California’s battle over same-sex marriage points to more than just the moral depravity of society

by Keith Bassham

We conservative Christians have been crowing about our success relative to the liberal mainline denomina­tions at least a generation. While most of the country, certainly the majority of the nation’s media and academia, was fairly unaware of the rising strength in conservative Christianity in the 60s and early 70s, they had noticed the theologically liberal Protestant denominations were shrinking. A few sociologists dug a little deeper, among them sociologist Dean Kelley who wrote Why Conservative Churches are Growing in 1972, but many more were in agree­ment with Lutheran theologian Peter Berger, who told the New York Times in 1969 that religion in the U.S. would soon be composed of groups “huddled together in little enclaves, surrounded by a sea of secularity.”

As we watched the mainline Protestant denominations hemorrhage membership statistics, we felt vindicated for our doctrinal stands, for our continued faithfulness to God, His Word, the Gospel of Christ, the Cross, and all the other theological and cultural positions we believe to be important. We conservatives had more churches, larger churches, and not a small amount of political clout. The data indicated we had won, and we truly thought we had triumphed.

However, it is easy to miss something under the surface. Earlier this year, Christian Smith published Souls in Transition: The Reli­gious and Spiritual Lives of Emerging Adults. The book is a follow-up to his widely read volume on the spiritual lives of teens, and a few paragraphs from it challenge our sense of triumph. Smith writes,

“These are not the glory days of mainline-liberal Protestantism in America. Yet many ob­servers are so focused on membership statistics and apparent political influences that they miss an important fact: that liberal Protestantism’s organizational decline has been accompanied by and is in part arguably the consequence of the fact that liberal Protestantism has won a decisive, larger cultural victory.”

He goes on to cite the work of N. Jay Demerath, who in 1995 wrote a journal article in which he argues that the reason the liberal Protestant churches declined is not because they failed, but because they succeeded! Far from representing failure,” he says, “the decline of Liberal Protestantism may actually stem from its success. It may be the painful structural consequences of [its] wider cultural triumph.… Liberal Protestants have lost struc­turally at the micro level precisely because they won culturally at the macro level.”

In other words, Smith says,

“liberal Protestantism’s core values – indi­vidualism, pluralism, emancipation, tolerance, free critical inquiry, and the authority of human experience – have come to so permeate broader American culture that its own churches as or­ganizations have difficulty surviving. …In short, many emerging adults would be quite comfort­able with the kind of liberal faith described by the Yale theologian H. Richard Niebuhr in 1937 as being about ‘a God without wrath [who] brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.’”

I am not certain of the process, who influenced whom, whether we are talking chickens and eggs here, or what, but I can tell you the observations are spot on. Therefore, when someone asked me about my response to the Federal judge’s overturning California’s Proposition 8, the majority-supported act to define marriage as exclusively a one-man-one-woman relationship, I asked, “And what did you expect?”

Actually, this is the second time this issue has received a ruling in a high court in California, the first occurring two years ago. At that time, the California Supreme Court ruled that the state’s Defense of Marriage Act defining marriage in traditional one-man-one-woman terms, was unconstitutional. Backers of the law believed at the time the only way to prevent a similar overturning was to amend the state’s constitution, which they did in a voter referendum that fall. The amendment was contained in the language of Proposition 8 (“only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California”), and those who wanted to retain traditional marriage and prevent same-sex marriages in California thought that would put the matter out of the court’s reach.

In the meantime, the homosexual activists and liberal politicians favoring same-sex mar­riage geared up for the inevitable showdown. The American Civil Liberties Union posted a strategy document on their website: “Make Change, Not Lawsuits.” The downloadable document showed the logos of nine LGBT organizations and gave encouagement to the same-sex marriage proponents:

“The win in California was no accident. Cities in California started adopting Domestic Partnership policies in the mid 80s. The state adopted its first law in 1999, and expanded it over the next six years. Courts in California have been deciding important cases about discrimination since the 70s. With the victories in Massachusetts and California, we should be able to win marriage more quickly in other states.… Marriage in California will transform the national debate on the freedom to marry. It will do that because the decision is well-rea­soned constitutional law from the most influ­ential state court in the nation. It will do that because California is an American trendsetter.”

This more recent decision must be seen in the light of that earlier ruling and what we already know about the homosexual activist agenda.

I have demonstrated before that though homosexuality apologists deny there is any homosexual agenda, there is one. In their 1989 pro-gay book, After the Ball, Marshall K. Kirk and Hunter Madsen wrote, “The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affir­mation of and societal acceptance of homo­sexual behavior.” These same-sex marriage declarations are important to the homosexual community because what they are after is not tolerance but broad acceptance, and as long as this legal marriage barrier stands, homosexual­ity will not be regarded as normal.

This position has been confirmed again and again. Outspoken homosexual activist Michelangelo Signorile wrote in a column for OUT magazine in 1994 of a strategy and goal, “to fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institu­tion of marriage completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to soci­ety’s moral codes but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution.”

More than 10 years ago, Hadley Arkes, writing in First Things, said,

“For what drives the litigation for gay rights is the need to have the gay life recognized and confirmed in principle in every setting in which the issue may arise. Gay activists seem to understand that their interests will not be secured as long as there persists in the public a residual moral sense that there is something about homosexuality that is not quite right. Hence, the need to seek more and more occa­sions for inducing the public first to tolerate, and then, in small steps, to endorse or approve.”

Understand, this is not some plea for tolerance, a deliverance from culturally embed­ded and socially sanctioned physical perse­cution. Rather, the goal is, according to the same-sex proponents, a radical revolution in morality.

Nowhere is this more plain than in the language used by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker in his ruling where he invokes the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Law­rence v. Texas. Walker wrote,

“The arguments surrounding Proposition 8 raise a question similar to that addressed in Lawrence, when the Court asked whether a majority of citizens could use the power of the state to enforce ‘profound and deep convic­tions accepted as ethical and moral principles’ through the criminal code.…They cannot. “

In fact, woven throughout Judge Walker’s ruling, just about any law based on a moral view, especially if related to religion, is suspect. That is, unless it corresponds with his view of morality. For instance, at one point in his decision he states as a fact (not his opinion, mind you) that “religious beliefs that gay and lesbian relationships are sinful…harm gays and lesbians.”

Again, though, I ask, what did you expect? Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia dissented in the Lawrence case in 2003, warning this very event was inevitable. He wrote then,

“This effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation. If, as the Court asserts, the promotion of majoritarian sexual morality is not even a legitimate state interest… Today’s opinion (i.e. the majority) is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct. … So imbued is the Court with the law profession’s anti-anti-homosexual culture, that it is seemingly unaware that the attitudes of that culture are not obviously ‘mainstream’…”

Later, he notes that the majority opinion of Court is careful to say the present case “does not involve whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that homosexual persons seek to enter.” I’m think­ing Justice O’Connor was using the last bit of her opinion to try to steer the homosexual activists away from using her as a legal basis for same-sex marriage arrangements in the future. Scalia saw it for what it was. His response: “Do not believe it.… Today’s opinion dismantles the structure of constitutional law that has permit­ted a distinction to be made between het­erosexual and homosexual unions, insofar as formal recognition in marriage is concerned.”

Justice Scalia’s next few sentences pre­sciently quote Judge Walker (seven years in advance) almost word for word, for Walker says there is no legitimate state interest involved in proscribing same-sex marriage, precisely what Scalia said would happen after the Supreme Court decided Lawrence.

And so what of the majority of the people in this country, religious or not, who still believe that these matters should be decided in a democratic venue? Matthew J. Franck, director of the William E. and Carol G. Simon Center on Religion and the Constitution at the Witherspoon Institute in Princeton, New Jersey, writes, that according to Judge Walker and his allies,

“Citizens who wish to defend the institu­tion of marriage as they and their families have known it all their lives, and for countless generations, are irrational bigots. Worse still, if they are moved to act because of the union of their faith with their moral opinions, they are crazy religious folk, bent only on harming oth­ers whom they merely ‘dislike’ on grounds that cannot possibly be defended before a tribunal of right-thinking people. And those others, the same-sex-couple plaintiffs? They must be rescued from the ‘harm’ to their feelings that results from their exclusion from a historic civil and moral institution that has never hitherto been thought to have been built for them.”

Let’s see if we can’t twist all these threads together to see where we are.

First, I was planning to publish an apolo­getics article this month, one dealing with the question, “Can we be good without God?” when the news on the California decision came in. What is the source for our sense of right and wrong? How do we know what is right? Why do right? Those kinds of things. I had no idea the Federal judicial system would provide such a ready illustration. For, casting them­selves adrift from God as Creator and Lawgiver, much as Paul describes in Romans 1, modern American culture finds itself without a moral compass, let alone a rudder.

Second, this casting adrift was done in col­lusion with liberal Protestant theology as we described above. Not long ago, the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life reported in the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, 56 percent of those from mainline denominational churches agreed with a statement that said, “Homosexu­ality is a way of life that should be accepted by society.” Only 34 percent said homosexuality should be discouraged. The number of evan­gelicals agreeing with acceptance was smaller (26 percent), but considerable. Christianity often is redefined so the new core value and evidence of morality is tolerance of just about anything except traditional morality.

President Obama, I think, gives us an example of this new type of “Christian” think­ing. In his book, The Audacity of Hope, he mentions that his faith helped him to conclude that marriage is between a man and woman, a position he maintains publicly to the present time. Yet at the same time he favors repeal of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act, opposes a constitutional amendment declaring mar­riage is one-man-one-woman, and he opposed Proposition 8. Further, he advocates homo­sexuals openly serving in the US military, and unlike his immediate predecessor, has made two presidential proclamations for Gay Pride Month in 2009 and 2010. Finally, just a month or so back, in a statement honoring fathers on Fathers Day, he said, “Nurturing families come in many forms, and children may be raised by a father and mother, a single father, two fathers, a step-father, a grandfather, or caring guardian.”

Third, temporally, it is hard to judge suc­cess and failure. One could argue that liberal Protestantism sacrificed their institutions but in so doing they achieved great success embedding their core values in American culture. Mean­while, evangelical churches have grown in num­bers but appear to be losing clout in society at large. Some attribute this to a backlash against political activism, while others say we have not been as active in this area as we yet need to be.

One thing is clear. If there is ability to take this nation back to a more biblical worldview, it will require full effort over a long period of time among those with a serious allegiance to God and His ways.

by Jon Konnerup

What do you think of when you think of France? The Eiffel Tower? The Louvre? Notre Dame Cathedral? The palaces at Versailles? French bread? Cheese? Rich desserts? French toast?

All of these typify France and are reminders of the rich historical and cultural treasure France is to the world. More important than all the architectural wonders, the historical landmarks, the cultural tradi­tions, and the food, are the people of France. There are millions of people who have not heard a clear gospel witness and who seem to have no spiritual hunger or thirst for God.

It is said that France is a missionary graveyard. Early missionary endeavors were made in France; however, in our modern times, France has become one of the slowest and most difficult places to spread the Good News. Why? There are a variety of reasons, but I want to highlight three.

One is the small number of willing workers. The spiritual ground in France is hard with little yield in the last five decades. It can be discouraging when results seem to be sparse. The French are searching for spiri­tual meaning and find themselves empty after trying other paths. Continued patient evangelism and mis­sionary work is necessary. We need people to be on the ground for an extended period of time to build re­lationships and trust, to get involved in our established churches and our camp, and to till the spiritual soil, softening it to receive the seed of the gospel. It will take surrender of more people in our churches to go to France so that we have more people to do the work and be that witness.

Another reason is the limited amount of finan­cial resources. There is a misconception that France is a “comfortable” mission field where one does not need to make many sacrifices. This misconception not only makes it more difficult for missionaries to raise support, but it extends their time on deputation. France is a very expensive country in which to live and work, so the level of support a missionary needs is greater. Fuel for a car is currently around $6 a gallon and the purchase of land and buildings seems to be out of reach. The reports of salvations and churches started in France convey not only the difficulty of the field, but may reflect that many concerned for mis­sions are interested in going to and investing in coun­tries where the results are greater. It is going to take a dedicated effort to financially and prayerfully support those who serve.

The last reason I want to highlight is the spiri­tual dearth in France. France has a population of 60.7 million people with 10.7 million people in Paris alone. These numbers are growing rapidly by the day as more people migrate there from all around the world. Many believe that France is now the largest unreached western nation because of its strong growth in multi-culturalism leading to many different false religious views. There are thousands of cities and towns without any gospel witness or Bible-believing church. Although France is now known for its rejection of the Bible which has led them to a philosophy of secularism, materi­alism, and socialism, certain religions are not dying. Islam is growing at an alarming rate, mostly due to the number of those entering from Islamic countries. It is estimated that 4.5 million Muslims live in France. Many cults are present and belief in the occult is also prevalent. It is said that there are six times as many spiritual mediums as there are doctors.

Consequently, missionaries are always under strong spiritual attacks from the Devil and it is diffi­cult for people to be open to the Truth. Their hearts are blinded by the evil one who has gained a stronghold in France and will not readily relinquish it. These reli­gions and cults have caused the French government to crack down on the activity of most religious groups. They have initiated legislation to limit their abilities to work freely. One day, this may affect our missionaries and their ministries. We need to do as much as we can now before such restrictions occur. Thankfully, at this time, our missionaries have the necessary recognition to freely serve as God has called and led them.

All of this became very personal and evident to me when my family and I visited France this summer. Baptist Bible Fellowship International has four fami­lies currently in France who are all active in ministry and desire to see more churches started. The Dedeyans have been in France for 40 years, the Williams fam­ily for 35 years, the Autersons for 10 years, and the Van Meris family for about six years. People have been brought to Christ through their efforts and churches have been started who have in turn reproduced them­selves by sending out their own to other cities. A high­light of our visit was attending and preaching in the main church where the Dedeyans have worked. The people’s excitement for the Lord and interest to see the Truth spread in their country was encouraging. The Dedeyans have a three-week-long youth camp every July. Through the years, many young people have been saved and numerous have surrendered to serve the Lord while at this camp.

Our time with the missionaries was a blessing. I was amazed at their diligence in spite of the difficul­ties and barriers they face. Missionary Paul Dedeyan states that the three reasons why the French find it hard to accept the gospel message are (1) the desire to put the family and entertainment first, (2) loyalty and dedication to their own religion, and (3) materi­alism. Each missionary family stated that despite all the hindrances, they see opportunities — great op­portunities to reach people with the gospel and start new churches. Their plea is for more laborers to join in the task. Good things are happening through the BBFI missionaries in France.

So what can we do? Urgently PRAY! We must pray for God’s power and protection for our current missionaries in France. Pray that God will enable the current churches to reach out to the many cities that are without a church. Pray that God will provide more laborers to partner with our current missionary force. Are we up to this task?

by Jon Konnerup

As mission director of the BBFI, I have had the opportunity to travel to many different countries where we have missionaries. Not only do I love to visit with the missionaries, I also enjoy meeting those the missionaries have reached with the gospel and have trained to be pas­tors. This is the goal of our missionary efforts. Everywhere I have met with national leaders, they have expressed their gratitude for the BBFI churches and the missionaries they have sent out. In fact, one Korean pastor recently re­marked at Ike Foster’s memorial service that he loved Tex­as. He said it’s not because everything there is so big, but because the church that sent the missionary who reached him with the gospel is in Texas. Many of these national pastors have asked how things are going in other parts of the world. As I share these things with them, they listen intently, eager to know that they are a part of something bigger. They are always thrilled to know they are a part of the big picture and work that God has done, is doing, and will continue to do through the BBFI.

Because there has been so much interest in hearing what is going on around the world, Bro. Jun Lumagbas, of the Philippines, and I discussed the idea of having an International Fellowship Meeting in a foreign country. After sharing this with and getting the approval of the leadership of our Fellowship, we began to assemble a planning committee of leaders from around the world.

Cebu City, Philippines, was chosen as the ideal location for this meeting. Bible Baptist Church in Cebu City is a great church with a wonderful history. A BBFI missionary, Bob Hughes, started a church and trained a man, Dr. Armie Jesalva, who later became the pastor of the church. He has now led this church for over 40 years. Bible Baptist Church has in turn started over 300 churches in the Philippines and has sent out numerous missionaries around the world. This is the exact picture of the purpose of the BBFI globally. This church can handle hosting a large meeting like this and they will definitely be a blessing to all who attend.

I have been burdened to bring attention to and en­courage our co-laborers across the globe. Far from taking away from our own responsibility to world missions, the intent of this meeting is to rejoice in the results of our 60 years of labor as Baptist Bible Fellowship International. We are anticipating a great International Fellowship Meeting in Cebu, Philippines. It is important that as many pastors as possible attend this historical meeting.

We hope to “Remember” the past with thanks­giving, “Rejoice” in what God is doing right now with praise, and “Renew” our efforts for the cause of Christ with great enthusiasm.

“Let the Nations Rejoice” is our theme. Let the na­tions rejoice as we join with them in reaching our world for Christ and may the nations rejoice as they hear the wonderful story of Jesus and turn to Him for salvation. May it all bring glory and honor to God.

By Elsie Fishgrab
Retired BBFI Missionary to the Navajo

Shorty grew up in the early days of the state of Tex­as. Outlaws, cattle rustlers, and horse thieves were prominent residents. And, following the example set before him, Shorty happily set forth to see what he could get by with.

At the ripe old age of 10, he started smoking, and then graduated to liquor and a few other things. Naturally, those things took money, so he had to swipe a few chick­ens, then a couple of billy goats. After that, he went on to bigger things, until one day he and a couple of friends tack­led something really big. He’d been doing pretty good at getting away with things, but that day he didn’t quite get away fast enough. He soon found himself heading for the Tex­as border, just one short step ahead of a very angry posse bent on frontier justice, which was often meted out at the end of a hangman’s rope.

Well, Shorty couldn’t wait to collect any of his personal belongings, so he just lit out of Texas on one fast horse and the clothes on his back. When he finally shook that posse and left the Texas border many miles behind, Shorty sat down to take stock of his present situation. It didn’t look very good. Few clothes, no money, no food, and nowhere to go for help.

Of course, with a little careful maneuvering, he could probably find a change of clothes, maybe even a quilt, hanging on an unguarded clothesline — but money could be a real problem. He’d have to tread pretty carefully, as he was still close enough to Texas that his reputation could have arrived ahead of him.

After giving it some serious thought, Shorty realized he’d left everything he had in Texas. And, he’d even have to leave his name there too — otherwise he might end up back in Texas to pay for all his crimes.

“Well,” he mused, “everything I had I left it in Texas, so what could be more right than I call myself Shorty Leffit? For that’s just what I did, I leff it all in Texas.”

Sometime later, Shorty found himself wandering around in No Man’s Land. No Man’s Land was an area sev­eral miles in scope surrounded by the states or territories of Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado, and New Mexico. An area not claimed by any organized group, the only law available was a United States marshal that had to be called from somewhere in one of the surrounding states or territories — which could take anywhere from a week to a month to accomplish. This, of course, gave an outlaw plenty of time to change locations or call in friends to help defend his terri­tory. And most Federal marshals didn’t much care to engage in a shootout with a gang of outlaws. So No Man’s Land was a safe hangout for criminals of every sort.

For some of them, No Man’s Land was also a place where they could take time to consider their lives and decide where they wanted to go from there. After due consideration, Shorty decided he didn’t want to end up in prison — so he would just steal enough stuff to get himself a good start, then he would “go straight” from then on. Several outlaws, after a trip through No Man’s Land, came out on the oth­er side owning land and cattle and becoming respected ranch­ers. Shorty himself came out with a wife and enough stuff to make a new start, and he was no longer known as Shorty Leffit, but was Shorty… Smith? Jones? Brown? Doesn’t really matter, they were all generic names anyway!

And now you must be think­ing, “Just what is the point in all of this?”

The point is that God has a place that we might call No Man’ s Land — a place where we must stop and take a good look at our lives thus far, a place where we can decide if we will go right on with our old, sinful way of living, or if we will make a right turn and “go straight” in the path the Lord will set before us.

When we choose to go His way, the Lord Himself will give us a new name. He will write it down in the Book of Life where it can never be changed or erased.

Shorty Leffit had many name changes in his lifetime, and always he worried that someday his real name would catch up with him. He lived in fear that he would be hauled back to Texas to pay for the crimes he had done. When the Lord changes our names, we are free from fear, for Jesus Christ himself will stand as our lawyer and plead our cause in time of trouble.

“…To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hid­den mana, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.” Revelation 2:17

“He that overcometh shall be clothed in white raiment: and I will not blot out his name in the book of life, …but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.” Revelation 3: 5

by Charles Lyons

“Body found in the Humboldt Park Lagoon,” read the headline from a lit­tle over a year ago. Another one from a few years back, “Man’s body found in Hum­boldt Lagoon.” These are just a couple stories I’ve snagged and saved. I’m sure I missed a few. Humboldt Park Lagoon, not to mention the surrounding square of green in the middle of some of Chicago’s most desperate neighbor­hoods, has long been the battleground of 100 plus gangs.

For more than a generation, Humboldt Park and the surrounding area which goes by the same name, has been synonymous with the worst American cities can serve up; the usual menu of stick-ups, muggings, rapes, and gen­eral mayhem. Back in the day, driving through the park to various places, I would see dog packs of eight or nine animals roaming, forag­ing, threatening. Suffice to say, the park and its environs continue to live up to a grim reputa­tion (Google Humboldt Park shooting).

I was convicted 12 years ago that we had messed up Jesus’ idea of believer’s baptism. We have privatized what Jesus meant to be public domain. We know baptism is to be the public declaration of Jesus’ lordship and attachment to His local body, but in reality we’ve taken the route of convenience. We schedule baptism in hidden, walled, sequestered pools, often in front of the smallest audience of the week. At any rate, I concluded that we were not maxi­mizing water baptism by making it as public as possible. I thought it would be great to take baptism to the Humboldt Park Lagoon. I’m always looking for ways to get out of the church building walls anyway. What church activity needs to be in public more than baptism?

Decades ago, the lagoon was refitted to make it an urban beach. A sorry beach it is, I have to tell you. Nonetheless, it gives us a great place to bear witness to the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ in the lives of trans­formed urbanites. A gentle hillside overlooks the brown puddle. Between the bottom of the hill and the edge of the water is a huge weep­ing willow tree. The crowd seated on the slope looks across the lagoon at the dramatic down­town Chicago skyline. It’s an unbelievable set­ting. A beautiful blend of nature and man’s ingenuity.

The last Sunday in August, we take Sunday Nite Live 10 blocks straight south to our local Jordan River! A few years back we started notic­ing that every time we were there, not too far away a large crowd of a couple hundred urban rowdies was gathered. Come to find out, it was the annual picnic of one of the local street gangs. This, along with ball games, picnickers, strollers, always a few winos, is what surrounds us as we praise, preach, testify, and baptize.

One of our first candidates was a young man who grew up just a couple blocks from the park. He is now a regional director for FEMA. Our custom is to have people give their testimony of faith in Christ before they are baptized. A couple of years ago a young lady stepped to the mic and said, “Last year when you were here for this service I was right over there, hiding behind that tree. I had been at Armitage as a child and professed Christ as Savior, but strayed. A year ago tonight, you surprised me when you came for the baptism because you caught me drunk in the park.” Moments later we immersed her in the murky water.

Another year, two of those being bap­tized were the daughter of a Korean doctor and a young Puerto Rican girl whose dad aban­doned her. Then there’s the Polish girl one of our people met in the subway and brought to Christ. There was the gangbanger who had been in prison for a double murder. I remem­ber the older gentleman who was won by the aforementioned Korean doctor. When the doc­tor found him in his nursing home bed, he couldn’t get out of bed. After sharing a powerful story of Christ’s saving healing power, this new­born oldster walked to the lagoon’s edge and into the water. Or there’s the American Indian, a slave of alcohol so long, who stood looking at his children on the shore. They surely never thought their dad would change. But Christ…. An African-American TV news reporter who came to do a story at Armitage got saved, and became one of the station’s news anchors, came up out of the waters dripping and smiling.

So this is one of the highlights of our year. We get to baptize some of our disciples under a summer sky, against the backdrop of a world-class skyline, surrounded by real estate from which blood cries out.

To date, without the help of police, we have lifted almost 100 bodies out of Humboldt Park Lagoon. Live ones. Regenerated. Deliv­ered. Transformed. “…buried with Him…raised to walk in newness of life.”

by Keith Bassham

About this time 60 years ago, preachers and church members were planning to take a trip to Springfield to celebrate the opening day of Baptist Bible College. For those excited founders, the World War II surplus barracks and the borrowed space at High Street Baptist Church represented a summer of prayer, work, giving, and sweating.

The practice of coming together on such an occasion was customary in the fellowship they had left. In fact, those forming the new fellowship were not radicals, and they wanted something like the older one. They wanted a loose network, where no single preach­er or group of preachers or churches would exercise control over the others. Each local church was autonomous and each pastor had a voice in the affairs of the Fellowship. For that matter, they believed this whole fellowship business would be voluntary and participative. You joined simply by participating and agreeing with the others on what came to be known as the 20 Articles of Faith,

There were between a dozen and 20 adult missionaries, de­pending on how you count, in about a half dozen places, and they had purchased a piece of property in Springfield, Missouri, for a college. One short and tumultuous decade later, college enrollment had grown from a little over 107 to 565. The missionary force had swelled to 169 missionaries serving on 17 fields, and in 1959, the BBF Mission Office processed three quarters of a million dollars for those missionaries, an unbelievable amount in those days.

But in September 1960, the Fellowship was in a conflict over church autonomy, though at the time they were not aware that was the true issue. Specifically, some preachers had come to the position that we should require of our national officers something beyond what is spelled out in the 20 Articles of Faith. In other words, they wanted more rules based on applications of specific doctrines. The subject was debated and studied over a year’s time, and the pastors came to an important conclusion. They believed that by adding more rules, even if the rules applied only to the officers, those of­ficers were pastors of churches, and thus the new rules would affect churches as well. Very wisely, in September 1960, the gentlemen rejected additional rules, the 20 Articles remained as they were, and the requirements for officers were left alone. In the process though, the Constitution and Bylaws for the Fellowship were redrafted, and in particular this statement was added:

ARTICLE IX – RELATIONSHIP TO CHURCHES

All New Testament Churches are autonomous and self-governing; therefore, no article in this Constitution or By-Laws shall ever be interpreted in any way as to infringe upon or jeopardize the absolute sovereignty of any local church. The property rights, the missionary policies, and the practical procedures for autonomous, self-governing churches shall never be endangered in any way by the Baptist Bible Fellowship International, its agencies or subsidiaries.

For a thorough analysis of this important chapter in Fellowship history, see the article “The BBFI Philosophy of Fellowship” by Mike Randall on the web at http://bbfi.org/philosophy.htm.

by Mark Hodges

Expect great things; attempt great things” was stated by Wil­liam Carey in a sermon to the Baptist Association meeting in Northampton, England, May 30, 1792. Carey used the statement to urge his Baptist colleagues to enter the missionary enterprise.

For 60 years the Baptist Bible Fellowship has been in the busi­ness of carrying out the Great Commission. We are known world­wide for our church-planting thrust and sending missionaries to for­eign lands. We are a movement of pastors who have seen the need of uniting together to do something great for God.

In recent days, we, as well as other independent Baptist groups and the SBC, have faced some difficulties. We were warned “that in the last days perilous times shall come” (2 Timothy 3:1). Yet difficul­ties should never be a deterrent to this Fellowship moving forward and witnessing some of our greatest days in the future.

The BBFI is known as the premier independent Baptist foreign mission organization. We assist local churches in getting their mis­sionaries to the field. Under the leadership of Jon Konnerup, our future is very bright, but missionary prospects are a must for future growth and success.

In a relatively short period of time, the BBFI has become known for its church planting organization, the National Church Plant­ing Office. We assist local churches in getting the information and finances to young men who are called to start churches. NCPO Director Wayne Guinn has done a marvelous job in establishing the office. Yet, new church planters are imperative for future growth and success.

God has used Keith Bassham and our Baptist Bible Tribune in promoting God’s work through these organizations.

The Lord is coming back soon and it is my vision to see inde­pendent Baptists uniting together to do something BIG for God. I’ve spoken with two presidents of colleges who are not currently Fellow­ship schools. They have a desire to unite with us in our church plant­ing and mission endeavors. The BBFI has the tools to unite all of us together in carrying out the Great Commission in a greater manner.

In the past, independent Baptists have been known for their divisions and it’s high time that we show the world we can unite for the common goal of reaching this world for Christ.

I am thankful for the opportunity to have served as president of the BBFI. God has blessed us with a wonderful history and I believe that God can use us in the future. We will recognize our past Tribune editors and mission directors at the September meeting in Chicago. I will present a plan in our business meeting to show how we can revi­talize and expand our Fellowship.

“Expect great things; attempt great things.”

by Steve Bender

Although this may sound trite to some, we Christians are here on earth for just a little while. With this in mind, what we do in this life, be it leading people to Jesus and then helping them mature spiritually or building buildings where believers can be taught God’s Word and worship Him, does not come without a cost. Baptist Bible Fellowship International missionaries have always counted the cost of leaving mother, father, children, grandchildren, and their home country to fulfill His command and take the message of God’s love to our world.

The Missionary Projects Offering or MPO — a program to aid missionaries and their local congregations in buying property, build­ing church buildings, and to help buy homes in which missionaries live as they minister in their fields — was established several years ago. Each year the Mission Office mails a brochure to all financially contributing churches detailing the missionary projects for church buildings or homes. Beginning in late May, the Mission Office works with the National Directors in presenting the MPO to pastors and asking them to lead their churches to invest in this offering that cul­minates at the September BBFI National Fellowship Meeting. Over the course of each summer, the Mission Office directors travel to as many state and local Fellowship meetings as possible to explain in detail the MPO’s workings and its benefit to the missionaries and for­eign churches. This past year, the MPO helped financially complete nine church buildings and five missionary homes in countries abroad.

Pastors and other donors are asked to look through the MPO brochure and find missionaries they already partner with in prayer and financial support or to find a project they feel led to support and send their financial investment designated and clearly marked with that project number to the BBFI Mission Office. Like every financial gift given through the Mission Office, 100 percent will be deposited to the missionary or project to which it is designated.

Often, pastors will lead their congregations to make a sizable financial commitment to a particular project either all at once or over the course of the year. Some churches make commitments of several thousand dollars per year and, each month when they send the funds, they designate them to a different project, thus investing in the min­istries of many different missionaries.

The MPO is a success due to the combined efforts of the mission­aries involved, the BBFI Mission Office, state-elected officers, and pastors of local churches who convey this vision to the members who pray and contribute financially to see this great work accomplished. Together, let’s continue to build with eternity in mind and make this September’s commitment one that will have significant impact.

For more information concerning the MPO or to request a copy of this year’s brochure, contact Steve Bender at the BBF Mission Office (PO Box 191, Springfield, MO 65801, (417) 862-5001, www.bbfimissions.com).

by Wayne Guinn

It’s been exciting to work with the Iowa state fellowship and their refocus on church planting. Vernell Lott, who recently complet­ed the NCPO Church Planting School, is birthing a church in Des Moines. This is Iowa’s first attempt to plant a church in Des Moines’ black community. We have also co-sponsored a restart of Bethel Bap­tist Church in Carroll, Iowa, under the leadership of Pastor Randy Abell and the state fellowship. That work is progressing very well and we look forward to featuring this work in a future article.

Randy Abell, who oversees church planting for the state fellow­ship and whose church is a 2004 church plant of the Iowa Fellowship, writes:

While the Iowa BBF has around a dozen participating pastors, it is a good example of how a state can pick up the pieces from past prob­lems and begin to get something done for Christ. The Iowa BBF, like many other states, encountered problems around 10 years ago, losing many of their participating churches and causing a vacuum both in leadership, finances, and direction in planting more churches.

But those pastors who remained determined to reorganize, refit, and refinance their efforts are seeing the fruit of that now. They have been part of six church plants over the last six years, with five of the six doing well. They’ve helped church plants in Spencer, Urbandale, Oma­ha (Nebraska), and two in Des Moines. They also have given assis­tance to smaller churches that are struggling in their state, either due to the economy or to the lack of pastoral leadership. Partnering with the NCPO has been an added strength in accomplishing our goals.

Over the last decade, each of the last three state chairman, Phil Griffith (Ottumwa), Mark Carter (Des Moines), and Ed Matthews (Ottumwa), have worked hard to reorganize the state fellowship to make it the spiritually-healthy organization that it is today. They rewrote their constitution to give more flexibility in decisions, they send out a monthly informative newsletter to over 100 churches in the area, and they have raised and organized their finances to be able to help when needed and to finance church planters.

The state of Iowa has many cities and towns in desperate need of a Baptist church, and the Iowa BBF would love to hear from you! Please visit IowaBBF.org and may God bless the Baptist Bible Fellowship!

by Tom Wagoner

I am writing this note upon returning from the Texas Baptist Bible Fellowship gathering that combined with the NCPO for a train­ing school. The theme was “Revival, Prayer, and Motivation.” At the meeting, the heartbeat of everything was revival. Pastor Rick Carter had been praying and leading his people and that state to fasting and prayer in preparation for our meeting.

I received an email from a pastor that reflected the heart of so many that were at the altars each service asking God to forgive them and confessing sin. I was reminded of the scripture that we could quote forward and backward, “If we confess our sin, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sin and to cleanse us from all unrighteous­ness” (1 John 1:9). We have to believe that. We have to be willing to confess our sin. James 5:16 says, “Confess your faults one to another and pray one for another that you may be healed.”

The thing that hinders revival most is our pride and our unwill­ingness to confess our sins before God. At some point, we began to believe that leadership somehow has to project a depth of spiritual­ity beyond where our people are. I think they are waiting for us to genuinely confess our sins and repent and I think that they will fol­low us in that as they follow us in everything else. One young pastor wrote, “I want revival and I am willing to pay the price.” He listed sins in his correspondence to me that I believe are a reflection of what he is confessing before God, others, and even in his church. God help us to be men who are honest enough to allow the Lord to “tear open our hearts” (Joel 2:13) and reveal what is inside so that we might have revival.

In every revival in history, there was a heavy emphasis upon the confession of sins and then repentance — first in leadership and then in the laity. It seems very interesting to me that when a mes­sage is preached on repentance in our Fellowship or in our churches, the people who respond appear to be the most godly. The other day I was reading a story of Bertha Smith, a spirit-filled missionary of the Southern Baptists for many years. Evangelist Bill Stafford tells the story of 98-year-old Bertha who was sitting in a revival service where he was preaching on repentance and confession, and among the first at the altar was that godly, bold missionary who was well known for her power, her fullness, and the fruit of the spirit in her life.

I believe someone is reading this article right now that needs to bow at this moment and begin to ask God to reveal sin in his or her life. If our hearts are torn open, God can and will reveal areas of defi­ciency, need, or sin in our lives. I am doing it right now. I hope that you will join me. Let’s together confess our sins and repent.