Good Armed Forces Stories

Please check out these two stories (one is lengthy & one is brief) from men who serve in the U.S. military. They are both emotionally moving. The first is of a soldier, John Gebhardt, who comforts a young Iraqi girl whose entire family was executed. The second is of a Marine Captain, Richard Stinnett, who honored the memory of a slain Marine soldier who gave his life in Iraq.

Continue to lift these men and women who serve in military and their families up in prayer.

A Few Pictures

A Good Day of Worship

This past Lord's Day was particularly sweet. I preached on "The Woman Who Fears the Lord," from Proverbs 31:10-31 as a part of a larger series titled, "Biblical Manhood, Biblical Womanhood, and the Family." We had a great crowd of people in attendance, and I had the great honor of baptizing a young man named Caleb. I pray for more gatherings like this one.

The Laying on of Hands

On Fifth Sunday evenings, I take questions from the congregation concerning Biblical issues, Christian theology, Christian history, and ethics.

One of the questions I received concerned the laying on of hands. Here was the question: Why do we not have laying on of hands when a person is saved? Is this not a commandment that goes along with Baptism?

I admit that I have not given the laying on of hands issue the attention it deserves. I do not recall much being said about the issue in my seminary training. And my only experience with the laying on of hands has been deacon ordination, my own ordination into pastoral ministry, and for healing in exceptional cases.

So in preparation for answering this question, I solidified my thinking on this issue, although a few questions remain.

In the New Testament there appears to be five major uses of the laying on of hands.

1. To heal the sick/lame
Both Jesus and the Apostles practiced the laying on of hands for this purpose. In Mark 6:5, Jesus was said to have laid his hands on some of the sick residents of Nazareth and they were healed. In Luke 13:13, Jesus lays his hands on a deformed woman, and her body was straightened. And in Acts 28:8, we find the apostle Paul laying his hands on one named Publius who was sick, and he too was healed. Paul himself was the recipient of the laying on of hands by Ananias in order to have his vision restored (Acts 9).

2. To bless children
In Matthew 19:15, we find Jesus laying his hands on children who were brought to him. It appears, although it is not explicit, that the parents wanted Jesus' blessing on the children. It does not seem to be a sickness issue here.

3. To set apart specific Christians for a special task.
In Acts 6, the Hellenists widows were being neglected in the distribution. So the Apostles suggested that the church select seven men full of wisdom and of the Spirit to fulfill this task. The church accepted the suggestion, and after the seven were selected, the Apostles laid their hands on them and prayed for them.

We also have another example found in Acts 13:1-4 where the Holy Spirit directed the church at Antioch to appoint Paul and Barnabas for a specific work. The work is not named, but it becomes evident that the work was gospel ministry for they depart and begin to share the gospel in various cities.

4. To receive a specific gift from the Holy Spirit
From texts like 1 Timothy 4:14 and 2 Timothy 1:6 we can see incidents where elders laid their hands on a Christian in order to receive a gift(s). Timothy is reminded not to neglect his gift which was given to him after prophecy and the laying on of hands.

5. To receive the Holy Spirit
In at least two events the laying on of hands resulted in believers receiving the Holy Spirit. In Acts 8:14-17, we are told that Samaria had received the word of God. So Peter and John were dispatched to the region. Peter and John found believers there who had been baptized, but they had not received the Holy Spirit so they laid their hands on them and the Samaritans received the Holy Spirit.

In Acts 19, Paul finds some disciples (of Christ?). Upon his investigation he learns that none of them have received the Holy Spirit and they have only received the baptism of John. They were baptized into Jesus' baptism and Paul laid his hands on them and prayed for them. After this they received the Holy Spirit.

This last category is the most perplexing. Why did the Samaritans not receive the Holy Spirit at conversion? The second act could be interpreted that these individuals were disciples of John and not Jesus. Perhaps the answer to the Samaritan question was that God wanted the Apostles to see the the advance of the gospel firsthand and see the power of the Holy Spirit coming upon them firsthand considering the strained relations these people groups had.

Then there is the question: why was it visibly apparent in Apostolic times when someone received the Holy Spirit (Acts 2, Acts 8, Acts 19)? The answer of many charismatic groups that it is still apparent through the speaking of tongues at the second blessing is surely false because Scripture makes clear that everyone does not receive tongues (1 Cor 12). The answer here will again only be speculation.

Going back to the original question...

Upon investigation the answer is: we do not lay hands on someone when he or she is saved with regularity because it is not commanded in Scripture. Baptism is commanded. Communion is commanded. The Laying on of hands is not commanded.

The only specific instruction that I could find given in Scripture concerning the laying on of hands is given to Timothy (1 Timothy 5:22) when Paul instructs him not to hastily lay hands on others.

My investigation leads me to believe that God permits freedom for churches to practice this in diverse ways. Since Jesus, the Apostles, elders, and churches practiced the laying on of hands, surely churches today should as well. Leaning upon the examples we have in the Bible, churches should institute this practice with more regularity where appropriate.

Mohler interviews Page

On September 18, Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary interviewed Dr. Frank Page, Pastor of 1st Baptist Church, Taylors, South Carolina and President of the Southern Baptist Convention on his weekday radio program.

During the interview, Mohler asked Page the following question (basically word for word):

Pastoring in South Carolina, how do you deal with the culture and gospel issue?

In his answer, Page made the following remark, "South Carolina is the capital of cultural Christianity which has led many people straight to hell."

Dr. Page was addressing the real problem that exists in many parts of the South (as Mohler remarked) where most people view themselves as being saved by virtue of many reasons except for the biblical one, namely ongoing repentance of sins and faith in Jesus Christ.

Serving in South Carolina, I find this comment to be true indeed. In too many conversations, people tell me that they were saved 10, 15, 20, 25 years ago, and for 8, 13, 18, 22 years they have been living like they have no relationship with Jesus, like the presence of the Holy Spirit is not in them, they have forsaken the people of God, and they have an obvious love affair with the world.

And it is so hard for individuals like this to come to an understanding that they might very well not be saved because some pastor or church has convinced them falsely.

One of the ways I try to battle this cultural trend in my own preaching is repeatedly reminding the congregation that our assurance of salvation is that:

we repented of our sins last night,
we trust Jesus today,
we pray to him regularly,
the fruits of the Holy Spirit are evident in our own lives
we hate sin
we love Jesus, and so on.

My prayer is that we will not produce another generation of deceived men and women.

A Selective Hermeneutic

Living in the South, especially South Carolina, one encounters both explicit and implicit racism particularly towards Black Americans.

One of the most common ways it is lightly expressed is when someone is telling you a story, and they always make sure that if one of the participants in the story is black, they make it clear to you.

Some of it is innocent (I am in no way dismissing it), but they sincerely do not mean anything by it. However, often times they do.

Race relations have a long way to go in the south.

From time to time I will apply some Scriptural point to race relations. For example when I addressed marriage from 2 Corinthians 6.14 I make the point that the only prohibition made when considering a spouse is that a believer should not marry an unbeliever. I will go on to make the point that interracial marriages are not forbidden.

I have been challenged to my face on this particular issue. Often the person will say, Jason you have two daughters, would you be pleased if they married two black men? My response is usually twofold. First, I say that if the young black man loves Jesus and is following after him, then I have no objections. Second, I say that hypothetically if I did have a problem, it would be my issue and not my daughter's or the young man's.

The usual arguments given by those against interracial marriages goes as following:

1. Some will say it will be too difficult because both partners will feel the stress of bringing two different cultures together. Furthermore, it is argued that you are placing a burden on the children of a mixed marriage.

More and more the stresses of the children are not legitimate in cities where children of all different racial and ethnic backgrounds are growing up together, and the issue is really a non-issue. However in rural areas and small towns, the problem is not the children born from mixed marriages but the racist attitudes in children who come from racist homes.

2. Less frequently is the so called biblical argument that races should not mix. This arises from texts where Israel was prohibited from marrying Canaanites (Deut 7:3).

It is generally agreed though that the biblical prohibition put upon Israel against marrying foreigners has nothing to do with their skin color or ethnicity, but has everything to do with the God they worshipped (see Deut 7:4). This principle clearly comes out in the New Testament as well as I have already referenced above.

Nevertheless, there are some in the church who will still make this argument from the Old Testament.

What really frustrates me is when some of these very ones who argue from the OT against interracial marriage will argue that the standard for tithing is the NT. While I agree that we should look to the NT's teaching concerning tithing, the OT should not be neglected in the pursuit of finding God's will on the issue.

I find it convenient when people in the church use this kind of selective hermeneutic to get from the Bible exactly what they want.

Baptism, Communion, & Local Church Membership

A debate has been circling the blogs regarding the relationship between Baptism, Communion, and Local Church Membership. It began as far as I can tell when John Piper responded through the Desiring God Blog to the change made in Wayne Grudem's systematic theology textbook concerning baptism. Previously, Grudem wrote in favor of allowing both credobaptistic and paedobaptistic views to be allowed within a single denomination and its local churches. However, he has personally changed his view. The compromise within a local church to allow both seems to be too great for the credo-baptist.

The meat of Piper's response comes when he says:

When I weigh the kind of imperfection involved in tolerating an invalid baptism because some of our members are deeply persuaded that it is biblically valid, over against the kind of imperfection involved in saying to a son or daughter of the living God, “You are excluded from the local church,” my biblical sense is that the latter is more unthinkable than the former. The local church is a visible expression of the invisible, universal, body of Christ. To exclude from it is virtually the same as excommunication. And no serious church takes excommunication as an invitation to attend the church down the street.

You can find Grudem's response to Piper's here. It was both humorous and humble when Grudem said that his own wife found Piper's argument more persuasive. For a more comprehensive and detailed report of Piper's own understanding on this issue you can research these resources.

Since this foray, others have weighed in on the discussion. Over at 9 Marks Blog, you can find two entries by Mark Dever here and here. You can also find two good posts regarding this issue from a historical perspective written by Aaron Menikoff (Part 1 & Part 2).

In Menikoff's articles he references John Bunyan, author of of the famed Pilgrim's Progress, who made significant arguments why paedo-baptists should not be barred from the membership or communion of a local baptist church titled, Differences in Water Baptism No Bar to Communion (1673).

Sam Storms has weighed in with an article asking how these men (Piper, Dever, Mohler, Duncan) can really be Together for the Gospel if Dever and Mohler would not permit Duncan to receive communion at their church (because they do not believe infant baptism constitutes a real baptism and one must receive believer's baptism before one receives communion). Meanwhile, Ligon Duncan has stated that his response will be forthcoming.

My own view is fairly traditional within modern baptist circles. The church I pastor requires baptism by immersion after the evidence of genuine faith in Jesus Christ in order to become a member of the church and to participate in communion. However, we do not police the elements in such a way that a visiting Presbyterian could not participate although I would make it clear from the beginning before the elements are passed out what our church's view is.

Like Grudem's wife though, I find Piper and Bunyan's arguments to be weighty and biblical. I also find it contradictory to prohibit a Presbyterian from communion at the church I pastor, but would allow him to preach at the church I pastor, which I have done. This past summer I invited both a Presbyterian and Methodist to preach while I was out of town.

My hope is that this current debate will spark much fruit from future and current Ph.D students who will try to tackle these issues afresh in our day. Until then, I will be examining the more thorough writings that have been offered by Christians past.

Update: Ligon Duncan has begun his post series on why he, Piper, Mohler, and Dever can be Together for the Gospel but not together on various other doctrines.

SBC Witness Interviews Dr. Rainer

Over at SBC Witness, Nathan Akin interviews Dr. Rainer, President of Lifeway Christian Resources. In the first installment of this interview, Dr. Rainer answers questions about upcoming projects from B&H Publishing, ongoing research on alcohol, calvinism, and church polity which will be released in future studies, and how his past has helped him for his present job.

In the second installment, Dr. Rainer will answer questions dealing SBC issues and will give advice for young pastors.

Reasons for the Resurgence of Reformed Doctrine

Dr. Mark Dever, pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church, has just finished his series titled, "Where'd All These Calvinists Come From?" Dever lists ten reasons for the present day resurgence in Reformed Doctrines among evangelicals. The following are his 10 reasons for Calvinistic growth:

Charles Spurgeon, D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, The Banner of Truth Trust, Evangelism Explosion by D. James Kennedy, Southern Baptist Convention Inerrancy Controversy, Presbyterian Church in America, J.I. Packer's book, "Knowing God," R.C. Sproul & John MacArthur, John Piper, the rise of secularism and decline of Christian nominalism.

You can find the entire series here. Over the past seven years my theology has drifted toward reformed doctrine. When I began my studies at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in January 2001, I believed in the sinfulness of man and the eternal security of a Christian believer. I came from a Southern Baptist Church, with a very faithful and biblical preacher, who is not reformed in his soteriology. So terms like unconditional election, irresistible grace, and limited atonement were not preached either for or against (to my knowledge).

So my first introduction to reformed doctrines was at Southern Seminary through the teaching of particular teachers, teacher recommendations of books, and student conversations. It was at that point that I learned of Dr. John Piper, pastor of Bethlehem Baptist Church. Since my introduction to the preaching and books by Piper, my drift toward the reformed doctrines has grown significantly. My understanding of man's sinfulness has grown. I have moved from believing in the sinfulness of all men, to the total depravity of mankind. I have moved from using phrases like "once saved, always saved" to "but the one who endures to the end, he will be saved (Mark 13:13)." I have come to believe in doctrines like unconditional election and irresistible grace as articulated by John Piper in particular.

I am still laboring over the doctrine of definite or limited atonement in all its preciseness. But in conclusion, I would fit into Dever's list under the categories of John Piper and the SBC Inerrancy Controversy due to its push to focus Baptists on the true and faithful teachings of the Bible and its fruits that are evident now at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

Why are College Men and Women Having Sex?

A recent survey conducted by researchers from the University of Texas questioned college aged students about their motivations for having sex. The top five responses men gave were:

1. I was attracted to the person.
2. It feels good.
3. I wanted to experience physical pleasure.
4. Its fun.
5. I wanted to show my affection to the person.

The top five responses given by women were:

1. I was attracted to the person.
2. I wanted to experience physical pleasure.
3. It feels good.
4. I wanted to show my affection to the person.
5. I wanted to express my love for the person.

The answers given by both men and women are not all that surprising given the shape our society is in and given our society's perversion of almost everything sexual. Perhaps the only surprising aspect of this study is the answers given by women, which seem to refute the commonly held notions that men are generally seeking self-pleasure and women are seeking love. The survey suggests that both men and women are primarily seeking to satisfy their personal physical desires.

The top four reasons for men and the top three for women were self-serving motivations.

Intimacy with the sexual partner was rated at 12 for women and 14 for men.

Not surprising though was how far down on the list that pregnancy was listed as the motivation, given that the overwhelming number of those surveyed were sexually active single men and women who were in college.

Perhaps what was most interesting for me were the statistics regarding the number of men and women (average age 19) who testified to having a history of sexual intercourse. Less than half of the men surveyed had in their past participated in sexual intercourse (233 out of 503). 110 of the men surveyed affirmed sexual activity, but had not gone so far as sexual intercourse.

More than half of the women surveyed had experienced sexual intercourse (664 out of 1046). 246 of the women surveyed had in their past been involved in various sexual activities but had not had sexual intercourse.

I was surprised by how much more sexually active the women were as opposed to the men in this survey. In all of those surveyed, 88 percent had gone as far in their sexual experience to participate in oral sex.

Now here is the most depressing stat: 65 percent of those surveyed reported themselves to be Christians. With the amount of information given, it is impossible to determine if the Christian men and women surveyed were more or less likely to have participated in sexual activity outside of marriage, but with the high percentages (88%) of those who had at least gone as far as oral sex, it seems likely that many of the Christians surveyed fall into this percentage.

Gluttony and Southern Baptists

The issue of gluttony in Southern Baptist circles has been discussed by some of late. There has even been a resolution or two sent to the resolutions committee of the Southern Baptist Convention in the past two years addressing this particular issue. However, the resolutions have failed to make it to the floor of the Convention by recommendation of the committee.

Baptist Press released an article yesterday titled Prof tries to help Baptists improve health, touching upon the issue of gluttony and its severe prevalence among Southern Baptist pastors. Jim Florence, Professor of Public Health at East Tennessee State University (my alma mater), and member of Calvary Baptist Church, Erwin, is aware of the growing trend of growing waistlines of Southern Baptist pastors and is currently working in his own local association to educate and assist pastors with this issue. One of Florence's own motivations for going into public health was the death of his brother by heart attack at 37.

The article also reports that a Purdue University study released in 2006 found that Southern Baptists are 30 times more likely to be obese than non-Christians, and are more obese than any other Christian denomination.

For some helpful information about your personal health, the following websites may be referenced (these are listed through the Tennessee Baptist Convention):
www.michigan.gov/surgeongeneral
www.bariatricedge.com/dtcf/pages/bmi_calculator.htm?pgn=8

How though does a pastor address the issue of gluttony from the pulpit? When was the last time you heard a preacher address this issue on Sunday morning from a Southern Baptist church? Certainly much care needs to be used, but simply avoiding the issue because it will hurt peoples' feelings is not the proper choice either.

I recently listened to two messages on gluttony preached by Paul Matthies at The Village Church. You can find these two sermons in IPod by selecting Podcasts, Religion & Spirituality, The Village Church. They are sermons 37 and 38, Defeating Gluttony and Defining Gluttony. These sermons provide some clear thinking on gluttony, and may help you to think about the issue more comprehensively.

San Antonio Convention in Review Part 6

The most controversial aspect of this year's Convention was the debate and vote concerning the motion made by Rick Garner concerning the BF&M 2000. The motion reads:

I move that this convention adopts the statement of the Executive Committee issued in February of this year, and included in the Executive's report found in the 2007 Book of Reports, page 17, which reads 'The Baptist Faith and Message is neither a creed, nor a complete statement of our faith, nor final and infallible; nevertheless, we further acknowledge that it is the only consensus statement of doctrinal beliefs approved by the Southern Baptist Convention and such is sufficient in its current form to guide trustees in their establishment of policies and practices of entities of the Convention.'

The intent behind the motion was to prohibit trustees serving on SBC agencies from requiring additional theological agreements beyond those published and adopted in the BF&M 2000. The incident which started this protest/movement was first the adopting of two additional theological policies by the trustees of the International Mission Board (IMB).

The two additional policies prohibited from missionary service through the IMB anyone who practiced a Private Prayer Language, and anyone who did not meet four requirements concerning Baptism. Any potential IMB missionary had to meet the following criteria:

1. Baptism is for a believer.
2. Baptism is by immersion only.
3. Baptism is not regenerative.
4. Must have been baptized in a church which believes in eternal security.

The first three points are nearly universally agreed upon by all Southern Baptists today. However, the fourth point drew considerable protest.

In order for a Baptism to be legitimate does a local church have to be perfect in its theological views? If only on certain theological points, then who gets to decide which ones are necessary and which ones are not?

A considerable protest movement started due in no small part to one trustee of the IMB who protested the adoption of these policies. Skipping over a lot of incidents, the debate has turned into whether or not trustees ought to add additional theological positions which must be met and believed that go beyond the BF&M 2000 in order for a Southern Baptist to serve in any of the Southern Baptist Agencies?

There was not much time for debate on the motion due mostly to the way Convention politics and schedules work. So many people who wanted to speak to this motion were not able to be heard and a motion to extend the time of debate was defeated.

The motion passed with 2137 (57.7%) votes for and 1565 (42.2%) against. I voted against the motion for mainly one reason. I did not think this was the best way to correct the policies adopted by the IMB or guard against future policies which further restrict who can serve in our agencies.

As a few of the Presidents of our Seminaries pointed out, the BF&M 2000 is not a sufficient document in and of itself to govern exhaustively the process of hiring a potential professor. There are abundant issues which should be asked of potential teachers on issues of theology and ethics which are not addressed in the BF&M 2000. So in my interpretation of the motion made by Rick Garner, I believed we would have been putting the trustees in a impossible situation of hiring the best teachers without the necessary tools because we would be limiting what must be agreed upon by a potential employee to such an extent that it certainly would endanger them because of a higher risk of selecting someone who may disagree with most Baptists on ethical issues not addressed specifically in the BF&M 2000.

My thinking is this: The best way to combat particular policies is to address them each specifically. If one does not agree with the IMB policy prohibiting a Southern Baptist from serving through the IMB if he or she has a PPL then, put that issue alone to a Convention vote.
IF one does not like the baptism/eternal security issue, then change it by bringin it for a vote at the Convention.

Had each issue (PPL and Baptism/eternal security) been addressed specifically, then I would have been more inclined to vote against the IMB policies.

In light of the adoption of the motion, the leading figure in the protest has made it clear that his view is if Seminaries want to ask for further agreement on other issues when hiring new professors then let the Seminaries bring it before the Convention. However, this seems unfeasible to me. The Convention was not designed so that Seminaries could bring every potential hire before it and get permission for every single issue not addressed in the BF&M 2000.

However, some have pointed out that the motion could be interpreted in at least two ways. The protest movement inteprets the motion to say that the BF&M 2000 alone should be the trustees' guide, but others have pointed out that the motion does not state say the BF&M 2000 is the only guide for trustees.

So what now? What will come of this motion? I do not think anything really has changed. It seems clear from the messages of some of the presidents of the seminaries that they are going to continue to ask questions on more theological issues than just contained in the BF&M 2000, and will be looking for some type of agreement on those questions, which to some would be a violation of the motion adopted in San Antonio, but to others would be completely in harmony with the same motion adopted in San Antonio.

Online Book Sale

This Wednesday and Thursday all of John Piper's books will be on sale for 5 dollars a piece. Advertised on a Desiring God blog post. There is no limit to how many books you can purchase.

San Antonio Convention in Review Part 5

Here are some of my thoughts on my second Convention:

1. I thought the turnout was small. I believe Greensboro, North Carolina had a little less than 12,000 messengers. The 2007 San Antonio had fewer than 9,000. I figured since "everything is bigger in Texas," there would be a significant turnout. I believe those who organized the Convention thought so as well. I heard early on from one person who said they were expecting around 14,000 messengers. I am not sure what to think about next year's Convention in Indianapolis. One side of me thinks if significant debate continues then the turnout might be high because of the Presidential vote. However, Indiana is not the South. The state of Indiana tallied 73 messengers in San Antonio.

2. There was early debate over a definition recommended titled Definition of the Cooperative Program of the Southern Baptist Convention. The recommended definition reads: The Cooperative Program is a Southern Baptists' unified plan of giving through which cooperating Southern Baptist churches give a percentage of their undesignated receipts in support of their respective state convention and the Southern Baptist Convention missions and ministries. After some debate, the motion passed.

Many have asked the question that if we give directly to the National Convention entities such as the Seminaries, IMB, and NAMB through designated receipts instead of giving it through our state convention, then why can it not be counted as CP contributions? Many churches are unsatisfied with state conventions taking a majority share of the CP, and sending a lesser share to the National Convention.

Currently, our church gives 10% of its undesignated yearly receipts to the Cooperative Program through the South Carolina Baptist Convention. We also give an additional 1.5% to both the IMB and NAMB. However, since this money is designated, it does not count towards Cooperative Program contributions. Jon Akin has written a good article addressing this issue, titled Defining, Defending, or De-funding the CP.

3. While 8,618 messengers registered in San Antonio, only a small percentage voted in the elections. During the 1st Vice Presidential vote, only 3143 voted. Likewise during the 2nd Vice Presidential vote, only 2841 voted. Perhaps the most telling vote was over the Baptist Faith & Message 2000 vote (which I'll address later). For as much controversy and debate it received, only 3702 messengers voted. It certainly does not appear that many people even cared enough to show up for votes.

San Antonio Convention in Review Part 4

The first SBC event I attended was the Pastor's Conference on Monday night to listen Albert Mohler, Jimmy Draper, James Merritt, and Johnny Hunt.

Albert Mohler, President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, gave a testimoney about his recent health crises with respect to his eye surgery and his even more recent crisis with blood clots in his lungs. Dr. Mohler recently posted an article about his recent trials on his website. You can find the article here.

James Draper, Jr., former President of Lifeway, gave us a personal testimony about temptation when a young woman tried to initiate an affair in his days in the pastorate. Draper believed he was impervious to the temptation of an affair, but found himself excited that another woman would find him desirable, so he did not decisively deal with the situation and drew it out.

James Merritt, Pastor of Cross Pointe, the Church at Gwinneth Center and Johnny Hunt, Pastor of Woodstock Baptist Church, both preached excellent sermons on holiness and humility. I did not know what to expect from Dr. Hunt. I wondered if Calvinism would come up in his talk. It did not. Surprisingly, if any controversy arose it came from Dr. Merritt when he seemed to give full permission to pastors to use his father's day sermon on Pastorsedge.com word for word if they so desired. This took me back somewhat. It also seemed that Hunt addressed this offer in his sermon when he spoke of the pastor's need to be led by the Spirit to write and preach the Lord's message for the church he pastors.

All in all, I believe Hunt's sermon was the best of the sermon's I had the priviledge to hear while in San Antonio.

San Antonio Convention in Review Part 3

Here are some day and night pics of the river which cuts through San Antonio. Mostly restaurants and a few stores line the Riverwalk. There was a CVS store on the Riverwalk. We frequented this establishment to purchase our drinks since they were excessively priced in our hotel (2.25 for a soft drink and 4.00 bottle water in the room).

The Riverboat tours were nice, but I would suggest that you either take the tour in the morning or in the late evening because the the 90+ temperatures.

San Antonio Convention in Review Part 2

Since this trip was also our vacation, we did not attend much of the Pastor's Conference on Monday. Instead, we took in many of the sights and sounds of San Antonio. Above, Naomi and I toured the Alamo which fortunately was directly across from our hotel.

San Antonio Convention in Review Part 1

My journey to the San Antonio Convention began with a trip to the Atlanta Airport where yours truly boarded an airplane for the first time. It was a pleasant experience and I am glad to have the flight as a part of my overall experience. However, getting to the airport 3 hours before departure (as the airlines suggest) translated for us into much time sitting around waiting for our flight to leave. This is the post 9-11 world in which we live, and security is well worth the wait.

Despite the largeness of the Atlanta Airport, I recognized two families there. I never cease to be amazed how in the midst of so many people how we can run into people we know who also do not live in Atlanta. We saw the Idell family from our home church in Tennessee who were on their way back from San Diego. Also, we flew on the same flight to San Antonio with the Moody's from 1st Baptist, Honea Path.

When we arrived in San Antonio, we were instructed by our Hotel staff to take a taxi because it was cheaper than the shuttles. So taking a taxi was another first for me. When we got into the taxi, the driver was playing rap music. He soon found out that we were in San Antonio for the Baptist Convention, he changed the station to classical music. I thought that was funny. Rap and classical are far from our preferences of music, but I did appreciate his consideration in changing the station.

We stayed at the Hyatt Regency. The hotel was excellent. Our room was excellent and the lobby led right onto the Riverwalk, where we spent considerable time walking and eating. At the top of the page is the view from the top of our hotel of San Antonio.

Private Prayer Language

Just wondering about your thoughts on the recent Lifeway survey that suggests around half of all Southern Baptist pastors use or would be in agreement with a private prayer language? What is your prayer language? Do you plan on speaking about this in San Antonio next week, or are you going to be hanging out with Lebron and Tim Duncan? I have heard in the past that the Alamo Dome is a hard place to shoot in, do you know anything about that? By the way, my private prayer language is English, sometimes with a little Espanol mixed in.

Two New CD's

All the Lovely Losers by Jason Gray
I am not sure how to describe the genre of this album but the style is similar to Bebo Norman. My personal favorites are Blessed Be, Weak, This Far, The Cut, Into the Mystery, and You are Mercy.

Full Attention by Jeremy Riddle
This album contains many worship styled songs--songs with simple but foundational biblical lyrics. Riddle's style sounds much like Jeremy Camp. So if you like Camp's music, then you will greatly enjoy Full Attention. My favorites are God of All Glory, Hallowed Father, Sweetly Broken, God Moves in a Mysterious Way (new format of William Cooper's old hymn), and Stand in Awe.