On September 28, 2022, Hurricane Ian slammed the coast of Southwest Florida with a fury not seen in nearly a century. In the immediate aftermath, our county sheriff’s office reported hundreds of fatalities from the storm. Fortunately, those numbers were not confirmed, although currently, the death toll has risen to 60 in my county and 100 in other areas. Property damage has been conservatively estimated to be in the tens of billions of dollars.
Due to a late jag to the southeast, the storm came right over my city of Cape Coral and the barrier islands to the west of us, Pine Island and Sanibel. Both the church I serve (Grace Baptist), and Founders Ministries were significantly affected. Some Grace members suffered significant loss. Nearly all suffered some loss. Businesses have been destroyed, homes devastated, families displaced, schools closed, and hospitals rendered inoperable.
I have lived through several serious storms during my 36 years in Cape Coral, including the last direct hit, Hurricane Charley, in 2004. Ian’s impact exceeds them all by far. In God’s providence, Donna and I were out of town when the hurricane landed. By his providence, the kindness of Delta Airlines, and the help of a good friend, we were able to get back to Cape Coral September 30. What I experienced in watching the storm from afar and seeing the aftermath up close has taught me several lessons.
Lessons About Grace
It is impossible not to see God’s grace in the storm. I write that fully aware of the deep grief that many are experiencing because of what they have suffered. Yet, grace is on display everywhere. From tens of thousands of linemen from across the country who staged just outside the storm’s path and deployed as soon as possible to get electrical services back online to trauma surgeons on standby to assist in medical emergencies, help has been extended to the people of SW Florida from all over.
There are dozens of examples of specific ways that I have seen God’s grace displayed in and after the storm. A few of them will suffice to make the point.
Within hours of the storm’s impact, I started receiving texts, phone calls, and emails from family, friends, and strangers with offers to help with relief and recovery work. Churches and individuals gathered food, water, and other supplies and sent them to us. Financial gifts were sent not only from people we know but from those we have never met. This outpouring of generosity enabled our church to distribute supplies to people in our community who were devastated by Ian. In addition to this, through the tireless work of Southern Baptist Disaster Relief and the Red Cross, we were able to provide hot meals to people for several days. Some of the recipients wept with gratitude.
Under the leadership of the deacons and elders, the members of Grace have poured themselves out in serving one another and our larger community. I long ago lost count of the number of houses that have had roofs tarped, drywall cut, mud raked out, and other repairs done by willing volunteers.
Speaking of volunteers, I must mention the teams of workers that have come to help us with such work. Men and women, including young people, have traveled hundreds of miles with a willingness to do whatever they can to help. Through a previous connection with our church, Sheepdog Impact Assistance staged in our facilities and was still at work serving our community nearly a month after the storm.
In addition to these more visible and obvious displays, God’s grace has been steadily at work in more covert, “behind-the-scenes” ways. Homes have been opened to those who have been displaced from their own homes. Meals have been shared and practical hospitality has been multiplied. Counsel, personal encouragement, and prayer have been readily and effectively offered by those who themselves are dealing with difficult challenges left in Ian’s wake.
Lessons About Sin
While the displays of God’s grace in acts of kindness and generosity can be traced to His saving work in Jesus Christ as well as to the fact that even unbelievers bear the image of God, Hurricane Ian has also provided opportunities to learn more personally the truth of the Bible’s teaching about sin. The world, obviously, is not the way that it is supposed to be—not the way it was originally designed to be and one day will be. Hurricanes, tornados, and floods are all part of what the Apostle Paul calls the “groaning” of creation as it awaits release from being made “subject to futility” (Romans 8:18-23). There will be no hurricanes in the new heavens and new earth.
Nor will there be looters or liars. Immediately after Ian’s winds subsided, some people began to ransack what was left of local businesses. Fortunately, both Governor DeSantis and our local sheriff publicly declared such wickedness unacceptable and warned looters that engaging in such activity could, and in some cases, likely would—result in death. From indications that I received, that message spread quickly among opportunistic thieves and most businesses did not suffer much loss from looting.
People who lost their homes on the barrier islands (which were hit the hardest) did not fare so well. Due to bridges being washed out to Pine Island (near our church) and Sanibel, the only access in the immediate aftermath was by boat or helicopter. The latter almost exclusively was limited to government officials or local news crews. Stories abounded of thieves in boats surreptitiously invading the islands, rifling through the remains of families’ possessions, and spiriting off with their stolen booty. It is a tragic display of Romans 3:10-18.
We saw similar, albeit less flagrant, expressions of human depravity in the conduct of some who received direct help from our church. Because of the generosity of so many from around the nation, our church quickly became a distribution point for much-needed basic supplies in our community. Most of those who came for help were deeply appreciative. Some had to be persuaded to take more than they originally planned to take (fresh water doesn’t last as long as you might think in Southwest Florida heat).
But others expressed frustration as if they had been mistreated when they weren’t given more or when supplies ran out. The creativity of depravity was also on display as various schemes were employed to get double, triple, and quadruple supplies. This occasionally resulted in tensions (“The greedy stir up conflict,” Proverbs 28:25) that had to be resolved by the wisdom that comes from above.
Lessons About Government
The last few years I have given more attention to the role of government in God’s world. There are a few reasons for this, not the least of which include the response to the Covid pandemic, the Black Lives Matter riots, and my study of Romans 13:1-7 as part of my regular exposition of that letter in our Sunday morning worship times at Grace.
Every thinking American Christian recognizes displays of failed government leaders and policies that are currently all around us in this nation. From President Biden’s promise to make abortion-on-demand the law of the land if Democrats control the legislature to the Supreme Court decision that undermines the institution of marriage and defies that God who instituted it, wickedness and corruption are evident in the halls of government. Examples could be easily multiplied.
So it has been refreshing to see government work in positive ways—ways that God intends and the Bible prescribes. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has done an exemplary job in marshaling resources for and giving help and encouragement to the parts of the state that were ravaged by the hurricane. Under his leadership, over 40,000 electrical linemen were staged just outside of the storm’s path and deployed as soon as possible to begin rebuilding electrical infrastructures and restoring power for over 2.5 million people. He also cut through governmental red tape when federal officials said that it would be “months” before bridges to the barrier islands could be rebuilt. He helped unite efforts to get two bridges built in 14 days. I told one of his staff that the governor is a poster-boy for what the Bible means in Romans 13:4 when it says that the civil magistrate “is God’s servant for your good.”
I attended a town hall sponsored by my congressman, Byron Donalds, and was greatly encouraged by the practical help both he and Cape Coral Mayor, John Gunter, were providing in their official capacities to serve our city. Everything from expedited trash collection to Federal Emergency Management Agency resources was quickly made available to residents of Lee County and Cape Coral.
As I have reflected on these lessons, I am reminded that a stable government, kind and generous neighbors, and churches uniting to serve devastated communities are blessings that God has showered on our nation, state, and community. I have been to other nations in the wake of natural disasters. The contrast between those places and people who have benefitted from the blessings that flow from biblical truth and those places and people where that truth has never been known or has been forgotten is stark. Today, in America, even with the manifest wickedness in many of our cultural, economic, educational, and political institutions, we still have much for which to be thankful. There are still blessings of common grace that flow through and to those who hate the very God who is their source.
Hurricane Ian did not make that so. But it has certainly made it evident.

Tweet Share

On behalf of Dr. Tom Ascol regarding the situation in SWFL and the impact of Hurricane Ian: 
The Founders team is so thankful for everyone who has been praying for us and our community in Southwest Florida during Hurricane Ian. By the grace of God, all of our team made it through the storm safely and we are praising Him for His goodness. But the damage and devastation in our area is immense. For that reason, all operations of Founders Ministries are fully suspended until further notice. 
We are not yet able to fully assess the damages at our offices and property. Thank you to all those who support and pray for us at Founders. Please continue to pray for us in the days and months ahead. We are going to be a part of a massive long term relief project in Southwest Florida. We will get back online and operating as soon as we are able, but at this time, there is no indication of when that may be. 
Many of you have asked how you can send donations to assist in relief. We are not in a position to set up a specific way to give right now. We are directing people to give through Grace Baptist Church online. Under the oversight of the Grace elders & deacons, they will steward those donations and insure that they are used in the best way to serve the needs of SWFL. If you do decide to make a donation through Founders specifically for Hurricane relief, please make sure to note that appropriately in the donation. Anything that you can do to help us spread this information would be wonderful.
As far as supplies, they can be sent to Grace Baptist Church (1303 Ceitus Terrace, Cape Coral, FL 33991). Immediate needs would be roofing supplies (tarps), canned / non perishable food, water, fuel, baby supplies (diapers, wipes, formula) and monetary donations. Each day it becomes more clear that this recovery will be massive and the rebuilding will take years. 
Thanks be to God for His goodness and the way He has blessed us, even in these hard and dark days. Please pray that He would continue to sustain us in the long road of ahead and that He would use this tragic event to display His glory in SWFL.

Tweet Share

Henry David Thoreau was an eccentric 19th century American author, philosopher, and naturalist. He spent 2 years, 2 months and 2 days living in a small cabin he built himself outside of Concord, Massachusetts. He chronicles his reflections during that experience in his 1854 book, Walden. He explains the rationale for his exile in the wilderness in the following words.

I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived. I did not wish to live what was not life, living is so dear; nor did I wish to practice resignation, unless it was quite necessary. I wanted to live deep and suck out all the marrow of life, to live so sturdily and Spartan-like as to put to rout all that was not life, to cut a broad swath and shave close, to drive life into a corner, and reduce it to its lowest terms, and, if it proved to be mean, why then to get the whole and genuine meanness of it, and publish its meanness to the world; or if it were sublime, to know it by experience, and be able to give a true account of it in my next excursion.

Thoreau commendably wanted to live life to the fullest, to experience its richness at its deepest levels so that when he died, he could die without regret. Eight years after publishing Walden, on May 6, 1862, after a lingering case of tuberculosis, he did die. While on his deathbed, his Aunt Louisa asked him if he had made his peace with God. Thoreau’s response was, “I did not know we had ever quarreled.”
Those words, no doubt spoken in sincerity, reflect the kind of willful ignorance that has tragically plagued mankind since our first parents turned away from our Creator. I call it “ignorance” because it reflects a lack of knowledge about the way things actually are.
The Bible teaches us that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 6:23) and that because of sin we are all “by nature children of wrath” (Ephesians 2:3), that is the wrath of God. The Apostle Paul says that we are all naturally “enemies of God” (Romans 5:10).
That is undeniably the way that life is now. But it is not the way it was in the beginning. Originally, God made Adam and Eve “upright” (Ecclesiastes 7:29) and enjoyed perfect fellowship with them. Sin caused them to be separated from Him and at odds with Him. Failure to acknowledge that is to be ill-informed. It is ignorance.
Such ignorance is willful because, as Romans 1:18-20 says, “the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.”
So yes, we all have quarreled with God—including those who, like Thoreau, are willfully ignorant of it. Sin has placed everyone in jeopardy and exposes us all to His wrath. The result is that, left to ourselves we cannot ever have peace with God.
But the good news that is revealed to us in the Bible is that God has not left us to ourselves. On the contrary, in our weakness and helplessness, He has come to us. Through His Son, Jesus Christ, He has provided salvation for us—a way for us to be restored to Him; to have our sin forgiven and to experience genuine peace with God.
Because of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, God now reconciles to Himself all who turn from sin and trust in Jesus as Lord.
That truth is what empowered the Apostle Paul to live the way that He did as a minister of Jesus Christ. And that truth is the very foundation of His church throughout the ages. It is what Christians live for; what we stand for. It is the one message that we have that we must declare to men, women, boys and girls today: “in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself” (2 Corinthians 5:19).

Follow Tom Ascol:

Henry David Thoreau was an eccentric 19th century American author, philosopher, and naturalist. He spent 2 years, 2 months and 2 days living in a small cabin he built himself outside of Concord, Massachusetts. He chronicles his reflections during that experience in his 1854 book, Walden. He explains the rationale for his exile in the wilderness in the following words.

I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived. I did not wish to live what was not life, living is so dear; nor did I wish to practice resignation, unless it was quite necessary. I wanted to live deep and suck out all the marrow of life, to live so sturdily and Spartan-like as to put to rout all that was not life, to cut a broad swath and shave close, to drive life into a corner, and reduce it to its lowest terms, and, if it proved to be mean, why then to get the whole and genuine meanness of it, and publish its meanness to the world; or if it were sublime, to know it by experience, and be able to give a true account of it in my next excursion.

Thoreau commendably wanted to live life to the fullest, to experience its richness at its deepest levels so that when he died, he could die without regret. Eight years after publishing Walden, on May 6, 1862, after a lingering case of tuberculosis, he did die. While on his deathbed, his Aunt Louisa asked him if he had made his peace with God. Thoreau’s response was, “I did not know we had ever quarreled.”
Those words, no doubt spoken in sincerity, reflect the kind of willful ignorance that has tragically plagued mankind since our first parents turned away from our Creator. I call it “ignorance” because it reflects a lack of knowledge about the way things actually are.
The Bible teaches us that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 6:23) and that because of sin we are all “by nature children of wrath” (Ephesians 2:3), that is the wrath of God. The Apostle Paul says that we are all naturally “enemies of God” (Romans 5:10).
That is undeniably the way that life is now. But it is not the way it was in the beginning. Originally, God made Adam and Eve “upright” (Ecclesiastes 7:29) and enjoyed perfect fellowship with them. Sin caused them to be separated from Him and at odds with Him. Failure to acknowledge that is to be ill-informed. It is ignorance.
Such ignorance is willful because, as Romans 1:18-20 says, “the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.”
So yes, we all have quarreled with God—including those who, like Thoreau, are willfully ignorant of it. Sin has placed everyone in jeopardy and exposes us all to His wrath. The result is that, left to ourselves we cannot ever have peace with God.
But the good news that is revealed to us in the Bible is that God has not left us to ourselves. On the contrary, in our weakness and helplessness, He has come to us. Through His Son, Jesus Christ, He has provided salvation for us—a way for us to be restored to Him; to have our sin forgiven and to experience genuine peace with God.
Because of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, God now reconciles to Himself all who turn from sin and trust in Jesus as Lord.
That truth is what empowered the Apostle Paul to live the way that He did as a minister of Jesus Christ. And that truth is the very foundation of His church throughout the ages. It is what Christians live for; what we stand for. It is the one message that we have that we must declare to men, women, boys and girls today: “in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself” (2 Corinthians 5:19).

Follow Tom Ascol:

Tweet Share

Last week our friends over at CrossPolitic (CP) posted a couple of podcast episodes that understandably offended large numbers of Christians who take God’s Word seriously. They did it in the name of “rowdy Presbyterianism,” serrated edge communication, and even brotherly love. Their original failure was bad enough. But their multiple follow-up defenses of their antics suggest that their mischaracterization of Baptists might be a feature, not a bug.
For the uninformed or slightly informed, what they tried to say is that the rampant individualism that permeates much of the Baptist and evangelical world can pave the way for transgenderism in America. But what they actually said is that Baptist theology “is the cause of” transgenderism. If you want to get up to speed you can go here to see the original source of the lingering stench they created when they intentionally stomped on some cow pies and then continued to track their mess throughout the reformed evangelical house. What they should have done once friends began to complain about the stink and collectively point to the source, was stop, remove their shoes, and start cleaning up the mess they made. That would have been both right and wise.
After all, that’s how Christians live, right? We are both believers and repenters. When the Corinthians became convinced by Paul’s rebuke that they had stepped in it what did they do? They grieved in a godly manner and repented and Paul commended them for it. “For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret, whereas worldly grief produces death. For see what earnestness this godly grief has produced in you, but also what eagerness to clear yourselves, what indignation, what fear, what longing, what zeal, what punishment! At every point you have proved yourselves innocent in the matter” (2 Corinthians 7:10-11).
Some may not judge what the CP men did as sin that needs to be repented of. Others understandably see the accusation as slanderous. In the spirit of 1 Corinthians 4:13, I would like to entreat my brothers to own what they have broadcast on their show and recant. Even if they cannot be convinced of sin, I hope they will at the very least realize that their words and actions have certainly catapulted way beyond the walls of wisdom and deep into the fields of foolishness. Either way, what was said should have been simply and plainly renounced.
Instead, they doubled down. “What stink? Let me explain to you why the sights and smells that you find problematic are really due to your hyper-sensitivity and not the poop on our shoes.” That basic thesis has been defended first by a follow-up podcast episode and then three (so far) written essays, not to mention various social media comments. The common theme in each is, “Hey, we didn’t do anything wrong. Why are your knickers in a knot?”
What They Actually Said
Gabe Rench has rightly appealed to people to “deal fairly with what we said.” I intend to do just that because burning straw men serves only to pollute the relational environment and is beneath the kind of good-faith engagement that should mark disagreements among Christians. Of course, the same is true about defending straw men when real men have actually been critiqued. More on that later.
In a CP show called, “From Slavery to Abortion to Transgenderism—The Church Led us to the Trans Movement,” David Shannon, Gabe Rench, and Jared Longshore were joined with video-guest, Jason Farley. Farley explained the rising transgenderism with its attendant mutilation of bodies with this statement (at 14:15): “This is just American Baptist Theology secularized.” At the end of that show, Shannon encouraged viewers to join the Fight, Laugh, Feast Club so that they could hear the rest of the conversation that would take place with Farley “Backstage.” Both of those shows are helpfully embedded in Gabe Rench’s article here.
Burning straw men serves only to pollute the relational environment and is beneath the kind of good-faith engagement that should mark disagreements among Christians.
That “Backstage” episode is entitled, “The Failure of Baptist Theology,” which precisely indicates that for which they actually argue during the next 27 minutes. That conversation, which continued without Longshore, opened with this exchange between Rench and Farley:

Rench: Let’s say I am Baptist Rench and you just said what you said.
Farley (laughing): I know. David gave me permission.
Rench: You came out and said that my view of waiting till my child is ready to confess faith in our Lord and then baptize them is, is related to the identity crisis found in transgenderism.
Farley: Yeah, I didn’t say “related to” I said, “is the cause of.”
Laughter by Knox & Rench
Rench calls that comment “a bomb” that Farley throws into the lap of faithful Baptist families, in essence saying to them, “you are the cause of the transgender problem.”
Farley: Yeah. Well, the pastor is, but yeah.

Farley goes on to talk about abortion being the church’s fault due to Christian parents because “we were the ones that started saying, “‘Not my kids,’ right?—that birth is not enough for me to say that, ‘Yes this is my kid’ because God doesn’t think in those categories. Right?”

Rench responds, “Right.”
Farely: Well, the categories that God thinks in are more real than any of the categories that I think in. So, if God looks at my kids and says,”‘Not my kids,” God is rejecting my kids before I ever do, then that’s a much deeper issue than [he does not finish his thought]. So then when the world comes along and says, “Well, look, they’re not even kids yet, right?”
Rench & Knox: Yeah
Farley: “We can kill them.” Just today, my 16 year old son who just got his driver’s license. We were driving home he was like, “Dad I was talking to my Baptist friend and I said, ‘So why aren’t you baptized yet?’ He was like, ‘Well you gotta make the choice and stuff.’ ‘Well, hurry up and do it.’ ‘Well, that’ s not really how it works, you gotta mean it and stuff.’
And he [Farley’s son] went on to say, “When your parents were adopted by God do you think that wasn’t going to include you? [Like God would say:] ‘I’ll take you but I don’t want your kids?’”
Rench: “Wow”
Farley quoting his son, who continues to speak for God: “‘I’ll be your dad but I won’t be your grandkids’ grandpa?’”
Rench: Right. Wow.

So here we have advocates of CREC theology applauding “God as grandfather” of “covenant kids.” More could be said but stop for a moment and just let it sink in a bit.
The grandfatherhood of God.
What about great-grandfatherhood? Are we to believe that when God adopts parents that He would seriously tell their grandchildren that He doesn’t want them? Does He really say, “I‘ll take you and your kids, but not your grandkids?” If yes, then why? If not, then…at what generation does the logic no longer hold?
I belabor this point for this reason: It makes clear what was actually said, affirmed, and commended by David Shannon and Gabe Rench and later defended by Toby Sumpter and Jared Longshore. You need to keep this in mind when you consider the defenses they offer when you listen to the 3rd video and read their written arguments. Because in the name of defending the points they actually made (as I’ve just documented) they actually try to defend that which they perhaps wish had been said.
What They Actually Defend
My purpose isn’t to critique every wrong thing that was said in this whole fiasco but rather to focus only on the foolish claims the CP guys made about Baptist theology and the problematic ways that they have responded to it once they were called to account. However, I do want to highlight the following comments by David Shannon. They added nothing to the purported explanation or defense of the erroneous and false accusations cited above, but they do reveal a wrong way of viewing the differences between Baptist and Presbyterian theologies (and therefore, practices).

Shannon: “I love my Baptist brothers more than they love me and I have evidence of that. I am part of a denomination, the CREC, that believes that Baptists and Presbyterians should not separate over the issue of baptism…. Every Sunday I am in communion and fellowship and membership with Baptists inside my Presbyterian church and we’re breaking bread at the table…. The way that Baptists view Presbyterians when it comes to be in relationship to them at the table in communion with them in membership in the church,… is that, ‘We’re friends but you can’t be a member of this church. You can’t have communion with us.’… Like if my children grow up and go to a Baptist church they have to be rebaptized.”

The assumption that a lower view of the importance of baptism is more loving than a higher view is unfounded. It is true that Baptist theology forbids any unbaptized person membership in the church. Of course, Presbyterian theology does the same thing—only those who have been baptized are proper candidates for membership in their churches, too. Baptists and Presbyterians are in complete agreement on this point.
Our differences are found in what constitutes baptism. Presbyterians practice paedobaptism. Baptists do not recognize that practice as legitimate baptism. We can fight (and, through the centuries, have fought) over what constitutes legitimate new covenant baptism, but we agree that only those who have been baptized can be members of our churches. There is nothing unloving to hold, following the clear teaching of the New Testament, the theological conviction that “Those who do actually profess repentance towards God, faith in, and obedience to, our Lord Jesus Christ, are the only proper subjects of this ordinance” (1689 Confession, 29.2). That means, in Baptist theology, only believers can experience biblical baptism. It has nothing to do with love but everything to do with biblical conviction. This is what causes Baptists to say that baptism is for believers alone.
Toby Sumpter doubles down on Shannon’s point a little later when he says that the practice of closed communion by a Baptist church is a “more extreme thing” than what Farley asserted about Baptist theology causing transgenderism. Both he and Shannon are confusing categories. Farley accused “Baptist theology” of causing transgenderism. A common practice for many (most?) Baptist churches for 400 years has been to fence the table against unbaptized people. The former is a scurrilous gratuitous assertion that scored points for being edgy and cool. The latter is rooted in careful exegesis of God’s Word that has resulted in deep doctrinal conviction that can be (and has been) debated. The effort to compare them and then to suggest that a long-held Baptist practice is “more extreme” than a silly assertion is a swing and a miss.
In Baptist theology, only believers can experience biblical baptism. It has nothing to do with love but everything to do with biblical conviction. This is what causes Baptists to say that baptism is for believers alone.
For what it is worth, I, a Baptist, have at times been uninvited to commune at the Lord’s Table with fellow Baptists while worshiping in their churches. By conviction, they regard the Lord’s Supper to be a local church ordinance for local church members. That is not my conviction, but I hardly find their practice offensive, unloving, or extreme. In fact, I rejoice that they actually care enough about it to take it seriously.
All this brings me back to my disappointment over the ways that the CP brothers have handled this whole unfortunate mess. Rather than deal with what was actually said, their defenses and explanations have centered on other things. For example, Shannon stated, “There are Baptist brothers who I don’t fit inside of the same box as American Baptist theological foundation system.” Gabe Rench echoed this defense in his written response to the controversy.

On our CrossPolitic show on Wednesday, my friend Jason Farley said the American Baptist theology turned-secular is why we have the trans culture that we have today (around the 14 minute mark). To be clear, I agree with Jason, and so did Knox and Pastor Toby. Also to be clear, we said the American Baptist theology, not Reformed Baptist theology. Distinctions matter, right?

Yes, distinctions do matter. Five minutes after Farley’s statement that transgenderism is “just American Baptist theology secularized” (in the original podcast) Shannon personifies the type of pushback that they anticipate that statement will evoke. Portraying Baptists who are trying to follow Christ faithfully he says,

There is a group of people that think that what they are doing—they are doing family worship, they are trying their very best, they are seeking to honor God in how they are raising their kids in every way, and saying, “We’re covenantal, we’re Baptist, but we are covenantal. Right?”

Which Baptists other than those who are Reformed would call themselves “covenantal?” It is disingenuous to suggest that Farley’s accusation was a sniper shot at “American Baptists” that excluded “Reformed Baptists” (or any other kind, for that matter) in light of Shannon’s characterization of the kind of Baptist that they are addressing. Further, the follow-up “backstage” episode during which they elaborate the charge is, as I mentioned above, entitled, “The Failure of Baptist Theology (my emphasis).” No distinctions. No qualifications. No exclusions. Just a shotgun blast with #8 shot.
On the episode that attempted to clarify their meaning (“Baptists vs Presbyterians? Christian Unity & Separation on Theological Issues”) Sumpter goes to great lengths to defend what Farley never said. After setting up his point by noting that Presbyterianism “can grow a certain kind of cancer” he remarks, “I’m a Presbyterian. I just hit myself.” For emphasis he added, “Were a bunch of Presbyterians white supremacists in the South? Yes.” Then he makes what he thinks is a valid point.

There’s really no difference in saying that and saying, “Does Baptist theology, can it grow mold? Can it grow cancer? Can it grow tumors? Can it become a corruption?” Who’s gonna say no? And, if Jason Farley says, “Hey, one of the tumors that Baptist theology can grow is radical individualism”…. James White is not even denying it; he’s saying non-confessional Baptist theology… is particularly prone to grow this kind of mold, to grow this kind of cancer. Does that lead to radical individualism… Does that turn into transgenderism? Yes.

I agree with this completely. “Who’s gonna say no?” But that is a different conversation from the one provoked by Farley’s broadside. Sumpter seems to think that Farley spoke in the subjunctive: “If Jason Farley says, ‘Hey, one of the tumors that Baptist theology can grow is radical individualism….,’” If that is what Farley had said, then no harm, no foul. Play on. But Farley spoke in the indicative. He asserted a statement as a fact. What he actually said is that the Baptist conviction of baptizing only those who confess Jesus Christ as Lord “is the cause of” transgenderism.
I wish someone would actually try to defend what he actually said and not what they might have wished he said. If the theological convictions and practices of Baptists are responsible for the transgenderism in our culture then at least try to make an argument to demonstrate it. Don’t take the worst examples of a theological position, or worse yet, a perversion of a position, highlight its deficiencies, and then claim to have made your case. If Baptist theology is the problem, then at least marshal some theological arguments.
The lack of such argumentation underscores another weakness of all the responses thus far, and that is the lack of any biblical engagement at all. I know some Presbyterians think my Baptist impulse to want actual biblical texts to undergird theological arguments and positions is a quaint type of biblicism. But if you are going to charge “Baptist theology” with failure and with causing the transgender movement in our culture, is it too much to expect at least a modicum of actual biblical exposition showing the error of that theology? If that is a request too great to bear could we at least have some proof texts cited? As I read the written responses and watched the videos it became increasingly evident that if the Bible were a virus then the CP shows and defenses would be in no danger of catching it.
If you are going to charge “Baptist theology” with failure and with causing the transgender movement in our culture, is it too much to expect at least a modicum of actual biblical exposition showing the error of that theology?
Well, much, much more could be said about the failures of the CP brothers in how they have handled the stink they have created. Rather than simply acknowledge the facts—that Jason Farley laid an egg with a slanderous statement that should be walked back—they have doubled down, tried to convince us of what we should have heard, suggested that those who find his accusation scurrilous and indefensible simply don’t know how to communicate like men, with a serrated edge, or especially like Jesus. As one young pastor friend graciously put it, these responses are “honestly close to gaslighting.”
While some might be impressed with all these moves, I, and I am guessing many others, have seen this play before. Rather than take the “L” and move forward, the typical way that most contemporary Christian organizations respond to legitimate concerns is to dismiss them as missing the point, being untoward, or having no relevance. Then the wagons are circled in hopes that the news cycle passes quickly.
Such responses always leave me cold because they are no different from those who have no Savior. Christians have no reason to resist owning our sin and failures. Our Lord was crucified and raised from the dead. We don’t have to pretend that we live sin-free lives or try to obfuscate or coverup when sin or shortcoming in our lives and ministries come to light. We can own it, repent, make things right, and move on in faith.
But that doesn’t seem to be the evangelical way anymore.
I hope better for the CP men.
After writing this I learned that both Jeff Wright and James White have responded to this fiasco. Both are worth your attention.

Follow Tom Ascol:

Tweet Share

As I have written elsewhere, we are living through a famine of sound moral reasoning in the evangelical world today. The multiple failures at this point reveal an unbiblical separation between theology and ethics. The idea that one can live rightly while believing wrongly is foolish, and while right belief does not guarantee right living at every point, theology does provide the basis for judging the rightness or wrongness of actions.  That is, when a person acts contrary to what he believes his theology provides a corrective if it is allowed to function in that way on the practical level. But when one’s theology is faulty then ethical failure tends to be an outworking of that wrong belief. Rather than provide a needed corrective to bad living, bad theology confirms it.
For example, if one holds to an antinomian view of grace in salvation, then living immorally is fortified by cavalier platitudes like “once saved, always saved” and “since where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, let’s continue in sin so that grace may abound.” Yet, if grace is rightly understood as working a change in the believer so that he pursues a life of holiness, then immoral attitudes and actions can be corrected by the sound theology of that understanding.
In many ways our evangelical forebears understood this relationship far better than we do today. As such, they can help provide some help to us sharpen our moral reasoning. One such helpful teacher from our Baptist heritage is John Dagg. He was the first Baptist theologian in the southern United States to write a systematic theology. Along with that he produced A Treatise on Church Order which he considered to be the Second Part of his Manual of Theology.
A lesser known volume that Dagg wrote is his Elements of Moral Science. The book is a rich resource in thinking and acting Christianly. Though some of the specifics may be dated, the principles Dagg teaches are timeless. One such principle is the wickedness of evil surmising. He addresses this issue in chapter 8, section 8 of his book, which is found on pages 195-197 of the 1860 edition. While we do not hear much about this topic in our day, Dagg demonstrates that sincere Christians should work hard to avoid falling into this pattern of immoral judgment.

Evil Surmising

Reputation is the opinion of the community; and since I am one of the community, my opinion concerning my neighbor, is a part of his reputation. If I think less of him than I ought, I so far do wrong to his reputation. Hence we do wrong to others, when we judge them too unfavorably; and the wrong is not confined to them, but rebounds on ourselves. The habit of judging unfavorably, hardens the heart against the social affections and sympathies, on which our happy intercourse with others greatly depends. It is directly opposed to the charity which “thinketh no evil;”1 and tends inevitably to cut us off from the sympathies and affections of others, and the approbation of heaven. “Judge not, that ye be not judged; for with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.”2
Love to our neighbor will incline us to admit his sincerity, and attribute to him no other motives than those from which he professes to act. We resent the wrong, if others ascribe to us motives which we disclaim; and we ought, therefore, to avoid such judgment of others. Some men earn a reputation for insincerity, to which they are justly entitled, and there is no necessity that we should be blind to their true character; but there is no merit in being the first to suspect the evil designs of others. Some persons pride themselves on their deep insight into human character; and when some unlovely feature, before unsuspected, has been disclosed, they are ready to exclaim, I told you so; but they do not inform us how many times they have suspected evil which never existed. They are perhaps deceived as often as the less suspicious; but if they are not, it is better to be deceived sometimes, than to cultivate in ourselves the habit of thinking evil; to keep the mind in perpetual disquiet, with the apprehension of suffering wrong from all who approach us; and to banish all confidence from the intercourse of human society. To deal with honest men as if they were rogues, is a maxim which savors of the wisdom from beneath, rather than of that which cometh from above. The peace and happiness of human society depend much on the cultivation of love and mutual confidence; and it is better that men should be surprised and shocked by occasional abuse of confidence, than that they should be perpetually prepared for it by sleepless suspicion.
Much of the strife which disturbs society, originates in evil surmising. An injurious suspicion once entertained, cannot be concealed without great difficulty. If not expressed in words, it produces a cautiousness in action, by which the other party is led to suspect and resent its existence. Mutual suspicion being engendered, a fire is kindled within, which refuses to be smothered. If you would avoid strife and rage, check the very beginnings of evil surmising.
Since the most virtuous have imperfections, it is unjust, because of one failure, to judge the whole character corrupt. Peter denied his Master; but he notwithstanding loved and honored him, and suffered martyrdom in his cause. We ought not to judge a man destitute of any particular virtue, because he fails to exercise it in some one instance; and if it should be proved that he is totally destitute of a particular virtue, we ought not thence to conclude, that he is destitute of all virtue. Even the truly pious may have a sin that does easily beset them;1 and those who have not renounced all for Christ, may, like the young ruler whom Jesus loved,2 possess traits of character worthy to be loved and admired.
We should be careful not to suffer our estimate of others to be determined by their regard for us. “Sinners love those that love them;”3 but righteous judgment is not founded on considerations so selfish. If a man. has treated me unkindly, it does not follow that he is a bad man. Unkindness to me is not worse than unkindness to any other person; and if we strike from our list of friends all who have ever treated any one amiss, we shall have few names remaining. If we detect with keen perception, and decry with bold vociferation, the faults of our enemies or opponents, while we are blind to the faults of our friends, and those of our party; we do not judge according to righteousness. We should school ourselves to estimate every man, not by his bearing toward us, but by his true character.[1]

1 1 Cor. 13:5.
2 Matt. 7:1, 2.
1 Heb. 12:1.
2 Mark 10:21.
3 Luke 6:32.

Tweet Share

One of great failures of modern evangelical Christians that has been undeniably made manifest over the last few years is the lack of moral reasoning that plagues so many of our number—even those regarded as leaders. I have commented on this and written about it in relation to racial tensions and abortion and politics. At the bottom of this deficiency, I have argued, is a failure to recognize and think deeply about the teaching of God’s Word on law and gospel. Many of our leaders have rightly encouraged us to keep “the gospel above all” but have done so in ways that suggest there is no place for the law.
One of the great needs of our day is to recover what was better understood by many of our forebears about the relationship between law and gospel. Specifically, we need to face up to the fact that the God who gave us His gospel has also given us His law and He cares as much about His law being obeyed as He does His gospel being believed. Such understanding is no threat to the gospel. On the contrary, it exalts the gospel and protects it from antinomianism on the one hand and legalism on the other. In fact, the gospel cannot be properly appreciated apart from a recognition and appreciation of the law. The very subsoil of Mount Calvary is Mount Sinai.
God loves His law by which He rules us as much as He loves His gospel by which He saves us.
This is what I mean: Without the law, there is no sin and without the knowledge of the law there can be no recognition of sin (Romans 4:15, 5:13, 7:7-8; 1 John 3:4). Without sin, there is no need for grace—specifically, the grace of God in the gospel. The gospel—the person and work of Jesus—is for sinners (Luke 5:32). What Jesus did to accomplish our salvation—living a righteous life and dying a sacrificial, atoning death—was necessary because of our violation of God’s law. When a sinner turns from sin and trusts Christ for salvation, he is credited both with the righteousness that Christ earned by His life and the payment that He made by His death.
Such a saved sinner now loves Jesus and wants to please the God who freely saved Him at such a great cost. What does that look like? As Jesus put it, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments” (John 14:15). In other words, true discipleship under the lordship of Jesus looks like a life of faith in Christ that is committed to keeping His commandments. Anything less is not biblical Christianity. It is false faith. Jesus makes this plain when He asks, “Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I tell you?” (Luke 6:46; cf. Matthew 7:21-23; 1 John 2:3-6).
God loves His law by which He rules us as much as He loves His gospel by which He saves us.
If a Christian fails to grasp this and order his life accordingly, he will not be able to see his way out of the moral morass that afflicts so many sectors of evangelicalism in our day. What J. Gresham Machen wrote about the law a century ago is as true today as it was then.

A new and more powerful proclamation of [the] law is perhaps the most pressing need of the hour; men would have little difficulty with the gospel if they had only learned the lesson of the law….So it always is; a low view of law always brings legalism in religion; a high view of law makes a man a seeker after grace. Pray God that the high view may again prevail (What is Faith, 141-42).

The only hope of being delivered from the tyranny of ever-changing, man-made standards of righteousness is to be clearly committed to and advocates of God’s one, unchanging standard as summarized in the Ten Commandments. Without this, Christian moral reasoning is lost and virtue and righteousness will be dictated by the most effective mob. But, understanding and embracing such biblical wisdom grants freedom and strength to withstand the mobs and refuse to kowtow to their demands of obeisance to their false gods and compliance to their false standards. Christians who are committed to trust God’s gospel and obey His commandments will, with joy in their hearts, pursue the path of true righteousness regardless of cost or consequence.

Follow Tom Ascol:

Tweet Share

In the providence of God, the Supreme Court’s decision on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was handed down five days after I began an exposition of Romans 13:1-7. My first sermon on that passage (which came during an ongoing study of the whole letter) involved an overview of it, outlining the argument that Paul makes and the way that he makes it. I also explained the nature of authority and the jurisdictional realms in which God has delegated His authority in His world, namely the home, the church, and the state.
My sermon after that decision focused on verse 1, which states the thesis for the whole paragraph: “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.” Because God has instituted civil governments, everyone is obligated to be submissive to them. The idea of government and governmental authorities comes from God. This is a fundamental truth that all Christians must remember as we work out our public, and especially our political, theology. We are submissive to governmental authorities because we are subject to Jesus Christ, who possesses “all authority” (Matthew 28:18).
We must remember this as we think about the Supreme Court’s recent decision (in Dobbs) to overturn the 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion in the United States. Because God has even the heart of kings in His hands (Proverbs 21:1) we know that, ultimately, that decision is His work. Since it is a work that offers some legal protection to unborn children, everyone who loves mercy and justice should unashamedly rejoice. By its ruling the current justices determined that Roe v. Wade was an unjust decision—a mistake made by an earlier iteration of the court.
No one can legitimately doubt the accuracy of this ruling. In 1973 the right to abortion was invented out of thin air and attributed to the fourteenth amendment. But any honest reader will study in vain to find the right to kill unborn babies in that amendment. Certainly, those who adopted the amendment in 1868 had no thought of it being used to justify abortion.
The idea of government and governmental authorities comes from God. This is a fundamental truth that all Christians must remember as we work out our public, and especially our political, theology.
So, praise God that on June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States reversed an unrighteous decision by overturning Roe v. Wade. It was the right decision before both the law of God—“You shall not murder”—and before the Constitution of the United States—“No State shall…deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
The United States federal government is comprised of a chief executive (the President) and representatives (Congressmen & women and Senators) who are all elected by the citizens. These elected officials are obligated to carry out their responsibilities according to the rules that are established in a written constitution.
The third branch of our federal government is the judiciary with the Supreme Court being the highest court in our land. It has the responsibility of settling questions and controversies arising under the laws of our nation. Its job is to interpret the United States Constitution and render judgments on the constitutionality of all lesser laws or actions that become the occasion of dispute.
Chiseled into the Supreme Court building in Washington DC, just above the main entrance, are the words,
EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW
That motto expresses the primary responsibility of the Supreme Court—to ensure that the citizens of the United States are granted equal justice under the laws of our land, the highest of which is the constitution itself.
By reversing Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court has properly carried out its duty to at least begin the process of restoring equal protection under the law for the most vulnerable among us—unborn babies. So, lovers of justice rejoice and should thank God for His kind provision of this decision.
We who know the Lord should especially rejoice over God’s kindness in causing those justices to make the ruling that they did. Their decision brings our nation back into a closer alignment to the governing authorities that God has appointed over us in the civil arena.
What I mean is this. The God of whom Job 12:23 says, “He makes nations great, and he destroys them; he enlarges nations, and leads them away,” the God who establishes empires and casts them down, this God—the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ—in His providence established the United States of America in such a fashion that our highest governing authority is not a person or an office, but a document. And that document—the Constitution of the United States—was recognized and submitted to by the Supreme Court when they overturned Roe v. Wade and began to recognize that unborn babies deserve equal justice under law just like every other image-bearer of God.
By reversing Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court has properly carried out its duty to at least begin the process of restoring equal protection under the law for the most vulnerable among us—unborn babies.
So, we praise God for ordaining government and for providentially establishing the government of the United States as a constitutional republic. We further praise Him that the highest court in the judicial branch of our government properly exercised their authority in making a righteous ruling by overturning the wicked ruling of Roe v. Wade.
While this does not mean that unborn babies will now be afforded equal protection under the law, it is a step in the right direction. Let’s continue to call on our civil authorities at every level and in every branch of government to exercise their God-given authority in ways that He has prescribed. And let us continue to be subject to them out of our greater submission to the King of all Kings and Lord of all lords, Jesus Christ.

Follow Tom Ascol:

Tweet Share