SWBTS proposed chaplain changes mind

Jimmy, sounds like you've got an axe to grind with Dr. Patterson and now with SWBTS. I know Dr. P. personally and I attended SEBTS from 1999-2001. I can't help but believe that you've probably never met the man, or if you have then you've never really gotten to know him. Dr. P. has the reputation of being a ruthless "my way or the highway" kind of guy, but nothing could be further from the truth. Dr. P. is a committed soul-winner very much in the order of G.W. Truett, W.A. Criswell, and many other godly men. He believes firmly in the exegesis and exposition of Scripture in preaching. And as for compassion, I have witnessed him weep on several occasions for missionaries and church planters across this country and all over the world. The only reason gets a reputation for being ruthless is because he will not compromise the clear truths of the Word of God. He will not tolerate a professor or anyone on his faculty who will not teach in accord with the Baptist Faith & Message, and for this he has received the most attacks. For example, such was the case with Dr. Crutchley. He wouldn't teach in accord with the BF&M, so he was asked to leave. Is this not a fair requirement seeing as how SWBTS is a SBC school? Certainly!

Simply stated, those who are most often found crying "soul freedom" and "autonomy" are usually the ones who can't stand Dr. P. because they know that he will not stand for false doctrine, no matter what flag you want to parade it under. I challenge you to get to know the man. Just watch - in 5 years, SWBTS will be just as strong as SEBTS was when he left it. God blesses faithfulness and integrity, and that's why God has blessed the ministry of Dr. P.

 

Jimmy C,
You bring up some valid points. I think it was very fortunate that Dr. Thomas withdrew. The good ol boy network still working, but just up to a point. Look for Thomas to resurface later.
WallyGator

 

Jimmy and Wally, I think you both allow your personal feelings about Dr. P and the SBC to cloud your judgment of how SWBTS is being led. I feel I stand on solid ground when I say that Crutchley was asked to leave because he would not sign off on the BF&M 2000. That info was confirmed to me by a close friend of Dr. P's who wanted to know the truth of the situation. He called Dr. P, spoke to him about it, and that is what he was told. Besides, all I need to know about Dr. Crutchley has been made known since he left SWBTS. He left a school that has now pledged itself to teach within the parameters of the BF&M 2000 and came to my neck of the woods (Carson-Newman) where he will join a religion faculty with only one self-professed inerrantist. His fellow faculty members fully support the CBF, egalitarian causes, and inter-faith efforts. Like I said, that tells me all I need to know about Dr. Crutchley.

 

Dr. Crutchely was fired from his school because he held to the 2000 BFM. He held to the preamble of the 2000 BFM and used this as his hermeneutic for interpreting the rest of the document. He was asked about this and was fired. If you'll notice, the preamble to the BFM is downplayed by the SBC. If SBC leaders have a problem with the preamble they should remove it.

No one ever accused Crutchley of holding a view different from the 2000 BFM. I never heard him teach a view contrary to the 2000 BFM.

I have strong disagreements with the president over methodology but I do believe he is a strong soul-winner and is doing what he believes to be the best for his school, his denomination, and the church. We should not let differences of opinion dictate how we perceive others, but we should not allow agreement of opinion dictate these same perceptions.

The president has not publicly limited the role of female students at his school. Unfortunately, he has not publicly assured students that he will not. I wish he would.

With regards to the pastor not excepting a position at the school ... we do not know what the situation was with him and the school.
With regards to the pastor and his church ... my information is that both sides of the issue made careless errors in judgment of perception but no ethical lapse occurred.

And I like soul competency.

 

A lady is teaching Hebrew at SWBTS.

 

This is one of the worst comments I've read around this board in a long time. You are making a poor rush to judgment and ridiculing a man who has the higest integrity and academic respectability of New Testament scholars in the SBC. Just because someone goes to teach at a school where there are differing views is not a warrant to libel them and bring caustic words against them. Dr. Crutchley is one of the kindest souls and bravest, competent biblicists out there. Thankfully he is going to an environment where he will both be heard and contribute to the process

Thankfully there are far more people who disagree with this kind of an opinion than agree. The world would be a scary place if our academic instituions were staffed with folks who believed the exact same things all the way down the line.

 

BTW I am taking Hebrew Exegetical Methods with said instructor. She is an excellent prof and approaches class and the students therein with great care and academic respect

 

PreachingJesus, I have never met one person who is a committed soul-winner and responsible scholar who could not get along with Dr. P. and teach on a faculty that he administrates. Many folks who post on here say a lot of things about Dr. P., but I happen to know the man personally and attended the school he was president of from 1999-2001. The bottom line with Dr. P. is if you love God, love people, crave scholarship, and commit to pursue said scholarship within the parameters established by Southern Baptists, then you will be a wonderful member of his faculty.

For instance, take Dr. John Sailhamer at SEBTS (professor of OT). He has some very unique ideas about the creation account of Gen. 1-2, but he has not been asked to leave just because his view of creation is different than Dr. P's. In fact, Dr. Sailhamer was added to the faculty of SEBTS during Dr. P's tenure there as President. I mention that just to say that Dr. P. is not the narrow-minded glory hog that some posters here in the Baptist Board would like to make him out to be.

While I realize that Dr. Crutchley may have accepted the position at Carson-Newman to try and bring some accountability back to the Religion Dept. of C-N, I seriously doubt that such is the case. For instance, the keynote speaker for the Fall semester Convocation Service at C-N was a man by the name of Dr. Charles Kimball (Head of Religion at Wake Forest University). Unlike anyone else posting here, I attended that chapel service and listened to Dr. Kimball bring a message on the value of inter-faith relationships in which he said that we should stay away from absolute truth claims, such as "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life" (Jn. 14:6). At the end of the lecture, I asked Dr. Kimball, "Do you believe that Christians, Muslims, Hindus, etc. are all worshiping the same God?" His reply was, "Young man, that is a complex question, and one that can't be answered with a simple yes or no." I'm sure that you may think that the views of Dr. Kimball have nothing to do with Dr. Crutchley, but consider this: Dr. Kimball had the endorsement of the Religion Dept. when he was asked to come and speak to the student body. And who is a part of that religion faculty? You guessed it...Dr. Crutchley.

Hear me out: I'm not saying that Dr. Crutchley doesn't believe in the exclusivity of salvation in Jesus Christ...that's not what I'm saying at all. What I am saying is that he left an environment where such an inclusivistic message would never be tolerated to go and join a faculty that welcomes such a message. Guilt by association is never an absolute standard of ajudication, but I think it applies in this scenario. As for the motives of his leaving, I only know what I am told by those who are close to Dr. P. Jimmy seems to indicate that Dr. Crutchley accepted the position at C-N so he can feed his family. To that I reply that there are many more ways for a man to feed his family than to join the Religion faculty of a school that has no intention of honoring any doctrinally accountable Statement of Faith.

 

A side note to PreachingJesus,

Jimmy's reply is a wonderful demonstration of what happens when an old fundy (like myself) presents specific examples to those of the more moderate persuasion. Instead of dealing with the specific examples, they often begin to move the debate to personalities, allege politics, and try to reaffirm some sort of conspiracy theory that they believe is running rampant throughout the SBC.

Jimmy,

1. Do you actually classify Dr. Dilday as a conservative?
2. If Dr. Crutchley is the fine conservative scholar that you allege he is, then why would he leave SWBTS when Dr. P's track record is that of a proven, Bible-honoring conservative? No matter what you may say or think about Crutchley, if you are going to persuade folks to your point of view on this one then the burden of proof rests upon you to answer this question - why did he leave?
3. It is apparent that you think my grevience against C-N is personal one without much merit. That really causes me to laugh since you are in Dallas and I am in Morristown, just 10 miles East of C-N's campus. I know faculty at C-N. I know the head of Church Relations at C-N. I have attended several chapels at C-N. I have dialogued for several hours with students and Student Body Presidents at C-N. About 5 of my college students from the church I pastor here in Morristown are students at C-N. I feel that I am qualified to make an intelligent and informed statement about where C-N currently stands. C-N (especially the Religion Dept.) has proven that it does not want to teach within biblical parameters on MANY issues (women in ministry, evolution, open theism, exclusive salvation in Christ, etc.). Why would a conservative man of God want to join such a faculty when it is certain that the school has no intentions of coming back to the theological right?

I challenge you to answer these questions rather than coming up with some type of moderate spin. I will try to do the same with your questions.

 

Jimmy, you are certainly correct about one thing. Coming from someone who knows very much about C-N, they were definitely interested in adding someone to the faculty who is at least perceived as a conservative. You see, right now C-N has a huge perception problem within our Tennessee Baptist Convention (one they have earned). They are perceived as becoming increasingly much more liberal (which they are). Bringing on a guy like Crutchley was nothing more than a PR move on their part, though I certainly don't pretend to accuse Crutchley of making the move simply for matters of convenience. Yet, I still have serious doubts about someone who would be "forced out" by Dr. Patterson. I know Dr. P., and he doesn't "force out" those who are committed to the Word of God and remaining within the doctrinal parameters that have been set forth by Southern Baptists in the 2000 BF&M.

 

I've always had a huge problem with Christians firing Christians. It seems others do as well. For instance, any time one mentions that person A was fired by person B one immediately gets denials. "No way. Who told you that? That's a lie." When one provides proof of the firing, the person says, "Well, person A probably deserved it." And when it comes to seminary professors the reason they deserved it is usually that they hold to some form of "heterodox." Yes, I think the gut reaction of many is denial, then explanation. I remember the letter sent to students from a certain seminary that stated if the school didn't receive tuition payments professors would be fired. "No!" everyone said. "That's a fake and forgery." The sheer list of SBC employees who have been fired over the past 25 years is breathtaking. How many of them have held heterodox views? Almost none. I have not heard of one but when you have so many the possibility that at least one held heterodox views can't be ignored. Yet, among Southern Baptist circles, they must all have been heretics because why else would our SBC leaders have fired them? Why indeed. Yes, on the positive side, it is good to know that most Baptists still disagree with such firings to the extent that they have to find theological reasons for it. Let us pray they never stop disagreeing.

 

I don't know how long you would make it in the pastorate with that kind of an idealism. For instance, let's say you are the Pastor of a local church and you have a staff member that is clearly pursuing some sort of sinful lifestyle. You ask the staff member to repent and get things right, but he is not willing. What are you to do then...just let him stay because we have "a huge problem with Christians firing Christians." I think I understand the spirit in which your post was written in, that being that we need to seek reconciliation with our brothers and sisters in Christ even when we do have differences. But let's not forget that we live in the real world, a world filled with sin and all sorts of perversions. Occasionally, sometimes even godly men and women fall prey to these perversions - why do you think Jesus and Paul left us clear instructions for church discipline. At the seminary level, if a man is not willing to teach/live within biblical parameters, then he needs to be fired. By firing such an erring person, we do our best to insure that the leaven stays out of the bread (cf. 1 Cor. 5).

 

Ah, walked into my trap (sorry about that). I was not talking about a sinful, unrepentful employee or an incompetent employee or an employee with heterodox beliefs. And no one has found evidence or even really accused Crutchley, Bullock, Stookey, Dilday, or Prescott of any of these. I have a problem about Christians firing Christians because A) we don't like them, or A) we want to get our own people in. That's how the world operates. That's how secular businesses operate. That's not how Christians should operate. And you just proved my point. When the scenario comes out that a believer was fired by another believer for either A or B, our first reaction (especially if we like the person doing the firing) is to deny the scenario and say the one fired must be either sinful, incompetent, or heterodox.

 

An, if there are some folks who like to take sides when it comes to someone's hiring/firing just because someone they like did the said hiring/firing, then that is shameful. That is certainly not what I have done here with Dr. P., and so I'm afraid I haven't "walked into your trap." What I have done is formed my opinion of Dr. Crutchley based on first-hand info relayed to me by a personal friend of Dr. P's and based upon what I know of Carson-Newman's Religion faculty and many of their recent actions.

This whole discussion still begs the question, "Why would Dr. C. leave SWBTS to go to an institution that has not proven that it has any interest in teaching within biblical parameters?" I know some have answered by saying that Dr. C. didn't want to play any of Patterson's politics, but don't you think that Dr. Crutchley and Dr. Patterson/the Trustees could've agreed to disagree on an issue of Christian liberty and still go about the business of pursuing quality Christian education together? The simple truth is that we don't all know what went on behind closed doors and SWBTS, and we don't need to pretend we know something about "political ranglings" and "conspiracy theories" when those are near always nothing more than urban legends. I'll choose to stick with what I've witnessed and make my judgments based on that.