« Tozer on a Joyless Faith by Peter Lumpkins | Main | Danny Akin, Ed Stetzer and Muffling Mean-spirited Myth-makers: Part 2 by Peter Lumpkins »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Chris Roberts


I think you misunderstand Stetzer's statement about Jesus' leadership. Look *one* more time at the quote:

“If we place the mission work in North America on pause because we need a new slate of executives at NAMB, then we have forgotten (or just plain neglected) just Who is the Head of the church”

It is not an argument that we need to just trust this or that decision to be God's will, it is an argument that God is, in fact, the head of his church and a president of an organization is less important than Christ. It is important for NAMB to have a president but the missionary work of NAMB continues without one because Jesus Christ continues as head of the church. Missionaries were spreading the gospel long before NAMB ever had a president.

Luke Tolbert

I just wanted to clarify a couple of things because I am not sure I understand:

1)What evidence are you wanting to see? Is it evidence of Trustees being maligned?

2)what is the central point of this post? Are you stating that Stetzer's article makes a "Mockery of the Lord of the Church" as your central thesis?

Thank you for clearing these up for me.

peter lumpkins


Thanks for your courtesy.

The "evidence" line may primarily be gauged by the series of rhetorical questions I ask right after "May question is..." Secondarily, it is a smart alek pun attempted on Stetzer's famous line, "facts are our friends" ;^)

As for my central "point" or "thesis", I'm really not sure I have one on this log. I realize that sounds strange but blogs are not always articles or essays which invariably have a central "point" or central "thesis."

But, if one insisted, I suppose mine would be a counter-point to what I interpret as Dr. Stetzer's overly-zealous defense of a premature VP appointment. Yet how much more impotently one could communicate I haven't the slightest clue.

With that, I am...

peter lumpkins


Thanks, bro. But I must be dense. I haven't a clue how your interpretation of Stetzer is supposed to salvage his flawed point.

Let's assume your interpretation of Stetzer is correct: "God is the head of his church and a president of an organization is less important than Christ."

I am perfectly willing to grant the theological presupposition, Chris.

What I will not do is grant such a presupposition, framed in such a way as to squelch questions pertaining to administrative decisions, which, from my standpoint is precisely what Dr. Stetzer did in the post under consideration..

If I grant such a presupposition, will the same courtesy be granted to another who argues backwards from the same premise?

Here's how it would look:

God is the head of his church and the appointment of a VP of an organization is less important than Christ. Furthermore, God is the head of his church and NAMB's mission potentially being stalled because of executive searches is less important than trusting in the Head, Who is Christ.

When a premise serves equally well for both sides of the question, it's time to look elsewhere for a definitive answer. At least, that's how I see it.

With that, I am...

The comments to this entry are closed.