To Some Southern Baptist Preachers Jesus Is Just Another Southern Baptist Preacher

Some Southern Baptist pastors have created an image of Jesus that is purely cultural. Jesus is a white male who loves grits, buttermilk and cornbread. He eschews beer with the boys, but he loves Nascar and football. He's in church on Sunday morning and night, visitation on Monday night, and prayer meeting on Wednesday night. He gives ten percent of his income to the church, and refuses to be friends with any church member who doesn't. He's a card carrying member of the National Rifle Association. He hates homosexuality (homos) more than he does adultery (people who have an 'affair'). He is silent about obesity caused by the overindulgence of food but loudly condemns anybody who even thinks of drinking one glass of wine. He speaks with sappy spiritual sentimentality about loving the world, but he is quick to grab a microphone and loudly condemn any person who doesn't see the world like he does.  He wants everyone to look like him, act like him, talk like him, be like him. In short, Jesus is a  Southern Baptist pastor to many Southern Baptist pastors.

We have lost any concept of the transcendence of God. Transcendence is defined as "a state of being or existence above and beyond the limits of material experience."  Jesus is, by virtue of His personhood, way beyond our experience. When we try to mold Jesus into our image, we get a "holy" and "righteous" anger with fellow pastors who don't look like us.

Some fellow Southern Baptist pastors are trying to make an issue of Al Mohler's statement that Southern Baptists have "lied" about the nature of homosexuality and have practiced "homophobia" (fear of homosexuals) in years past. These Southern Baptist pastors are in a frenzy (see here and here). What is absolutely absurd about this entire situation is that Dr. Al Mohler has written over 200 articles clearly detailing a sound, biblical view of homosexuality, and even has gone on Larry King to stand for biblical truth. The disagreement going on is not over whether or not homosexuality is sin (the Bible is clear that it is), but how Southern Baptists should relate to sinners who struggle with the sin of homosexuality. Those Southern Baptist pastors who see Jesus as a Southern Baptist pastor are demanding Al Mohler explain how Southern Baptists have lied about homosexuality and how Southern Baptists have been homophobic.

Dr. Mohler is capable of answering for himself, but allow me to point out just one example of homophobia in Southern Baptist circles. In 1992 the Southern Baptist Convention  changed Article III of the SBC Constitution (change is emboldened).

------------------------
Article III. Membership: The Convention shall consist of messengers who are members of missionary Baptist churches cooperating with the Convention as follows:
 1. One (1) messenger from each church which: (1) Is in friendly cooperation with the Convention and sympathetic with its purposes and work. Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse homosexual behavior.
2. One (1) additional messenger from each such church for every two hundred and fifty (250) members; or for each $250.00 paid to the work of the Convention during the fiscal year preceding the annual meeting.
3. The messengers shall be appointed and certified by the churches to the Convention, but no church may appoint more than ten .
4. Each messenger shall be a member of the church by which he is appointed.
--------------------------------
 
Do you see the homophobia? The issue of homosexuality becomes the defining factor of whether or not a church is in cooperation with the SBC. Why did we not change the consitution to say the following?

Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse adulterous behavior.
Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse pedophilic behavior.
Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse gluttonous behavior.
Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse drunkenness behavor.
Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse addictive behavior.
Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse arrogant behavior.
Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse gossiping behavior.
Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse hateful behavior.
 
We all are in need of a Savior. Yes, homosexuals fight hard to try to convince themselves their actions are not sin. So too do gossips. So too do the proud. So too do adulterers. So too do gluttons.
 
Oh well. You get the picture. Why the homophobia? The problem we have right now in the Southern Baptist Convention is Southern Baptist preachers who honestly believe that Jesus would never sit down with a militant homosexual and have a cordial conservation with him over dinner (think Zacchaeus), or that Jesus would ever care to be in the presence of a loud-mouth radical lesbian who is known throughout the city for her activism much less offer to help the lesbian with repairs on her home or pay for her groceries (think woman at the well), or that Jesus would ever go to the homes of homosexuals and open the Scriptures and teach them about Himself. They don't think Jesus would EVER do that because THEY would never do that. This kind of legalism becomes the death knell of any spiritual vitality in the Southern Baptist Convention.

Jesus is not just another Southern Baptist preacher. Thank God He is not, and thank God He is God. Maybe Al Mohler has caught a glimpse of Jesus in ways his critics have not.

The Connection Between Christian Patriarchy and Sexual Abuse in the Home

I have written the Foreword to Jon Zen's new book No Will of My Own, a short treatise on the connection between sexual abuse and Christian patriarchy. The Foreword, reprinted below, gives you an indication of the importance of Jon's new book. Newspapers are headlining with stories of sexual abuse in patriarchal homes, and it is incumbent upon those who love Christ and follow the teachings of Scripture to not remain silent in the face of such abuses caused by the error of patriarchalism.

"I am embarrassed to write the Foreword for this excellent little book by my friend Jon Zens for a couple of reasons. First, the person who should be writing it is Paulo Fuller of the Philippines. Paulo serves as the Director of Renew Foundation, a ministry devoted to help women and children escape the sex trade in Angeles City. Unfortunately, due to the publication deadlines for this book and Paulo's non-stop work in Angeles City, Paulo just does not have the time to write this Foreword. Jon Zen's wife, Dotty, and Bonnie Jaeckle from the United States are assisting Paulo in Philippino Filipino bar/street ministry for four weeks in early 2011. Paulo is far more qualified to talk about No Will of My Own. I am a pastor who understands intiutively and theologically the problems associated with patriarchy, but Paulo is on the streets and understands them experientially. For those of you who may be doubt the connection Jon Zen's makes between particarchy and sexual sins behind closed doors of Christian homes, Paulo's ministry and the dozens of others like it can sadly confirm what Jon writes. Many of the girls who wind up in the sex trade come from patriarchal homes.

Second, the content of this book is not easy to read. What Jon writes is important to read and understand, but it will not be comfortable to digest. To write a foreword for a book that deals with incest, sexual abuse and other forms of immoral behavior in the Christian home is something I'm not proud to have to do. Were it not for the false belief system that serves as the underpinnings of patriarchy, there would be no need for this book to exist.

Patriarchy is the belief that men have complete authority in the home, and that husbands should rule over their wives and children. Most conservative Christians who advocate patriarchy base their views on what God told Eve when she rebelled and God, pronouncing judgment on Eve, said:

“I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” (Genesis 3:16).

Patriachalists say that the last portion of Genesis 3:16 means that (1). God commands that a woman should display sexual desire for her man (i.e. “your desire shall be for your husband”), and that (2). The male is to be the head, authority and ruler over the women in his home (i.e. “and he shall rule over you”). Women should be subservient to the men, and the Christian home ought to be governed by men, because God commands it to be that way, say those Christians who hold to patriarchy.

However, using basic principles of interpretation, one can easily see Genesis 3:16 is a consequence of sin and not a commandment from God. The woman’s desire for her husband in Genesis 3:16 is not, at least linguistically and contextually, a sexual desire. The word translated "desire" (teshuqah) is used in the next chapter, Genesis 4:7, where teshuquah refers to sin’s desire to control Cain. Thus, letting the Bible interpret itself, the word “desire” in both both Genesis 3:16 and Genesis 4:7 means “a desire to control.”

Simply put, sin causes a desire to dominate or control. The curse of sin becomes a constant battle for control. This is not how God created relationships between men and women to be. Many conservative Christians, though, have made the mistake of interpreting Genesis 3:16 to teach that God commands the woman to stay home, give sexual fulfillment to her man, while God has given the man complete authority to control and govern the women in his life. This theology of male domination can, left unchecked, lead to incest and sexual abuse.

When the God of all grace, however, gets a grip on the home, no longer will there be a fight to see who dominates and controls the other. Rather, there will be mutual submission between the husband and the wife because there is mutual equaility (i.e. Ephesians 5:21 – “submitting to one another in reverence to Christ”). Mutual submission, with no thought of control, is God's design for the home. It should be the effort of every Bible-believing church, pastor and teacher to instruct husbands and wives on the sinful nature of any husband or wife who seeks to dominate the home.

Dr. Richard Hess, Professor of Old Testament and Semitic Languages at Denver Theological Seminary comments on Genesis 3:16. Dr. Hess said all Christians should attempt to pull down any patriarchal system of domination and control in the Christian home, and then responds to those who object to any attempt to end patriarchy:

"It is no more a sin to end this consequence of the fall than it is to use weed killer to end the promised weeds and thorns in the following verses. No, the emphasis (in Genesis 3:16) is on the terrible effects of sin, and the destruction of a harmonious relationship that once existed. In its place comes a harmful struggle of wills."

In No Will of My Own author Jon Zens gives evidence how patriarchy's warped view of male dominance can lead females to the dark place of having no will of their own. My prayer is that pastors and Christian people will read this book and find help to resist any involvement in the patriarchal movement that purports to be from God but gives experiential evidence to the contrary."

Wade Burleson
Emmanuel Baptist Church
Enid, Oklahoma, January 2011