Bobby Welch Gets It Wrong - Again
Yesterday, I read an article by former president of the
It was just a year ago when Bobby Welch took the shoddy research of Dr. Steve Lemke’s white paper called “The Future of the Southern Baptists as Evangelicals” and wrote a piece in his church’s newsletter which stated that Calvinism is detrimental to the Great Commission according to the “hard evidence” proposed by Lemke. Welch got it wrong last year, as he has clearly shown that he knows very little about evangelical Calvinists as well as the history of Southern Baptists which is fully of passionate soul-winners who are yes, Calvinists.
This year, Bobby Welch has chosen to misrepresent the issue of the alcohol resolution and throw in some unnecessary rhetoric which sounds good in a sermon I suppose but does nothing to argue his case. I have been told that when you are seeking to present an argument against an opposing view, the first thing you must do is accurately and fairly present the opposing argument as though they were saying it themselves. Then, only after having done that, does one critique that position and offer a corrective or alternative position. For the Christian, this is a moral matter, as integrity, truthfulness, and honesty should characterize our presentation of not only those who agree with us, but also those who we disagree. At this crucial point, Bobby Welch has done his worst work—a work which I would call immoral.
Bobby Welch has all the rights in the world to disagree with those on the other side of resolution number five, but he has absolutely no right to misrepresent them and lie about it. What makes this matter all the more appalling is that the Executive Committee gives him a pass and publishes his article in spite of this. What does this say about the Executive Committee? What does this say about our leaders in the
Aside from the pleas of “more, more, more”, “accelerate, accelerate, accelerate,” and “now, now, now,” Bobby Welch says that the victory was against the “theology of moderation.” Theology of moderation? What is he talking about? Welch goes on to say that those arguing against the resolution “publicly promoted the drinking of alcoholic beverages and wanted the
Welch says that those against the resolution are “blinded by a theology” that encourages and promotes drinking alcoholic beverages. First, this has nothing to do with “theology.” This matter is not a doctrinal issue, though some would like to think it is. It is a social issue and a hermeneutical issue. Welch wants to spin the issue to make alcohol appear as an essential matter by talking about “theology of moderation.” Trust me, Bobby Welch, none of us against this resolution are blind to anything here, especially your empty rhetoric and shameful comments.
Such shameful comments come at the expense of taking pot shots at Wade Burleson for example, whom he calls “a pathetic joke(!)” when referring to his article about witnessing to a lady over a class of wine. In such a short article, what is surprising to me is how easily Welch can throw in comments like “blinded by theology,” “such foolishness,” and “sipping saints.” As I look back on this article, the only part that I am happy to see written is found in the title, “A Word from Our Former President.”
Our Convention needs a new attitude and new leadership, and thankfully we have received it in Dr. Frank Page. In the same
Ultimately, the problem in
For a list of bloggers responding to Bobby Welch’s article, go here.