines to support the vision and direction of the President, and the new Chairman has expressed opposition to the current President's vision, is it within corporate and Board ethics to elect that former staff administrator as Chairman of the Board? I'm just asking, and maybe someone can give an answer that can persuade me one way or the other.

Question Two: Is there a policy problem, as some are saying, that because Dr. Floyd draws a pension from the IMB the Board may be in violation of Article 15 Section F of the Southern Baptist Convention bylaws which states:

No person shall be eligible to serve on any one of the above entities from which he/she receives any part of his/her salary, directly or indirectly, or, which provides funds for which he/she has a duty of administration. When such conditions become applicable, that person shall be considered as having resigned and such vacancy shall be filled in accordance with established Convention procedure.

Whether or not this bylaw can be interpreted to include pensions may be a matter of debate, or for that matter, may need further legal clarification. Again, these are just questions and they may be answered in ways I don't expect.

I do believe our Board is now in an excellent position of realizing we MUST support the vision and direction of current administration and I believe Dr. Floyd understands the importance of doing that as Chairman, and he will do his best to fulfill his role as Chairman defined by our policy manuals, realizing the high level of scrutiny he will be under. I will continue to fulfill my role as a trustee to watch closely that every trustee abides by Board approved policy.

John Russell, a wonderful, warm hearted trustee with a solid head on his shoulders who is Associate Pastor at the Bell Shoals Baptist Church outside of Tampa, Florida was elected Vice-Chairman. If for any reason the Chairman must resign for policy reasons, the Vice-Chairman will take his place.

The Chairman's Report

Due to the length of several reports and recognition of trustees who are completing their terms of service Dr. Hatley did not get to his report. He will be speaking tomorrow morning during the 8:30 to 12:00 noon plenary session. I will give you my comments on his report tomorrow. This is Dr. Hatley's last day to serve as Chairman of the Board of Trustees. I believe he has made some good faith efforts to resolve some very difficult issues and I'm sure he is relieved his role as Chairman is coming to an end.

Dr. Rankin's Report and the Financial Report

Once again, Dr. Ranking "rang the bell" as he encouraged us all with a wonderful update on the work taking place through our missionaries around the world. His report, along with regional reports were stunning. Great work is being accomplished by the IMB.

We had a good year financially in the IMB. Trustee Bill Sutton made the outstanding observation that our return on investments was enough to cover all administrative costs in Richmond, so that every dollar given to Lottie Moon AND CP in 2005 went directly to the missionaries OVERSEAS. Not one dollar was taken out for overhead. Investment income covered those costs. That is a great thing, and I appreciate my friend Bill Sutton for pointing that out to us all.

Why I Can't Stand the Longhorns

It is a tradition for trustees rotating off the Board to say a few words to the Board. One trustee, a person I am choosing not to name, took the microphone and then blasted "those who have a lot to say, but say nothing." He then proceeded to use some very colorful descriptive language to identify "those people." I believe it was clearly evident by those who approached me later that my perceptions of his remarks were on target --- he was identifying me --- and most everyone knew it. It got real quiet (remember this is in public forum) and he said, "That person reminds me of that thing on Trustee Barnes shirt! You see that! It's a Longhorn." (As an aside, Trustee Barnes was wearing a Texas Longhorn shirt).

The pontificating trustee continued, "He who says a lot but actually says nothing at all is like that Longhorn --- there are two points (stretching his arms out to show the two points) with a lot of bull in between."

This OU Sooner fan has never liked the Longhorns!

Now I know why! I don't like bull. :)

In His Grace,


P.S. I signed the BFM 2000 and wrote three comments on the sheet that I will share later. The hour is late. Blessings.


Anonymous said...


Well you ask about support of policies now in place. It seems that the reason the newly elected chairman of the BoT retired early from the IMB, was that he could not support New Directions. I really hope that he now can.

There is much more that I could write on this subject, but I want to try to come close to the standards you maintain, of not speaking ill of others. Maybe, sometime soon we might talk.

Anonymous said...

As an Arkansas Razorback, even though I have many good friends from Texas, I share you feelings about the Shorthorns. I wonder how the remarks of this trustee go along with the policy regarding not publicly criticizing board actions, trustees or staff. If there is not action taken by the chairman or the trustees to speak to this man's remarks, I suppose we can assume the policy is no longer in force and all trustees are free to speak their mind.

Anonymous said...

Well, you have just pretty well clinched it in my book now!

Boomer Sooner!

Bob Cleveland said...


I agree with what you say about Chairman Floyd. But with one caveat:

You stated: "Obviously, the Lord intended Dr. Floyd to be elected for a good purpose."

True enough, but it's possible that "good purpose" may not be what we expect. God has let folks go their own way, to their detriment, many times in history. That is a possibility here.

Regardless of the outcome, I love to see God at work. He works in a manner so unlike what any man could imagine, that it's thrilling to watch.

God bless, Brother.

Todd Nelson said...


Glad to hear about the appointments. I've seen some myself, and they are always inspiring.

Regarding the elections ... I didn't know anything about either of the men who "ran" for the chairmanship, until just now. I found Mid-America Seminary's web site that lists Dr Floyd is a Vice-President and Missions Dept Chairman there, and a former FMB missionary to the Philippines and administrator in Europe. Here's his faculty page (will require a copy-and-paste into the URL line):

I found that Dr Wayne Marshall is senior pastor of Longview Heights Baptist Church in Olive Branch, northern Mississippi.

Hmm. The vote was close.

Question: If John Floyd is in disagreement with Jerry Rankin's vision, and trustees voted 39-34 for Dr Floyd, what message should we take from this vote? What part did vision play in it? I'm sure this is a concern to many.

As to Dr Floyd's pension ... wouldn't that be coming from the Annuity Board / GuideStone? (Or does the IMB have their own fund?) Either way, this doesn't appear to be a significant issue -- not like the potential leadership and vision conflict.

Since the BOT is the entity that hires and fires the president (correct?), and if Dr Floyd and others do openly oppose Dr Rankin's leadership, what's to prevent Dr Floyd and like-minded trustees from trying to convince a majority that Dr Rankin should retire? Am I supposing too much and running too far ahead? (I hope so!) Might the vote split the way it did for Dr Floyd's election? Or would they have a much harder time in persuading others to pressure Dr Rankin to step aside?

I realize you are limited in what you can comment on. But I'm sure others will research and reply; and I hope we'll have a better understanding of things. I will be praying for you and all the people involved that you will have wisdom from heaven that is pure, peace-loving, gentle, sincere, willing to yield, full of mercy and good deeds. (James 3:17)

O God, help us! To paraphrase the words of Pogo, "We seem to continually meet the enemy, and find that he is us!"

Praying and observing from Kuala Lumpur,

Anonymous said...

Wade ,
Does Dr. Floyd hold to Landmarkist ideas?

Anonymous said...

To a certain extent the trustees are to support the vision of the President - however that does not imply a blind loyalty. For many years the trustees were a rubber stamp for the President - never questioning or holding him accountable. Whenthe conservative resurgence occurred suddenly the board of trustees began to question the direction that the board was taking and as a result conflict occured and eventually Dr. Parks resigned. Then Dr. Rankin was elected and the came up with a different vision and direction for the board - which the trustees approved. Now if Dr. Rankin is God's man for this time as you assert - then the trustees of former times who were not supportive of Dr. Parks were used to usher in a new age. SO blind loyalty to a President and his vision is not the role of the trustees or else Dr. Rankin would not have come ot the throne. You do raise an interesting question thought by extension:
Are the President and staff accountable to the board who is in turn acocuntable to the Convention OR are the trustees accoutnable to the President and staff who are then unaccoutnable to the convention. If you look back at the history of the IMB you will find that often through the life of the IMB the trustees were just rubber stamps for the President and there was no accountability - dissent was not brooked - you would have probably rally been in trouble back then Wade.

Anonymous said...

John Russell is Associate Pastor at Bell Shoals Baptist Church where Forrest Pollock is Pastor. Incidentally, Bob Reccord used to pastor there.

Tim Rogers said...

Brother Wade,
I would like to say that you did an excellent job on describing the Missionary Commisioning service. I shall never forget the impact a commissioning service made on my wife and me at a New Orleans Convention. Also, the report on the funds from investment returns covering the administrative cost of IMB. What a joy to know every penny of what was given to Lottie Moon goes to the field in order that our Missionaries are able to carry out the vision for ministry God has given them.
Allow me to apologize to you for the arrogant liberty a lame duck Trustee took on his way out. How can I get the minutes of that meeting in order to make certain that never happens again? EM

Anonymous said...

I’m in a griping mood—my hero has just taken a dive in the boxing ring. How can you condemn Patterson when you did the same thing?—sign the 2000 when you don’t believe some of the statements should be in it.
I’ve never heard of “The Abstract of Principles” until you quoted them. From what you wrote, I see how someone could be fooled a lot easier than the BFM2000 fooling anyone.

Have you ever thought that God may want you kicked off the IMB because he has a more important position for you? And if it is better than the IMB position, WOW!

The old conventions of Texas and Virginia believe as you do, but they had the courage NOT to sign the BFM2000. Yes, they have suffered the slurs, insults, and thrown out of the good graces of the SBC, but they stayed honest.
They are victims of taxation without representation. You got a taste of what they have shouldered through the years when the trustee rotating off the Board cut you down.

If all the small churches of these two conventions came with their messengers and joined your small army, they could vote Mickey Mouse president.

Speaking of an army, when you promoted someone else to run for president it was like Barak getting someone else to lead his army.

Trying to think how to end this on a good note, but I’ve come up short.

Tim Rogers said...

Sorry for the double. The reason for the apology from me is that Trustee represents me. He is my voice that is the reason I voted in favor of the nominating report in 1998. So, please accept my apology. Also, pass this on to the new Chairman and let him know that I am highly offended that this type of display is allowed in a public meeting.


GOD BLESS YOU AND YOURS. OL to be young again, I bet you could use some sleep.
Your Brother

CB Scott said...

A heart for missions, he had not.

He just wanted to take a shot.

Pawing the ground and slinging snot,

Proves he's the bull, does it not?

Roll Tide.


Anonymous said...


Question 2:

If the staff "pension" arrangement is like that for missionaries, there are some issues that would currently cause some question as to conflict of interest. Were policies to be changed on the vesting design, I think it would be a mute point.

At the present, missionary annuity payments are classified as "100% vested", yet if one reads the fine print, it is not the missionary, but the missionary's estate that is vested. One is allowed to withdraw all funds only by annuitizing them. One cannot touch the principle during one's lifetime, except to annuitize.

As trustees have to approve policy changes including the regulation of the retirement plan, there could be some conflict of interest as regards the manner in which these funds could be tapped. This would not signify new monies, but a change in distribution of benefits.

I know that the IMB has also made changes in regard to retirement benefits for emeritus personnel after the fact of their retirement. These have been positive financial benefits in regards to health care issues. I would assume that the Trustees could make the same or similar changes to benefits for retired staff in the same line.

These would be minor issues, but there is some room to state that a trustee who has served on staff or on the field has some vested financial interest in the dealings of the IMB. said...


You make me laugh! said...

10-40 Missionary,

Thank you for acknowledging the high standards of this blog.

I believe we as Southern Baptists should be able to freely, without repurcussion, and in open forum be allowed to discuss ISSUES.

Sometimes people get confused. They think if disagree with them on an issue or even RAISE an issue then you are disloyal or a "troublemaker."

If people can maintain a Christlike spirit while discussing the issues we will advance far in the Kingdom work.

That is my standard.

Wade said...


Nobody is out to get Dr. Rankin anymore.

Everyone has expressed love and admiration for Dr. Rankin over, and over, and over again the last three meetings.

It's been a love fest. :)

So, I would give to Dr. Floyd the right to oppose Dr. Rankin on the issues as much as anyone around, but the issues raised either be a violation of Biblical priciple, Board approved policy or some other PRINCIPLE.

Here is where the rub comes. Some INTERRETATIONS of Scripture SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE in a convention of cooperation. People are now getting that message. I am trusting our new chairman is too.

Anonymous said...


Lottie Moon funds historically were not allowed to be used anywhere other than overseas. Has this changed?

Anonymous said...


Sorry for the third comment: are the regional leaders still being counted as missionaries, and therefore not part of the administration overhead? When Parks left the FMB, the area directors were considered administration. Admin ate up 8% of the FMB budget. Last I checked, the regional leaders are no longer considered administration, yet admin takes over 14% of the budget. In my book, those are significant changes that have been glossed over. said...

Former M,

This year no Lottie Moon or CP funds were used for administration.

That is what is unique.

Thanks for the clarification. said...

I'm not sure about that M. I'll find out.

Craig Thompson said...


I do not know you and was introduced to your blog for the first time today as I was perusing and attempting to better understand the "Memphis Declaration" on another site. However, as I read your latest post, (note: I rarely read many blogs because I find that they often insite disunity) I was interested in the questions you asked concerning the IMB, but I can't help but question your decision to not ask them publicly. If you did not know the answers, it seems to me that would have been the exact reason to ask the question. After all, if you know the answer, why is there a need to ask the question?

This is not intended as a criticism and I hope it is not taken that way, only an observation. I'm just not sure why you ask questions for the IMB to the public at large. We are now left with questions and no answers. Had you asked the question for which you do not have the answer, it is possible that we would all have been given insight into these matters.

Anonymous said...

Wade, the bad news is that the exiting IMB Trustee used the "old as the hills" analogy of the Texas longhorn in a thinly disguised personal attack on you. The worse news is that the animosity of his statement was not challenged by any Trustee in a leadership role bringing us to the conclusion that ad hominems of Trustees toward other Trustees continue to be tolerated by the leadership of the IMB BoT. . .placing them on the precarious tips of a (please excuse the use of another Texas bovine reference) "longhorn dilemma" as to how they propose to justify the hypocrisy of ignoring the egregious actions of one of their own, yet they have, to this day, failed to apologize for the unsubstantiated and false charges that they levied against you earlier this year! On second thought, perhaps, this is how those in control of the IMB BoT define "fair".

The good news is that this particular Trustee is doing what oak trees around the world do in the spring. . .they "leaf"! Hopefully, the Trustee will be replaced by someone who reflects some modicum of grace and civility. . .at least, that is this Okie's prayer.

In His Grace and Peace,

A 10-40 Window Missionary said...


Recently, I requested a copy og the minutes of the IMB BoT meetings. To my surprise, that request was refused. The reason? Security for missionaries on the field. Supposedly, names are mentioned. This is a rather lame excuse for not keeping Southern Baptists informed. If it were reammy about a few names, then the minutes could be easily "sanitized" by whomever has them on their computer. Missionaries on the field routinely "sanitize" their reports to supporters in the USA, why can the IMB not do the same? It really seems more like not wanting us to know...


Anonymous said.
I'm in a griping mood—my hero has just taken a dive in the boxing ring. How can you condemn Patterson when you did the same thing?—sign the 2000 when you don’t believe some of the statements should be in it.

Wade said
P.S. I signed the BFM 2000 and wrote three comments on the sheet that I will share later. The hour is late. Blessings

I asked where did Wade ever condemn Patterson on these BLODS??

Anonymous said...

I, too, understood that ALL Lottie Moon receipts were to go overseas. You stated "This year" no LM or CP monies were used for administration. Can you say that about 2004?? Was ALL the LM money sent overseas??

art rogers said...

Dr. Floyd's position as Board Chair is an issue that needs to be resolved, to be sure. I would like to know why, as a missionary drawing a pension (partly from Guidestone) why he was serving on the committee that oversaw the pension? In effect, he had a hand of determining his own pension amount.

It is not appropriate - especially when another place of service within the BOT would have been just as easy to fill.

I still think that missionaries, with years of interpersonal relationships that are bound to produce conflict, should not be allowed on their former agency's BOT. If NAMB missionaries want to serve on the IMB BOT, and vice versa, fine.

Otherwise, I think their presence is a conflict of interest within itself - as the 10-40 M at the top of the comments page describes.

art rogers said...

Oh, yeah. I don't like Longhorns, either.

Gig 'em, Aggies! said...

Mr. Anonymous,

ALL LOTTIE MOON receipts IN EVERY YEAR are used overseas, no overhead. In 20005 no CP funds were used in overhead. That is GREAT news. said...


This IS a public issue because the answers to the questions are outside the domain and pervue of this Board. This has to do with bylaw requirements of the SBC, not the IMB, and I think you will find this is debated openly in the weeks to come.

Welcome. said...

10- 40 Missionary,

I will have a post in the very near future about the minutes of the IMB that will answer your questions.

Anonymous said...

Wade, That has to be exciting, being part of sending out new missionaries. Too bad other things pop up to try to spoil things.

Rex, Barak got a woman (Deborah, a judge) to lead. This would never happen in the present-day SBC. One does tend to wonder if the putdowns of women by SBC leadership have more to do with power than theology. The fewer people eligible for certain jobs, or even to have their ideas heard, the better the chances for those still eligible.


Mike said...


I appreciate your blogging and the content within. Your positions routinely appear well thought out, and this is a great medium to gain insight into an area we might not otherwise. I have been a life-long S. Baptist and continue to be despite surrendering to full-time missions and going with a para-church org. From a random lay person perspective so much of the goings on at the IMB have been disconnected from my church life and awareness. This blog and your using the medium fills in a bunch of gaps for me. Thanks and God bless.


Anonymous said...

The old "two points with a lot of bull in between" line - a Southern Baptist standard!

When preachers get together for events like the one you're at, do they roll their eyes when they hear crusty old jokes and analogies like the aforementioned, or do they laugh politely? Is there like an unofficial "preach off" going on where each guy that gets up tries to "one up" the previous guy?

Todd Nelson said...


I'm very glad to hear that trustees have been affirming their love and respect for Dr Rankin. Thanks for the reply.

I also hope the BOT will reconsider their two new policies and, like you've been advocating, keep the tent large for cooperation with all Great Commission Christians, begining with Southern Baptist missionary candidates themselves.


Anonymous said...

As for your "conflict of interest" question, I have question for you:
Isn't it better to have someone serving on the board who knows how things really are on the field, rather than a bunch of pastors who may have taken some vacation trips?
You really don't know what the missionary life is like until you sell or give away all you own, move thousands of miles away from home and plan to stay for 30 years.
The presumption of those who have gone on a few (or on many) short-term trips and then returned to thier comfy suburban life in the US to expound on how they are "missionaries" really gets my goat. So does that of a pastor who says he can run a mission board better than someone who has retired from successful service.

Anonymous said...

I am a M from Texas. Don't hate us all for the unkind words of one...Go Longhorns, National Champs 2005/6!

Anonymous said...

As a M from Texas, don't hate us all for the unkind words of one. Go 'Horns, National Champs!

Anonymous said...

So I hear from sbcoutpost that you might be having a tough day. Please know I'm praying for you (and wanting badly to rope a longhorn)!

Remember brother, you've only got an audience of One. I admire the integrity and humility with which you've handled all of this bad, bad stuff.

Anonymous said...

It's nice to have some firsthand comments on the good work of the IMB!

Kevin Bussey said...

I think Dr. H needs to repent! This is crazy!

Anonymous said...

To 70 year old brother in Christ,
From a 74 year old brother in Christ, otherwise known as Rex,

I don’t know who you referred your question to, and I was waiting for someone to answer, but like a lot of my questions—no one hears what they don’t want to hear.
Since you quoted me, I’ll show you where I got my conclusion that Wade condemns Patterson.

Wade made the following statements made May 23 on his May 22 post of ‘Albuquerque and the International Mission Board Trustee Meeting.’

Wade said:
“Maiden,…if what you say is true and Dr. Patterson has actually signed the Abstract of Principles…then we possibly have a very interesting situation of a Seminary President signing a document he does not actually believe.”

“My point: Did Dr. Patterson actually believe that when he signed the Abstract of Principles? I am sure he must or he would never have signed it, right?”

“Dr. Patterson would have never signed this as President of Southeastern had he not actually believed that, would he?”

“I [Wade] close with three questions:
1. Did Dr. Patterson sign the Abstract of Principles though he actually didn’t believe the Principles?
2. Has Dr. Patterson grown in his understanding since he signed the Abstract?
3. Should Dr. Patterson be able to sympathize with anyone who is asked to sign a statement that contains certain doctrines not essential to salvation, but over which Baptist have differing views?”

As far as Patterson signing something he really doesn’t believe; he wrote the forward to Criswell’s Study Bible and signed it.
He wrote: “Harmonization of apparent discrepancies and explanations of passages thought by some to contain error are afforded the reader.”

Years ago, I asked him if they got all the discrepancies or just some of them. He answered if a voice all could hear, “We got all of them!”

I asked, what about the girl being dead in Matthew and alive in Mark and Luke?

In a voice only I could hear, “We got all we could.”

The Baptist Standard would not print this account, but I’ll see if it squeaks by here.
Rex Ray


Anonymous said...
To 70 year old brother in Christ,
From a 74 year old brother in Christ, otherwise know as Rex,

I know we are getting Old and Tired of the watering down of GOD’S WORD. I do think you need new glasses or you need to reread WADE’S Post. I saw nothing that Condemns Dr. Patterson. I did see that WADE questions if these thing were so.

Bowden McElroy said...

I would like to take a stab at a serious response to the question you raised about the applicability of Article 15 Section F to John Floyd.

I assume the purpose of the section is to speak to the issue of dual relationships. I can't be accountable to my boss as an employee and at the same time have him accountable to me as a trustee. (Similarly, I can't hold stock in a company that acts as a vendor to the organization and also hold a position that influence who we buy from.) One relationship would unduly influence the other.

A retiree is outside the life of the organization; he is no longer making decisions or responsible for carrying out the directives of others. Apart form issues of increases to pensions, Dr. Floyd has only one relationship to the IMB: that of trustee.

The presence of a dual relationship isn't necessarily unethical. The misuse of power in one aspect of that relationship would be unethical. We encourage people to avoid dual relationships as a means of avoiding temptation.

I have no problem, in principle, with a retiree serving as a trustee; provided he recuse himself from all decisions directly impacting the pension.

Anonymous said...

Brother Wade...
I have been reading your blog for some time now and also other Baptist media releases. I have come to one conclusion...
Is there any wonder the SBC is losing ground? When men appointed to serve as representatives of the local bodies cannot agree and handle the business at hand without airing everyone's laundry, how can they expect unity in the convention or the local body of Christ.
As a deacon in a local SBC church which is very supportive of missions and the Cooperative Program, we may have disagreements going into meetings, but when we leave we are "one". This does not mean each one must have identical thoughts and beliefs, but rather we support the majority opinion if it is Biblical and present a united front in our quest to be the servants and body Christ expects.
Those of us elected to serve the Church (the called out) must be extremely cautious of how we express ourselves both privately and, especially, publicly. The people we serve are looking for unity and cooperation in their appointed leaders. Conflict at the convention level trickles down to the local body and often causes much discussion and division.
God Bless our missionaries!

Anonymous said...

To OLD brother from Rex,
My reply did not make the cut. (Wade’s rules of ‘no unfavorable facts against personal names’, takes all the fun out.) So I will try this comment again.
As kids we’d say cut-downs like, “Are you bragging or complaining?”
So, what was the purpose of Wade’s questions about ‘Person A’ signing something that ‘Person A’ did not believe in?
In other words, was Wade bragging or complaining about ‘Person A’?
I don’t think glasses are needed to know the answer.

Did you miss the point of ‘Person A’s forward to Criswell’s Study Bible is misleading by him giving two answers to my question?

‘Person B’ pointed the finger and said ‘Person A’ was the one who wrote the letter to the SBC Executive Board that incorrectly quoted a person of the BWA.

‘Person A’ jumped on ‘Person C’ for having some women in higher positions than men.

‘Person A’ explained how he removed ‘undesirable’ professors from SWBTS. He gave them a choice; they could resign with a good recommendation or be fired with a bad recommendation. That was not the policy of SWBTS, but ‘Person A’ gets things accomplished his way.

Old brother, I believe we are both on the same side. Let’s have peace.
Rex Ray

Anonymous said...


Thank you for standing in there. I am sorry that you are catching such heat from fellow believers.

May all of us who believe in the absolute integrity of Scripture live out Jesus' new commandment to "love one another..." so that "all people will know that yo are My disciples,..." John 13:34,35

In regard to the Longhorn comment, it sounds almost biblical. In the RSV, Psalm 50:9 says "I will accept no bull from your house, ..." :)

May God use this mess to bring a lost world to know Him!

volfan007 said...

from someone who knows dr. floyd and wayne marshall personally, they both would have been great choices for the chairman position. both of these men are sound, wonderful men of God. they are the kind of men that would keep us on the path of truth and and biblical soundness.

i do believe that we must have standards set on what we will allow as a convention, and i cant believe that we let someone who speaks in ecstatic utterance be the director of our imb. i think that dr. rankin is a fine man, and i appreciate the work that he has done. but, if i had known that he was into ecstatic utterance, or prayer languages, i would not want him to be the president of the imb. nor would i want a five point calvinist to be head of the imb. nor would i want anyone thats off into extreme theological viewpoints to be leading ministries in the sbc, nor at my local church. i dont hate these people in the extreme theological camps, but i dont think that they should be in leadership positions.

by the way, the true ut is not texas. it's the ut vols. go big orange(thats tn orange-the real orange).