Susannah Wesley bore 19 children, 10 of whom died before age two. But two of those who did survive were used of God to shake a nation. John and Charles Wesley preached the gospel, wrote hymns, and established a renewed faith for the land of Great Britain that spread globally.

Susannah has been remembered as one of the great mothers in history. Read just a few of her thoughts on raising children:

1. Allow no eating between meals.
2. Teach each child to pray as soon as they can speak.
3. Require all children to be quiet during family worship.
4. Give a child nothing that they cry for, and only that which they ask for politely.
5. To prevent lying, punish no fault that is first confessed and repented of.
6. Never allow a sinful act to go unpunished.
7. Never punish a child twice for a single offense.
8. Commend and reward good behavior.
9. Commend any attempt to please, even if poorly performed.
10. Strictly observe all promises.
11. Require no daughter to work before she can read well.
12. Teach children to fear the rod.

Susannah never had a high political office, nor did she earn great degrees or titles. We must remember that the most important people have the shortest of titles: Mom. Dad. Son. Daughter. Pastor.

I love Southeastern for a lot of reasons, but the one that marks our school we do not talk a lot about relates to the value of family: the family of God in the local church, our seminary family, and the nuclear family.

We know that the family is under assault today. The best way to defend the family is to demonstrate the gospel’s effect on families of believers. Such families realize our wretchedness and great need of daily grace, and prioritize the gospel and the mission of God for the people of God to the nations for the glory of God. We who follow Christ do not always demonstrate a moral superiority over all others, but we are aware of divine grace. And a divine calling.

Here are just a few examples of our faculty who demonstrate the gospel in their homes:

Steve McKinion and his wife Ginger have shown the work of God’s grace in their journey with Harrison in his valiant battle against cancer, encouraged by his siblings Lachlan and Blakely;

President Akin and wife Charlotte have raised four godly young men who serve the Lord in ministry;

George and Catherine Robinson have taken their whole family (3 kids) on a mission trip to Asia;

Tony and Kim Merida have famously championed adoption by their words and by their example with five children of their own they chose to adopt.

Tomorrow I will walk our beautiful daughter Hannah down the aisle in Binkley Chapel where she will take the hand of a fine young man named Corey – whom she met while traveling with me in ministry — who will be her husband. Four weeks later our son Josh will marry a precious young lady named Jacqueline – a pastor’s daughter and a student in our college – in the same chapel. Michelle and I have been blessed with children after we thought for a season we would never have any. And now they begin their own families, with Jesus at the center.

Makes me think of the wonderful hymn penned by Charles Wesley days after his conversion:

Amazing love, how can it be

That Thou my God would die for me!

We deserve nothing but God’s wrath, but in His great mercy He has given us eternal life by faith. And He has given us family.  Blessed be the name of the Lord.

10.4.2011

Question: What do you think stands as the main contributing factor in why many men today seem to be less mature than the generations of old? What do you feel are the spiritual applications?

Reply: (by Danny Akin and Alvin Reid): This is an excellent question and one that is quite relevant and extremely important for our times. When we see beer commercials mocking the immaturity of young men in our culture, we know that we have a problem! More significant individuals have addressed this issue as well, including a recent article entitled “Why men are in trouble?” by William Bennett. One of the better articles written some time ago is “Wimps and Barbarians” by Terrence Moore.

Dr. Reid addresses this in every class and preached on this subject in chapel (Click here for chapel message on October 28, 2010). Dr. Akin deals with this topic on a consistent basis in forums on campus and elsewhere. He especially raises the issue in the context of female/male service on the international mission field where women serve in massively superior numbers to men. In June 2009, for example, there were 331 journey girls and 126 journey men serving among the nations.

We live in a day when the average purchaser of video games is a 34 year old male; a time of prolonged adolescence and delayed responsibility. The root of this, in part, is sociological and goes back a few generations. The rise of the common school which led to public school education, housing massive numbers of children with one another more than being integrated in society with multiple generations, child labor laws which protected children from working in factories (a good thing) while failing to give responsibilities they could handle (a bad thing), and the practical reality that the median age in the United States has grown from 16 in 1800 to 35 in 2000 all play a role.

However, more recent factors include the rise of adolescence as a separate category fueled by such literary pieces as “The Lord of the Flies” and “Catcher in the Rye,” both published in the 1950s; the movie “Rebel Without a Cause” in 1954; the rise of rock and roll and a growing juvenile culture have all accelerated the growing immaturity of young men. Where once upon a time young men trained for war or for industry, young men today train for video games and play fantasy football.

We have a generation of soft boys. We have had several generations of wimps!

Add to that the reality of the absentee father, what we would argue may be the most dire of all other factors, and you can see to some extent how we have gotten to the place we are today. For the first time in American history we have a generation today where close to 40% are growing up without a father in the home. As we look ahead, at least one estimate has 55% of Millennial children growing up without a father in the home (Parenting the Millennials, 7).

We believe one of the most fundamental challenges of the church today has to do with raising up a generation of young men who become men of God, not spiritual wimps on the one hand or boorish barbarians on the other. We simply have too many who can be described as BANs, or half boy, half man.

What is a man? More specifically what is a man of God? Paul addresses this in I Timothy 6:11f. Here is a great place to begin the construction process of a man of God. First, Paul says recognize who you are! We are men of God. “You, man of God.” This is indicative. If you are a man and a believer, you are a man of God, so be who you are! Now, what are the marks of this man?

He is a runner: Paul says to flee and to pursue (verse 11). We are to run from the things listed in 6:3-10 such as false doctrine, slander, the love of money, useless arguments, etc. It is not the mark of a man of God to be constantly arguing over secondary issues. We are to run after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, perseverance, and gentleness.

Men of God respect authority. And, they keep their word! They persevere, even when it is hard. One of the marks of this immature generation of men is their inability to persevere. More young men that women drop out of Alvin’s workout group each semester. More young ladies than young men are heading to the mission field. This is pathetic.

Men of God are also gentle. Being a man does not mean you watch MMA or talk tough. That may actually demonstrate adolescent behavior. Grown men can cheer for their sports team with gusto, speak to a child with gentleness, and love on their wives with tenderness.

Men of God are runners; they are also fighters. We are to “fight the good fight of faith” (v. 12). Some things are worth fighting over. Let us fight against Satan and his kingdom. Let us wage war against heresy on the one hand and legalism on the other. Let us man up and take a stand when necessary. Shepherds of local churches do not only guide the sheep with gentleness; they confront wolves with ferociousness.

Men of God are also wrestlers: we are to “take hold of” or “grasp firmly” eternal life (verse 12). Men do not spend their time and emotions fooling around with insignificant matters. Men of God give their lives to matters of eternity.

Finally, men of God are guardians. In verse 14 and following Paul reminds us to guard the things God commands. We must stand on the message of God and live out the message of God in our generation.

One of our students fought in Somalia and was rightly portrayed as a hero in “Black Hawk Down.” He talks about the wimpiness he sees in churches and how effeminate it is!We are convinced that the quota for wimps has been met in the church! It is time for a “man of God revolution!”

So what can you do? Get men involved in the lives of younger men. Challenge them to go on mission assignments nationally and internationally. Get them into the Word. Teach them theology. Read Titus 2 carefully and put it into practice for both men and women in your church. See the prolonged adolescence of young men as an idol in our time that must be confronted by the gospel. Be the man God saved you to be. The time is now and the need has never been greater.

The Christian Scriptures make clear that God is a missionary God. In the immediate aftermath of Adam and Eve’s rebellion, God responded by promising a Seed who would defeat sin and Satan and death. Throughout the pages of the Scriptures, we see the triumphant march of God to bring forth the Messiah who would redeem God’s image-bearers and restore God’s good creation. In the New Testament, we learn that the Messiah is Jesus of Nazareth, that this Jesus provides salvation through his crucifixion and resurrection, and that he will return one day to reign supremely. In that day, he will be worshipped by believers from every tribe, tongue, people, and nations, who will dwell with him eternally on the New Heavens and Earth.

We, God’s church, live between the times of his first and second comings. Living between the times, we are called to be bear witness to Christ and his gospel, both in this nation and to the far corners of the world. This is our great privilege and responsibility.

For this reason, Southeastern seeks to be a Great Commission seminary, and invites you to join us in studying and preparing to bear witness to Christ in this nation and throughout the world. Toward this end, you will have the opportunity to study with the following faculty members.

John Michael Dodson (D.Miss., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) is Assistant Professor of Church Planting and Evangelism, Associate Director for North American Missions for the Center for Great Commission Studies, and North American Mission Board Nehemiah Professor. He is the co-author of Comeback Churches (B&H) and has published articles in Journal of Evangelism & Mission and On Mission. Dr. Dodson is uniquely qualified in his field in that he has gained expertise both in church planting and church revitalization.

Ant Greenham (Ph.D., Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary) is Assistant Professor of Missions and Islamic Studies. Dr. Greenham was born in South Africa, lived in Palestine for years, but now has found an oasis in Wake Forest, NC. He is the author of Muslim Conversions to Christ.

Al James (Th.D., New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary) is Professor of Missions and Associate Dean for Proclamation Studies. Dr. James has lived and served in India and in Southeast Asia. His areas of concentration are Christian anthropology and history of mission. He is known to have a good sense of humor and is an administrative genius.

Alvin Reid (Ph.D., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary) is Professor of Evangelism and Student Ministry and Bailey Smith Chair of Evangelism. He is the author of more than 10 books including Evangelism Handbook (B&H), Radically Unchurched (Kregel), and co-author with fellow SEBTS professor Mark Liederbach of The Convergent Church: Missional Worshippers in an Emerging Culture (Kregel). Dr. Reid has a pet snake, accepts hundreds of speaking engagements per year, rules Twitter, and does P90X. He’s a beast.

George Robinson (D.Miss., Western Seminary) is Headrick Chair of World Missions and Assistant Professor of Missions and Evangelism. He is the author of Striking the Match and a chapter in the aforementioned Theology and Practice of Mission (B&H, forthcoming). Dr. Robinson has lived and worked in South Asia, sports a wicked nice pair of spectacles and a dog tag, and is an expert in short-term missions.

Josef Solc (Ph.D., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary) is Professor of Evangelism and Missions and author of Communicating on the Playing Field (Xulon Press), an introduction to the concept and practice of sports evangelism for the church. Dr. Solc is from the Czech Republic, where he played professional hockey and professional tennis before completing his Ph. D. and coming to SEBTS.

Bruce Riley Ashford (Ph.D., Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary) is Associate Professor of Theology & Culture, and Research Fellow for the L. Russ Bush Center for Faith & Culture. He is the editor of Theology and Practice of Mission: God, the Church, and the Nations (B&H: Forthcoming, Sept. 1, 2011).

The Bachelor of Arts in Christian Studies and Missions is a double major which introduces students to knowledge, principles, and practices central to missions in national and international contexts. The College also offers the Bachelor of Arts in Christian Studies with a minor in Apologetics or Missions. The M.A. in Intercultural Studies prepares students for international service with in-depth teaching and study. A student may pursue a concentration in Orality Studies, which prepares overseas workers to minister to primarily oral learners. The M.Div. with Evangelism trains vocational or church staff evangelists who may encourage church members to share the gospel in every generation. The M.Div. with Missiology is designed to equip students with the competencies necessary to serve as effective missions leaders in churches, denominational agencies, and other missions agencies in both North American and international settings. The M.Div. with North American Church Planting, under our Lewis A. Drummond Center for Great Commission Studies and in partnership with the North American Mission Board, equips leaders to plant effective churches. A focus in recent years has been to plat such churches in urban centers in the United States. The M.Div. with International Church Planting aims to provide the best training possible for the task of international missions. In partnership with the International Mission Board and under the direction of the Drummond Center, this program includes time on the mission field as part of program completion.

The D.Min with Missions, Evangelism, and Church Growth follows the cohort model wherein each student moves through the coursework and fieldwork with other students in this track and under the supervision of a mentor. The D.Min. at Southeastern is designed to wed continuing field ministry with intensive seminars to further equip ministers of the gospel. The desire and design of the Ph.D. at Southeastern is to fashion and equip Great Commission scholars. To this end, the Ph.D. in Applied Theology offers several relevant concentrations in a modified residency format: the concentration in Missions is offered to IMB workers serving overseas to equip them for teaching and writing about missions and theology while continuing their service in missions. The concentration in North American Missiology is offered for those serving in church ministry in North America to equip them for a writing ministry alongside their current ministry.

We invite you to study with our Missions and Evangelism faculty in the B. A., M.A., M.Div., Th.M., or Ph.D. programs of Southeastern. For more info visit our website (http://www.sebts.edu/ or http://www.sebts.edu/college/) and check out the Admissions and Academics links.

This series arose out of extended reflection on the Scriptures, out of which the Lord has made clear to me some of the perils of seminary, many of which I have succumbed to or been tempted by over the past decade and a half. I have attempted to communicate these perils to those of you who would read this post and might benefit from it. Although I have interjected humor at several points, I could not be more serious about the dangers I mentioned. After having written on those dangers, however, I would be remiss not to include one final danger: the danger of missing out on all that a good seminary has to offer.

I will never forget the first day of Systematic Theology with Paige Patterson. I had decided to take Systematic during my first semester and the opening class period would be the first experience I would have in a seminary environment. I sat on a row with J. D. Greear, Keith Errickson, and Chris Thompson. As Dr. Patterson began class, he announced that he would begin by handing out the class “syllabi.” As he said this, I leaned over to a friend and mentioned that the proper plural of syllabus is “syllabuses,” not “syllabi.” At this point, Keith raised his hand, was acknowledged by the teacher and proceeded to say, “My friend Bruce has a problem with your grammar.” I’m not joking. Dr. Patterson looked at me and said, “Yes?” To which I responded, “No sir, there is no problem with your grammar. My friend is joking.” The professor, however, insisted that I should put on my big boy pants and tell him what I really thought. So I did. I proceeded to unload my theory that syllabus was not derived from the Latin and therefore the plural should be syllabuses. Dr. Patterson thought about it for a second or two, looked at me, and said, “no, -buses are things that children ride to school, and since you know so much about everything, I will grade your weekly quizzes out loud, in front of the entire class, for the rest of the semester.” And that he did. Can you imagine what a never-ending carnival of theological wedgies the remainder of the semester was for me?

In all seriousness, I loved Systematic Theology. There is nothing more satisfying, more unsettling, more helpful, and more practical than asking the really big questions about God, man, salvation, the church, and last things. First and foremost, we studied the text of Scripture, drawing upon the resources of the entire canon to answer each question. Along the way, however, we investigated what the church fathers and the Reformers had to say on any of these doctrines, and learned to defend and apply those same doctrines. I was forced to write my first bona fide research paper. I had never written a paper in Turabian style and had no idea how to argue a thesis. I chose to argue for the divine inspiration theory of Scripture (vs. human constructivist and human response models).

After having mustered all of my bibliographic, analytic, and stylistic resources, I managed to complete my paper. I received it graded the next week. At the end of the paper, Dr. Patterson devoted several paragraphs of red ink to the shortcomings of my paper, gave me a few words of encouragement, and then ended with this sentence, which I will never forget: “Mr. Ashford, we will make a real scholar of you yet, if it kills us both in the process.” Hmmm. Even though I had just been informed that (1) I was not a real scholar, and (2) that to make me one might actually kill my professor in the process, I found myself encouraged, oddly enough, that I might one day make a decent theologian. There was light at the end of the tunnel. From Dr. Patterson, I learned not only theology and research, but also how it is that a teacher really challenges those whom he is teaching.

My biblical languages and biblical studies courses were of inestimable value. One of those courses was the book of Isaiah with Gary Galeotti. It was one of the most worshipful experiences of my life, as we studied Isaiah, line by line, for an entire semester. I realized that Isaiah understood Christ 800 years before the Lord’s coming better than I did 2000 years after. In addition to learning the book of Isaiah, I learned what it meant to be a godly preacher and teacher of the Word. Day after day, he opened the text of Scripture, expounded it, applied it to our lives, and challenged us to embrace and obey the words of God. He aimed not only for the mind, but for the heart.

I took Christian Philosophy, Apologetics, Christian Faith and the Modern Mind, and several other courses with L. Russ Bush. In these courses, I learned to give a defense of the faith once for all delivered to the saints. Dr. Bush was a man who had thought deeply and broadly and was able to speak cogently on any issue across the range of the disciplines. At his fingertips were theology, philosophy, history, world religions, and current affairs. It was in this class more than any other that the Lord distilled in me a love for reading widely across the disciplines.

Alvin Reid was my professor for Introduction to Evangelism. I had never been around a man with such a contagious enthusiasm for the gospel. His courses were an extended argument for evangelism, missions, and revival. He argued from the text of Scripture, illustrated from the annals of church history, and applied it to our contemporary milieu. Between his evangelism course and Keith Eitel’s Introduction to Christian Missions, I found myself under conviction every week. They continually impressed upon me the fact that a love for God and His Word necessarily issues forth in a desire to commend Him to a lost world.

John Hammett was my professor for courses such as Ecclesiology, Soteriology and Baptist History. Not only was I forced to study the doctrine of the church in depth, but I encountered a man who was the consummate scholar. In presenting his own views, we recognized that he was rigorous in his research and unflinching in his argumentation. In presenting views that differed from his own, he was unfailingly even-handed. He did not need to misrepresent his opponents in order to refute their views. One of the things that most impressed me about Dr. Hammett was that one could be a tough-minded theologian and at the same time have a gracious demeanor.

From Andreas Kostenberger, I encountered not only the New Testament but also a man who embodies the severe discipline necessary to “leave no stone unturned” in the study of the Scriptures. From Steve McKinion, I imbibed not only the writings of the church fathers but also learned that one could be a missionary to the academy; he could research and write and speak in such a manner that he reaches an audience extending far beyond the bounds of the evangelical world. From Dan Heimbach, not only did I learn Christian Ethics, but also observed the life of a man who had advised the President of the United States and taught at the Naval Academy and who was willing to leave all of that in order to teach ministers of the gospel. And this is just the short list of men from whom I have learned.

Last, but not least, I want to encourage seminary students to learn from those who God has put in leadership at their seminaries. It is God who has placed these men in such positions and we would be remiss not to learn from them. The lessons learned from each president will vary according to their personality, context, and relative strengths and weaknesses. Since I live and write from within a Southeastern context, I will mention our own President, Danny Akin. If I had to limit my thoughts to only one thing that I have learned from watching him, it would be that he has modeled for us what it means to hide behind the cross. I think it was James Denney who said, “No man can give the impression that he himself is clever and that Christ is mighty to save.” Our president models this in his preaching, as he keeps the text of Scripture front and center, and puts himself in the background. The lesson here is that we should not allow our personalities or agendas or sense of humor to overtake the text itself. He also models it in his leadership. It is not often that one has opportunity to sit under a leader who is genuinely self-effacing, consistently willing to admit his faults and ask forgiveness when wrong, committed to visit and serve his missions students on the field (in less than ideal conditions), and willing to spend time with students in spite of his multiple responsibilities.

I was very, very close to eliminating this installment because I was afraid that it would seem like an extended piece of flattery. After all, in trying to give a brief exposition of God’s grace to me in a seminary context, I have focused on the faculty as much as (or more than) I have the curriculum. There are two reasons why, in the end, I decided to post this installment. First, at a good seminary, the faculty and curriculum are inseparable. That is the whole point of having a seminary community. We are drinking deeply from the well of the Christian Scriptures at the feet of men who have walked with the Lord and who have studied their chosen disciplines with more depth than we likely ever will. Theology, pastoral ministry, and leadership are caught just as much as they are taught. Second, with all of the emphasis on young leaders in our convention, I thought it fitting to focus on the benefits of listening to, and learning from, the older leaders whom God has set before us. Young men are most likely to become leaders by sitting at the feet of their elders.

In conclusion, let me affirm what I wrote in the first post, “I can say that life in a seminary context has been good in many respects. It is a place where I learned to study God’s Word and relate it to all aspects of His world. I was introduced to church history, systematic theology, apologetics, and much more. I formed friendships that will last for a lifetime, and was taught and discipled by men who had walked with God for many years more than I. It is easy for me to recognize God’s grace and goodness to me in this calling.” Let us live and study and teach and worship in a manner worthy of our calling.

Between the Times contributor Alvin Reid has written an excellent article for his personal blog titled “Of Campus, Calvinism, and Coalitions.” You should check it out. We hope that more Southern Baptists, on all sides of the Calvinism debate (and other debates), will commit to labor together for the sake of the nations.

In the most recent Messenger Insight Podcast, Baptist Messenger editor Doug Baker talks with BtT contributor Alvin Reid about his new Evangelism Handbook, what it means to be missional, contextualization, and the future of the SBC’s North American and international mission efforts. They also discuss the recent numerical decline in the SBC, a historical reality that is denied by some observers. You can listen to the podcast at the Messenger Insight website.

Alvin Reid has gone and committed another act of literature, one which (as Roy Fish says in the Afterword) is well worth reading and which contains concepts worth putting into action. Evangelism Handbook: Biblical, Spiritual, Intentional, Missional is a comprehensive treatment of the various facets of getting the gospel to our neighbors (and to the nations).

In the first part, he treats foundational matters, giving a biblical theology of evangelism and an expose of lessons we can learn from the early church. In the second part, he writes about the spiritual nature of the task, covering such topics as prayer, testimony, character, and spiritual disciplines. In the third part, he writes about intentionality and the treacherous but necessary call to be effective and contextual. In the fourth part, he argues that the church must move from a primarily “attractional” model to a primarily missional model.

By the time you have gotten to this part of my little book notice, surely you are on the edge of your seats. The suspense is nearly unbearable. “Where,” you ask breathlessly, “might I read more about the book?” Well, the good news is that LifeWay has provided a free 36 page download which you can access by clicking here.

Or you could just determine to buy the book immediately. That’s what I did.

The Northwest Baptist Association in Oklahoma is sponsoring a conference titled “Becoming the Great Commission Church” on November 2. Lincoln Avenue Baptist Church in Woodward is the host church. The speakers include Alvin Reid, Anthony Jordan, and yours truly. The schedule for the conference is as follows:

Nathan Finn: Getting the Gospel Right
9:00 AM

Alvin Reid: Getting the Gospel Out
10:00 AM

Anthony Jordan: The Gospel and Cooperation
11:00 AM

Lunch at the host church

Panel Discussion: Moderated by Doug Baker
1:00 PM

Nathan Finn: The Gospel and the Church: Why We Do What We Do
2:00 PM

Alvin Reid: The Gospel and Culture
3:00 PM

Administrator’s Note: Yestersday Tom Ascol posted a “bloggersation” between he and Alvin Reid at the Founders Ministries Blog. They discussed a number of issues, including the history of their friendship, the Great Commission Resurgence, the 2009 Louisville Convention, and the Calvinism debate in the SBC. Because of Alvin’s participation in that bloggersation, we thought it would be good to also publish this material at BtT. Special thanks to Tom Ascol for his gracious permission to reprint his post in its entirety.

This is the first of a series of “bloggersations” that I hope to publish periodically on this blog. One of the vitally important dimensions to the resurgence of gospel unity that is developing within and beyond the SBC is the establishment of friendships.

Too often, brothers who disagree with each other talk past one another rather than constructively to each other. When there is no vital relationship it is easy to traffic in caricature or to allow misconceptions to go unchallenged. But where the respect engendered by friendship exists, those destructive tendencies are not tolerated.

It has been my joy to get to know Dr. Alvin Reid over the last year and to be able to call him my friend. As you will read below, our friendship developed because he initiated it. His example should encourage all who love Christ and His gospel to reach out to others to establish gospel-centered friendships.

As Alvin and I have traded emails, tweets and phone calls, it began to dawn on me that aspects of our conversations might be of interest and perhaps useful to others. The idea of blogging part of a conversation dawned on me a few months ago, and Alvin quickly agreed to participate.

What follows is a bloggersation between Alvin and me about the 2009 SBC and our friendship.

What happened at the SBC this year?

AR:While I agree with Jonathan Edwards that one should best judge a movement a posteriori than a priori, i.e., by its fruits, I believe we can ay that the meeting in Louisville was of historic proportions. I wrote of this at alvinreid.com, but in a nutshell it said we (in no certain order): 1) said to a coming generation of younger men of God that we believe in them and the future; 2) affirmed the call for a Great Commission Resurgence with an overwhelming voice; 3) affirmed wholeheartedly the leadership of men like Johnny Hunt, Danny Akin, and Al Mohler among others; 4) said as a body we will not focus on secondary issues of disagreement but come together to strive to fulfill the great commission; 5) proved we can differ on matters such as Calvinism, eschatology, etc, and yet bind together as a people for the glory of God and the sake of the gospel.

For me, it was every bit as historic as Dallas in 1995, my first SBC.

TA: I came away more encouraged from this convention than from any of the others that I have attended, going all the way back to 1979. There were several elements that combined to bring this about. First, God is giving us the kind of leaders that we need for this new day. Johnny Hunt’s grace and spirit is contagious and I sense that lots of those who attended–me included–want to catch whatever it is that he has! Danny Akin’s leadership resonated with the convention as he chaired the Resolutions Committee without a glitch and spoke in 4 different forums on Tuesday. Al Mohler’s motion to have a task force appointed, and Frank Page’s timely support of that motion signaled a new spirit of cooperation that many Southern Baptists have been longing for.

How do you account for what took place?

AR:I certainly think it was God at work, although I try to be careful to speak for God beyond what He clearly reveals in His Word. I also think it came as a convergence of many factors, signified first in Frank Page’s election, and from where I sit this was the culmination of what I had been hearing for three years as I travel around the SBC: a general sense of unrest, that culture has changed and we have not been willing to adapt to reach this culture (adapt methods not our message which is unchanging). I have spent my entire life studying movements, and this has all the marks of a growing movement. I am praying for a revolution of gospel-saturated believers who will live as missionaries in our increasingly unchurched and dechurched world. Add to that a flattened world where we can gain information and communicate more easily, and the sense that we are not doing our best to serve the Lord God has been reaching a crescendo.

TA: I think Alvin has a good take on this. There is a growing unrest that began years ago in the SBC. I think the rising generation has added energy and passion to that unrest that is now forcing some vitally important issues to be addressed. The informational gatekeepers have been forever circumvented by the new media. I think the last 2 SBC presidential elections have signaled the strength of the new winds that are blowing. So in one sense, I think the recent SBC in Louisville represents the next step in this development. Enough Southern Baptists are now willing to admit that we have real problems that cannot be solved by more cheerleading or doing more of the same. We need to get honest and start caring about not only the authority of Scripture but its sufficiency.

How did you guys become friends?

TA: Twitter. For real. On November 8, 2008, Alvin sent me a Direct Message saying, “We have never met personally…I would love to interact with you by email.” Less than two hours later I received a warm, lengthy email with the subject heading: “Hello my brother.” He told me a little about himself and said that he wanted to get to know me better and hopefully enjoy fellowship in the future. I had read some of Alvin’s writings and appreciated his insights into and love of revivals and awakenings. But, to my shame, had he waited on me to reach out to him we would not be friends today.

The fact that he had gone out of his way to establish some interaction with me intrigued me and engendered an immediate respect and appreciation for him. As we corresponded back and forth and talked on the phone I came to discover what many people have known about Alvin for years–that he is hard not to love! I am very grateful to the Lord for his friendship. Alvin is sold out to the gospel of Christ and is a passionate evangelist. I have a lot to learn from him.

AR: I had forgotten who took the initiative, but I am glad I did. I think our friendship is a great example of how God has been working in hearts. There are new coalitions and constituencies forming around biblical unity centered on the gospel, and less on certain causes some support. To be perfectly honest, I am not sure I was ready to be good friends with a brother in Christ who also led the Founders Ministry five or more years ago. But we began to converse via email, and then on the phone a couple of times. We finally met for lunch this past April near Tom’s area when I was there preaching.

Let me unpack what I said about where I was five years ago to now. Most of my friends were not Calvinists all through college and seminary. The occasional Calvinist I met typically wanted to tell me (since evangelism is obviously a big deal to me) everything wrong with evangelism, but never seemed to offer ways they sought to fulfill the great commission. This would be a total of a handful of people. Then on occasion I would get to know men of God of a Calvinist bent who also loved the gospel. Mark Coppenger hired me in Indiana out of seminary. I went door-to-door on several occasions with this Calvinist brother who was both brilliant and not snotty :-). I realized that I too can stereotype others even as some have stereotyped me!

Then I began to be consistent (not a bad idea). I love Edwards. And Whitefield, Carey, Spurgeon, etc. I also love Wesley and Graham. But while I could love the many Calvinists God used in the history of revival and evangelism, I had more disdain than affection for my contemporaries who were Calvinists.

And then I met Nathan Finn. Nathan was in my PhD seminar. I had no idea who he was. I soon learned two things. First, he knew history a lot better than I did. Second, he was truly humble about it. He and some others in the seminar who shared a more Reformed theology helped to make the seminar a delight. I realized that there seemed to be a growing number of Calvinists who were serious about the Great Commission, in the heritage of Andrew Fuller and Carey.

Finally, I watched my president, Danny Akin, who like me is not a Calvinist but who takes seriously the sovereignty of God and His work in salvation without affirming all five points. He has become a model for building bridges for all who love the gospel. Let’s be honest; I have known plenty of non-Calvinists who never share Christ. So like Akin, I would submit that the believer who is not serious about the great commission is in rebellion before God, whatever his “ism”.

So by the time Tom and I met I had been on a journey that led me to love Calvinists today who love the gospel as much as Edwards and Spurgeon of old. I can learn much from Tim Keller today about reaching the cities as I can from Samuel Mills and Carey who longed to reach the nations.

Where are your doctrinal agreements and disagreements?

TA: Other than the fact that I am a hyper-Calvinist and Alvin is a Pelagian, we really see eye-to-eye on theological issues. Seriously, those kinds of caricatures are what too-often become the default judgment of men who disagree on certain points of the doctrine of salvation. When they are unjustifiably harbored, communication and relationship inevitably break down.

Alvin and I have not talked at length about the details of our doctrinal convictions. We could, and I am sure at some point we will, and it won’t endanger our friendship, because are in great agreement on so much. We both believe in the sovereignty of God, the depravity of people by nature, substitutionary atonement, perseverance of the saints, that faith and repentance are duties, along with all the other orthodox Christological and Trinitarian doctrines.

I would assume that we disagree on the extent of the atonement, though I certainly affirm universal dimensions to the definite atoning work of Jesus and I would suspect (though we have not talked about it) that Alvin sees limitations to the saving benefits of Christ’s atoning work. We could have a profitable conversation about that without dismissing each other as heretics.

AR: I think Tom articulated this very well. I have spent my life teaching applied theology. In other words, I care little what one says he believes if how he lives does not back that up. So what drives me is the practice of one’s faith, which is why Paul is such a remarkable example to this day. He was both a brilliant theologian and a remarkable practitioner. That is why the conversations I have had with Tom and others on his staff have focussed on how we practice the theology we affirm. And, the more we talk about practice, the less we seem to divide. I suspect if we talked more about theology apart from practice we may find increasing disagreement. But as I said above, whether you call yourself a Calvinist, a non-Calvinist, a simple biblicist, a compatibalist, or another word bigger than mayonnaise, if your life does not demonstrate a heart for the gospel and a burden for the lost, your theology or mine needs work. But the shrill stereotypes, “Calvinists do not witness,” or “non-Calvinists have abandoned the gospel,” help no one. Such rhetoric can gain a collection of followers, but hardly resembles a yearning for biblical unity.

Aren’t at least a little bit suspicious of each other?

TA: No. I have come to see some of Alvin’s heart and what I have seen I love. His tireless investment in students and relentless efforts to make disciples of Jesus convicts and challenges me to follow Christ more diligently. So I have no reason to be suspicious of him and many reasons to have great confidence in him.

AR: I am not at all. I once was somewhat. See, full disclosure :-). But I have discovered we trust those more whom we get to know best, if there is a shared love for God and His truth. I can speak for the Tom Ascol I know now, as I did not know him in the past, but the Tom I know now I am convinced has a great heart for the nations and a desire to see the gospel proclaimed. Let me take a taxonomy from one of my favorite philosophers, Aristotle, who wrote in his Nichomachean Ethics about three kinds of friendships:

1) utility–friendships formed because we find one another useful for a task or agenda.

2) pleasure–we enjoy merriment and humor.

3) perfect friendship–common virtue, a common conviction.

I use this because I have found a few (very few) cases in SBC life where what I thought were close friendships were actually utilitarian-I was considered a friend as long as I promoted the agenda of certain friends. Such friendships are not as deep as we sometimes believe. But I am finding that most of my lifelong friends, and more recent friends like Tom, have become the third type of friendship Our desire to see Christ exalted, the gospel proclaimed, churches planted, and God’s truth taught, are far more important than other matters than seem quite vital to others.

I guess I would say finally that the common virtue we share is not only for the Word and the gospel, but there is a great sense of urgency. Tom has a daughter serving in a far away land for the gospel. My president Danny Akin has two children doing the same thing. This is not a theoretical or even a utilitarian connection. We are driven by a sense of urgency for a world lost and in need of Christ Who alone can save.

We not only should join together for the gospel, we must!

This series arose out of extended reflection on the Scriptures, out of which the Lord has made clear to me some of the perils of seminary, many of which I have succumbed to or been tempted by over the past decade and a half. I have attempted to communicate these perils to those of you who would read this post and might benefit from it. Although I have interjected humor at several points, I could not be more serious about the dangers I mentioned. After having written on those dangers, however, I would be remiss not to include one final danger: the danger of missing out on all that a good seminary has to offer.

I will never forget the first day of Systematic Theology with Paige Patterson. I had decided to take Systematic during my first semester and the opening class period would be the first experience I would have in a seminary environment. I sat on a row with J. D. Greear, Keith Errickson, and Chris Thompson. As Dr. Patterson began class, he announced that he would begin by handing out the class “syllabi.” As he said this, I leaned over to a friend and mentioned that the proper plural of syllabus is “syllabuses,” not “syllabi.” At this point, Keith raised his hand, was acknowledged by the teacher and proceeded to say, “My friend Bruce has a problem with your grammar.” I’m not joking. Dr. Patterson looked at me and said, “Yes?” To which I responded, “No sir, there is no problem with your grammar. My friend is joking.” The professor, however, insisted that I should put on my big boy pants and tell him what I really thought. So I did. I proceeded to unload my theory that syllabus was not derived from the Latin and therefore the plural should be syllabuses. Dr. Patterson thought about it for a second or two, looked at me, and said, “no, -buses are things that children ride to school, and since you know so much about everything, I will grade your weekly quizzes out loud, in front of the entire class, for the rest of the semester.” And that he did. Can you imagine what a never-ending carnival of theological wedgies the remainder of the semester was for me?

In all seriousness, I loved Systematic Theology. There is nothing more satisfying, more unsettling, more helpful, and more practical than asking the really big questions about God, man, salvation, the church, and last things. First and foremost, we studied the text of Scripture, drawing upon the resources of the entire canon to answer each question. Along the way, however, we investigated what the church fathers and the Reformers had to say on any of these doctrines, and learned to defend and apply those same doctrines. I was forced to write my first bona fide research paper. I had never written a paper in Turabian style and had no idea how to argue a thesis. I chose to argue for the divine inspiration theory of Scripture (vs. human constrictivist and human response models). After having mustered all of my bibliographic, analytic, and stylistic resources, I managed to complete my paper. I received it graded the next week. At the end of the paper, Dr. Patterson devoted several paragraphs of red ink to the shortcomings of my paper, gave me a few words of encouragement, and then ended with this sentence, which I will never forget: “Mr. Ashford, we will make a real scholar of you yet, if it kills us both in the process.” Hmmm. Even though I had just been informed that (1) I was not a real scholar, and (2) that to make me one might actually kill my professor in the process, I found myself encouraged, oddly enough, that I might one day make a decent theologian. There was light at the end of the tunnel. From Dr. Patterson, I learned not only theology and research, but also how it is that a teacher really challenges those whom he is teaching.

My biblical languages and biblical studies courses were of inestimable value. One of those courses was book of Isaiah with Gary Galeotti. It was one of the most worshipful experiences of my life, as we studied Isaiah, line by line, for an entire semester. I realized that Isaiah understood Christ 800 years before the Lord’s coming better than I did 2000 years after. In addition to learning the book of Isaiah, I learned what it meant to be a godly preacher and teacher of the Word. Day after day, he opened the text of Scripture, expounded it, applied it to our lives, and challenged us to embrace and obey the words of God. He aimed not only for the mind, but for the heart.

I took Christian Philosophy, Apologetics, Christian Faith and the Modern Mind, and several other courses with L. Russ Bush. In these courses, I learned to give a defense of the faith once for all delivered to the saints. Dr. Bush was a man who had thought deeply and broadly and was able to speak cogently on any issue across the range of the disciplines. At his fingertips were theology, philosophy, history, world religions, and current affairs. It was in this class more than any other that the Lord distilled in me a love for reading widely across the disciplines.

Alvin Reid was my professor for Introduction to Evangelism. I had never been around a man with such a contagious enthusiasm for the gospel. His courses were an extended argument for evangelism, missions, and revival. He argued from the text of Scripture, illustrated from the annals of church history, and applied it to our contemporary milieu. Between his evangelism course and Keith Eitel’s missions courses, I found myself under conviction every week. They continually impressed upon me the fact that a love for God and His Word necessarily issues forth in a desire to commend Him to a lost world.

John Hammett was my professor for courses such as Ecclesiology and Baptist History. Not only was I forced to study the doctrine of the church in depth, but I encountered a man who was the consummate scholar. In presenting his own views, we recognized that he was rigorous in his research and unflinching in his argumentation. In presenting views that differed from his own, he was unfailingly even-handed. He did not need to misrepresent his opponents in order to refute their views. One of the things that most impressed me about Dr. Hammett was that one could be a tough-minded theologian and at the same time have a gracious demeanor.

From Andreas Kostenberger, I encountered not only the New Testament but also a man who embodies the severe discipline necessary to “leave no stone unturned” in the study of the Scriptures. From Steve McKinion, I imbibed not only the writings of the church fathers but also learned that one could be a missionary to the academy; he could research and write and speak in such a manner that he reaches an audience extending far beyond the bounds of the evangelical world. From Dan Heimbach, not only did I learn Christian Ethics, but also observed the life of a man who had advised the President of the United States and gave lectures at the Naval Postgrad School and the Marine Corps University Staff and Command College and who was willing to leave all of that in order to teach ministers of the gospel. And this is just the short list of men from whom I have learned.

Last, but not least, I want to encourage seminary students to learn from those who God has put in leadership at their seminaries. It is God who has placed these men in such positions and we would be remiss not to learn from them. The lessons learned from each president will vary according to their personality, context, and relative strengths and weaknesses. Since I live and write from within a Southeastern context, I will mention our own President, Danny Akin. If I had to limit my thoughts to only one thing that I have learned from watching him, it would be that he has modeled for us what it means to hide behind the cross. I think it was James Denney who said, “No man can give the impression that he himself is clever and that Christ is mighty to save.” Our president models this in his preaching, as he keeps the text of Scripture front and center, and puts himself in the background. The lesson here is that we should not allow our personalities or agendas or sense of humor to overtake the text itself. He also models it in his leadership. It is not often that one has opportunity to sit under a leader who is genuinely self-effacing, consistently willing to admit his faults and ask forgiveness when wrong, committed to visit and serve his missions students on the field (in less than ideal conditions), and willing to spend time with students in spite of his multiple responsibilities.

I was very, very close to eliminating this installment because I was afraid that it would seem like an extended piece of flattery. After all, in trying to give a brief exposition of God’s grace to me in a seminary context, I have focused on the faculty as much as (or more than) I have the curriculum. There are two reasons why, in the end, I decided to post this installment, First, at a good seminary, the faculty and curriculum are in a sense inseparable. That is the whole point of having a seminary community. We are drinking deeply from the well of the Christian Scriptures at the feet of men who have walked with the Lord and who have studied their chosen disciplines with more depth than we likely ever will. Theology, pastoral ministry, and leadership are caught just as much as they are taught. Second, with all of the emphasis on young leaders in our convention, I thought it fitting to focus on the benefits of listening to, and learning from, the older leaders whom God has set before us. Young men are most likely to become leaders by sitting at the feet of their elders.

In conclusion, let me affirm what I wrote in the first post, “I can say that life in a seminary context has been good in many respects. It is a place where I learned to study God’s Word and relate it to all aspects of His world. I was introduced to church history, systematic theology, apologetics, and much more. I formed friendships that will last for a lifetime, and was taught and discipled by men who had walked with God for many years more than I. It is easy for me to recognize God’s grace and goodness to me in this calling.” Let us live and study and teach and worship in a manner worthy of our calling.