February 20, 2006
The Convention
I am leaving tomorrow for the Fundamental Baptist Convention. Most know it as the Leadership Conference. I call it “The Convention” because it is one of the few conferences where there is so obviously a representative from each of the approved schools and seminaries that are major players in their small pool of Fundamentalism. One really wonders if the speakers were chosen for their leadership and message or for the simple fact that they are leaders of said organizations. A closer look at the program shows a generous share of names among the workshop authorities that, for all practical purposes, have as their only claim to recognition their relations to the powers that be. Therefore, the conference has never really attracted me even though I have a number of friends who are involved in the organization of it and others who are speaking. (Of course, they won’t like my rather blunt opinion of the convention).
Yet, here I go. It’s the fellowship that I’m looking forward to. I know that there will certainly be some good preaching, and I already have in mind the workshops that I wish to attend. I will be sharing lodging with Pastor Joel Tetreau and Pastor Thomas Pryde. We intend to solve most of the world’s problems in just a few late nights of fellowship.
Posted by Bob Bixby at February 20, 2006 04:38 PM | eMail this entry! | 222 WordsThis entry was posted in the following categories:
Bob,
Why such cynicism as to the choice of speakers? As an insider on the speaker selection process, there is very little cronyism going on. We try to get some of the best speakers from the different schools and circles of fellowship in order to get the widest audience that is reasonably possible. Granted, there are others I would like to see involved, but there are budget limitations and many people involved in the planning. Also, for your information we regularly invite speakers somewhat outside of the closed BJU-MBBC-NBBC-DBTS-CBTS, etc. circles. May I recommend to you Randy Gaumer speaking in the Worship Track. He lives out in his church a balanced blended worship model that I consider to be more biblical and honoring than many of the other Fundamentalist offerings I have had to listen to for the last 20 years.
So please give the Conference (and it is a conference) a fair shake. We would be glad to accept names of other good speakers for next year’s conference. Maybe someday we’ll even have Bob Bixby speaking here (although around here you would not be one of the more progressive thinkers!). Hope to meet you this week!
Mark Farnham
Assistant Professor of Theology and NT
Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary
Lansdale, PA
Hi. I’m a student of CBTS who just happened upon this post and Prof. Farnham’s comment. May I further encourage you that this conference is balanced in content and speaker profiles. The face of CBTS is certainly less homogenous than you described in your post.You really do hear a broad swath of opinions and studies (e.g. from the last few years that the Rich Man & Lazarus = a parable, a presentation or two on the mid-trib position, etc.). It would be propoganda, however, if I put in a plug for Pastor Gaumer — he’s my pastor.
Posted by: Jonathan Henry at February 20, 2006 05:41 PMMark,
What was the intent of saying “around here you would not be one of the more progressive thinkers!”? It comes off (to me, anyway) like name-dropping, as if you are seeking a reputation as the “progressive” institution of fundamentalism. Is that a badge of honor or something? Perhaps I misunderstood you.
Posted by: Chris Anderson at February 20, 2006 05:44 PMMark,
No cynicism here. I’m just poking fun at what many of us chuckle about privately. This is clearly a different kind of conference. What you said here: We try to get some of the best speakers from the different schools and circles of fellowship in order to get the widest audience that is reasonably possible.
is clear to all of us. And that is basically what I implied.
I don’t think that is necessarily wrong. I just think it is obvious. That’s all.
Let me be clear, I don’t think there is cronyism here as far as the main speakers go. Au contraire, cronyism would not allow the obligatory representation that a “convention” would demand. I am excited about some of the speakers. I dare not mention names, but I am — for example — excited about hearing Les Ollila again. He has had such a great influence on my life and I haven’t heard him in years. I admire him as a leader.
I too am looking forward to the conference even though it has always struck me as a very strong effort to get some of the best speakers from the different schools and circles of fellowship in order to get the widest audience that is reasonably possible..
It is precisely that which gives the conference an attractive and unattractive element. I have to think too hard about whether I want to spend a limited budget on hearing every side when I already know which side I’m on.
I only called it a “convention” with tongue in cheek. And I wholly intend to give the conference a chance.
Oh, by the way. I’m not progressive! (Insert smiley face here because I’m having fun). I’m retro. I’m for a return to pre-Finneyism in evangelism, the restoration of the doctrines of grace within fundamentalism, and a demotion of dispensationalism from the pedastal of cardinal truth back to where it should be, a hermeneutical preference that cannot be the litmus test of fellowship. And I’m dispy (to a degree).
As I said before, I’m looking forward to the fellowship. I’m sure I’ll enjoy the conference. Please don’t take any offense.
Bob
Posted by: Bob at February 20, 2006 11:42 PMBob and Chris,
What I meant by progressive was not an attempt to position our school as “the progressive seminary.” I said that because Bob seems to delight in being progressive in that he thinks beyond the usual fundamentalist categories in a lot of areas— and I appreciate that. As evidence I present Bob’s prescription for retro-fundamentalism:
“I’m for a return to pre-Finneyism in evangelism, the restoration of the doctrines of grace within fundamentalism, and a demotion of dispensationalism from the pedastal of cardinal truth back to where it should be, a hermeneutical preference that cannot be the litmus test of fellowship. And I’m dispy (to a degree).”
That’s a progressive (or retro) solution, and that’s what makes this blog worth reading.
See you at the NLC!
Mark
I don’t see them inviting anyone from Trinity in Jacksonville, Tennessee Temple, or Liberty University.
Seems like the same people recycled from year to year, same people, same schools, different years…
I agree with Bob about it being the Convention. How about a better name, “The Good Old Boy Network”
Conferences are a dime a dozen, always the same three or four big names, change the dates and the locations, etc.
Posted by: tlange at February 21, 2006 09:40 PMSorry I missed meeting you at the conference! As a Trinity in Jacksonville grad (BA ‘94) (M.Div CBTS ‘97) and with friends still on staff at Trinity, I applaud your desire to see more circles attend the Leadership Conf. I think that would be wonderful.
However, your label of the NLC as a “good old boy network” is not fair, nor is it accurate. One must be honest with the facts: Pastor Tim, the church and seminary invite speakers who differ from them on a number of issues. They are honest about the differences and give equal time. Eg.: Thomas Strauss on his textual position, Dave Doran on his Calvisism position, etc.
One might as well lament the fact the Jack Schaap was not invited to speak as well. If you want an example of a “Good Old Boy Network”, Pastor’s School is held in March at First Baptist in Hammond.
Calvary’s NLC is a wonderful effort to get some of the small groups talking. I’m sure you agree that getting some circles together is certainly much better than getting none of the circles together.
Since you are concerned about getting Trinity speakers up to Lansdale, the only option available is to actively invite them to attend the NLC. I’m working with you to get more of my friends to attend. I trust they would enjoy the NLC as much as we do.
Joe
Posted by: Joe Whalen at February 25, 2006 02:59 PM
