First Baptist Woodstock hosting a ‘John 3:16′ Conference
Mar 3rd, 2008 by Nathan White
Tom Ascol reported today that First Baptist Woodstock will be hosting a ‘John 3:16’ conference in November of this year. More details can be found at Jerry Vines’ website.
This conference specifically interests me, as I am a former member of FBCW (almost 10years), it is located just a few miles from my house, and I interact with many members and former members on a regular basis.
Dr. Ascol expresses some optimism in discussing this conference, particularly in that it is good that Southern Baptist are discussing these issues. I too, somewhat guarded, also hope with sincerity that the conference will cause people to go back and examine the scriptures regarding the issues at hand. However, giving a conference this particular title, and with the lineup scheduled as it is, it would be a stretch to say that there is going to be any serious, in-depth interaction with the scriptural text on these issues, but that is just my personal opinion. Let us hope and pray that the men and women in the pews will do their due diligence, and that the Lord would bless their study of His word –as they look to the Word of God and not simply the word of man.
But given that the conference is apparently built around the passage of John 3:16, I do hope that the speakers are honest and straightforward in their handling of the text, particularly in the following areas:
-The term ‘whosoever’ in John 3:16, and noting that it is actually a descriptive term which more precisely interpreted as ‘all the ones believing’. That is, Jesus was describing the saved by telling Nicodemus what it is they do (believe on the Son given by the Father for the remission of sins).
-That the speakers will give the text in its context, and deal with the very next few sentences, particularly verse 18 which says,
“Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.”
Verse 18 is descriptive of the one who does not believe, just as v16 is descriptive of the one who does believe. How does this parallel with verse 16? What does it mean to be ‘condemned already’? How can they be ‘condemned’ if they still have a chance to believe before they die? Wouldn’t that imply that those under condemnation would not have their sins cleansed at the cross?
-An in-depth study of the term ‘born again’; why the term is used, what it signifies, etc. Of course, it seems clear as day that one cannot ‘birth’ themselves naturally, and so it follows that one cannot ‘birth’ themselves spiritually, but these speakers have previously denied this correlation with their position.
-A ‘whole counsel of God’ examination of say, John 6 and John 10 regarding this issue, would also be in the good interest of those honestly searching for the truth.
Nevertheless, if you will be attending the conference, I would encourage you to remember a few of these things in order to verify that all the issues are properly dealt with. As a former member of FBCW of 10 years, and as one who still regularly hears Johnny Hunt preach, I have my serious reservations whether any of the points above will be mentioned even in passing, but one can certainly hope 
Let’s continue to hold our leaders to the standard of God’s Word –and the WHOLE counsel of God.
Nathan, I can also hold out hope that it will be a sunny 87 degrees outside today. Even though I’ve seen the weather forecasts; even though I’ve lived through a few winters and have learned it doesn’t work like that. I mean, yes, I suppose it’s great to be hopeful and optimistic, and to affirm that God can do anything; but He would also have us be observant enough to accurately read the times we live in.
I hope I am wrong, and Dr. Ascol’s seemingly unrestrained optimism is vindicated.
But the prediction I have about this that personally causes me to look forward happily is this: The Reformed and Calvinistic response to the conference will be lightning-fast and overwhelming.
There used to be a day when you could have an event like this one and get away with saying whatever you wanted. Those days are gone, and good riddance.
My cheerful expectation is this: the Scriptural response to whatever is said there will be nearly instantaneous, from many sides.
I encourage Calvinistic SBC bloggers to committ even today to blogging seriously about this conference during the run-up to it, through it, and after it; and to committ to doing so with the intention of seasoning their words with the greatest possible grace and humility; and to base their responses on their own diligent study of the Word of God; and to leave personalities out of the whole deal, from the get-go.
Nathan,
good thoughts on the scripture specifically.
You may or my not know that Dr. James White as a nicely exegeted post on his blog on John 3:16 here:
http://goshareyourfaith.wordpress.com/2008/03/02/john-316-freed-from-tradition/
Nathan,
I’m sure everyone saw this, but perhaps the significance isn’t apparent. There is a $115 registration fee for this event (according to Vine’s website). That kind of $$ is not an incentive for the average 30188 lamb or sheep’s attendance; it’s also a disincentive for outsiders. If you agree with this thinking, then whatreason would they have for charging this kind of $$? Perhaps only ‘church staff’ whose expenses are covered by their congregations, are the target. And why would a reformed pastor ask his congregation to pay for such slurry?
On the OTHER hand, if one pays to attend such an event, haven’t they then BOUGHT the right to speak and challenge what’s said and heard? See where that could go?
Blessings,
The Porterhouse Prince
Robert-
Ya think that Dr. White has them in his sights. Perhaps a shot across the bow, to keep them on course.
I bloggened David Allen. He kinda made me mad. I revised a response I placed at SBC Today. Wes didn\’t like the first one (deservedly so) if you want you can catch it here. You can view both the hot salsa version and right above it the saccharinized still spicy but sweeter version.
I suppose he was testing his pet theory to see how well it would sell to his homeys. I don\’t expect much that will be different. I am not very kind, so Nate, you can kill this link if you want. Ban me, if you must.
$$$
Gordan — I hear you, and agree. But maybe the Beef king has a point about the $. That is, I fear that there might not be any response at all –and that because nobody wants to pay that kind of $ for a conference in which they know they’ll disagree with. It’s like, how can we have a conference on this subject, and yet discourage the bloggers (or whomever) from providing a response to it? Makes you wonder…
BTW– lurkers should definitely check out the link Robert provided above. James White provides an excellent response to the popular traditions surrounding John 3:16. Thanks for the link, Robert.
A little off point, but I found it interesting the Midwestern Seminary’s recent fundraising letter for its newly acquired Spurgeon Library was authored by Jack Graham. I know Spurgeon belongs to more than Calvinistic Baptists, but I thought it was ironic.
Nathan,
No problem on the link. Dr. White constistiently shows himself to be a careful exegete of the word.
We’d go a long way to follow his example. I find that most arguments about what the word says are emotional rather than exegetical. They run more along the lines of “I would never love a God who only saves some!” rather than..”well, I see what you’re saying about the “pas ho pistewn” as designating a specific group, but have you thought about…?”
bob
I have often wondered what “belief” means. Do you consider it an act of the will at all? There are things that I “believe”, even if I don’t always “feel” them to be true. I guess one could consider that doubt, but I think that’s a little different.
For many Christians, I must think it entails a decision. Most of us can’t rely on whether we feel something to be true, since feelings tend to fluctuate with the wind. Being human, our emotions tend to have more power over our minds than I think we admit, and emotions are not always reliable.
However, if it an involves an act of will, one must admit that there is less than compelling evidence for that which we believe. We don’t need to believe in the existence of the sun: its existence is plain to see.
This may not make sense, but I’ve often wondered what constitutes the substance of “faith”.
James,
I think that if you read the preaching of Paul and others, faith is simply, trust in a set of facts.
The fact is that this happened:
God created everything including man.
Adam, the first man, sinned and because of that we have a sinful nature.
We are to be punished for that.
God in his amazing mercy and grace, chose some to save from that fate.
His method, was to give his Son Jesus Christ as a payment of the penalty.
His payment instead of ours.
The way to receive that payment is to repent of your sins, forsake them, and trust in this set of truths as your only hope…because it is.
And as to your second point, you seem to be saying that unless you can see it…then it’s “less than compelling” evidence….
Question: Did George Washington exist?
How do you know?
Have you ever met him?
Have you ever seen anything he’s written?
How can you possibly believe that he existed based on second hand evidence that could be tampered with and faulty?
The truth is; all history is “record” and as such; the bible is a very reliable, well preserved record. It’s historicity isn’t questioned by serious theologians, only the ones who’s aim is to discredit it at any cost.
The bible also does what no other document’s ever done…tell the future with 100% accuracy.
If you’ve never heard of the exercise; please read the post I’ve linked to, it explains the chances of just a few of the prophesies concerning Jesus Christ coming true by chance. Here is the link:
http://goshareyourfaith.wordpress.com/2008/03/02/can-jesus-divinity-be-proven-statistically/
God bless,
bob
Nathan,
If we can each raise the money, how’d you like to put together the old and current Strange Baptist Fire team for this event? We could all come down and stay with folks in the area; perhaps you and Brother Scott could work that part out, and we could go as a group and live blog the Conference. Hey, here’s an idea, perhaps we could raise money by selling T-Shirts, mugs, etc. with the Strange Baptist Fire graphic on them from Cafe Press? It’s time we put that snazzy graphic to good use. I’m sure Frank Turk, aka, Centurion, who helped us with it would help us if we asked. I could probably get James Anderson (Tblog admin) and Tom Ascol to help us promote this. Jim @ Old Truth may be willing to put up a link. Timmy and Andrew might be able to get some SBTS students to buy the stuff.
I propose:
1. We decide how many of us can commit to going if we raise enough cash to cover 1/2 to 100 percent of the money required for the Conference. $115 is steep, but $57.50 is pretty reasonable. I could do that and then pay for food and fuel for the five hour drive down from NC.
2. Allow your church or Scott’s, if they are willing, to administer the fund for us to avoid any suggestions we’re doing this as a gimmick.
3. Any money left over from what is necessary to cover the SBF people who attend should be used to help fund any other Reformed bloggers, pastors, students, etc. who also wish to attend, like a scholarship fund.
4. Set it up so that each attendee registers and pays the initial outlay, presents their receipt to the administering church and then the church reimburses them from the scholarship fund.
5. Continue selling the T-shirts, mugs, etc through December, and give the money to the Lottie Moon offering, through the administering church, in December as a means of thanking the church and using the extra cash that we may not use for evangelism/missions.
Gene,
I love it!!
Count me in with $115 to support the project. Nathan knows I’m good for it.
I have a real angst about so-called ‘men of God’ using a bully-pulpit.’ It’s time to hold them accountable.
Keep us posted.
No more milk and pablum…we want the ‘meat’of His Word.
PP
Gene,
Great idea, and I would be happy to spread the word about it all I can from my blogs, which will get about ten more people involved.
Gene,
That sounds like a good idea. I wish I had room for folks to stay with me, but I really don’t. However, I may be able to find some lodging with some brothers to save some money. I’d be willing to put up links too.
Another strategy for saving the money is to budget a certain amount every month. I imagine the only way they’d stop taking entries is to limit them. I can’t imagine they’d have enough people to fill FBC Woodstock sanctuary. If they do, that’s a lot of potential poor information being feed to thousands of people.
Mark
Would it surprise any of you that, considering the price and the unlikelihood that the mega-sanctuary/civic center will be even mostly filled, this may be a filming session to create a DVD to sell to pastors? The entry fee would defray some of the costs…
Just a thought…
PP
Gentlemen–
I always have room at my house. I have a guest room and I would insist that you stay with me.I also talked with Scott Morgan, and he is willing to house someone, but he is about 45min away from me (I’m about 10 from FBCW, so it’d be an hour to the church from his place).
I’m open to the plan, Gene, but let me think/pray more about my personal involvment. I have many friends and even family that attend FBCW, and I would not want to offend any of them by making it seem that I was looking for a fight. My interaction with Hunt over two years ago still closes doors that would otherwise be open.
Good thoughts and ideas, brothers. Let’s hold our leaders accountable, but strive to do so with love, kindness, and great respect, even if they do not return the same.
Hey Nathan,
I heard about this conference this evening. I am going to pray about going as well. I don’t know anyone at the church so I could just go, but I bet there will be conference tapes afterwards. I’d like to live blog it myself.
Hey Geoff–
I know several guys that are going, but I think I’m going to stay out of it. After my personal experience at that church and stuff, I think my attendance would cause more bitterness and anger in me than anything –so I better stay home. But let me know if you’re serious about it. I’ll hook you up with some of my friends, one of which is going to live-blog it as well (on a blog I used to be a member of, strangebaptistfire.wordpress.com).
BTW, are you going to the Michael Horton conference at Grace Presbyterian next month? I will be with a group of guys. Love to have you join us.
–
Nate
Hi,
My name is Sherri Allen, my husband is David Allen, one of the speaker’s at the John 3:16 conference. I have never seen this blog, but wanted to give a few more details about the conference to a friend. I googled John 3:16 Conference and the first place it led me was to your website. I am impressed with the heart and seriousness that you and other’s have for scripture.
However, the comment from one of the replies was hurtful to me. (Thomas Twitchell). I have been married for 30 years to my husband, a wonderful man of God, who deeply loves the Lord, and has given his heart to the study of scripture and teaching young men to preach and teach in an expository manner.
He’s one of the most down to earth and ‘real’ men that I’ve ever known, and would never intentionally be disrepectful in speaking about another person.
I felt Mr. Twitchell’s words were not Christlike and surprising that a fellow believer would not mind that being ‘out there’ for anyone to see.
I certainly know how ‘blogs’ can be, and I am sure he meant no harm..but because the public is allowed to see this, you never know who might be hurt by the words.
I am not writing to offend anyone or to defend my husband, but more to remember that no matter what our opinions, there is always another ’side’! I pray that my words will be taken as they are meant; in kindness and love!
Kindly
Sherri Allen
Hello, Mrs. Allen,
A couple of quick points.
1. I think that Mr. Twitchell acknowledges that his comments lacked a degree of requisite kindness. To ‘censor’ him, though, would be as bad as liberal political correctness;
2. If your husband (whose Godliness and general good character do not appear to have been assailed) choses to step into this ‘debate’, he (and you) should understand that this is about what is ‘true’, not what is a matter of opinion and hence the merit of the opinion as well as whose opinion is more valid. Perhaps you may have gleaned from the dialogue herein that the difference here is not ‘opinion’ but rather ‘man-centeredness’ versus ‘God-centeredness.’ 180 degrees apart. I think that a sophisticated lady (most likely) like yourself can agree that both can’t be true.
3. When a man like David accepts a role that is as exposed as this one is tonight, these comments will come and one needs to be thick skinned and their loved ones also need to understand this and avoid taking up a perceived offense.
Does this change your feelings? No. However, without justifying the offending comments, perhaps you can see the need for minimally restrictive comments; the others on the blog will ostracize those who are too far afield. Nate’s done it in the past. Finally, I read and understood the comment as 1 guy’s opinion and did not walk away thinking less of David and do not hink that a visitor to this blog entry will see it any other way. Hopefully that will edify you. FWIW (for what its worth), I’ve Googled every speaker in the conference to find their writings on the topic they’ve accepted and I think most of these young cats do the same in order to really know and comment on a speaker’s position.
Nice of you to stop by!
Blessings,
PP
Thank you for replying! I certainly meant no harm to anyone, and actually, I’ve never replied to a blog before!!
Thank you also for your words, and I do understand being thick skinned. It’ not an easy place to be, and my prayers are with families of those who take a stand for their beliefs – whatever those beliefs may be!
Take care!
I can’t see how ANYONE could be offended by anything you have stated, written or even implied, dear lady.
You take care as well!
PP
Thank you!
I found the actual website I was looking for originally. I really just wanted to know what the schedule for the conference was and when David was speaking! I had forgotten to ask him details before he left Dallas this morning!
Blogging is… a little ’scary’!
thanks again……
[...] few months back I mentioned that my former church, First Baptist Woodstock here in the metro Atlanta area, is hosting a [...]
I appreciate the grace on each side of the discussion here. Sherri, I cannot speak for others, but certainly the author of this site means no ill towards your husband as a Christian brother simply because I disagree with his doctrinal convictions. And I personally appreciate your kind tone at a place where there are some disagreements with his position on Limited Atonement.
Blogging is indeed ’scary’, and we must remember that gossip and/or slander are easily fallen into. I will certainly do my best to delete any comments that cross that line. (Also, please understand that I do not necessarily agree with all the comments at my site, as I do hope a discussion can take place where all sides get a fair hearing).
Ultimately, let’s also keep in mind that the issue here is truth, and when the issue is truth, toes will undoubtedly be stepped on as we try to cut out all rhetoric and digest the pure milk of the word.
I’ve added a new post HERE for those wishing to discuss the conference from here on. And of course, all sides of the debate are welcome, as long as they are in with an attitude of grace and kindness towards the opposition.
Mrs. Allen,
My e-mail is thomastwitchell@msn.com
Beside that I have a blog if you follow the link for my name. You’ll find that I can be kind when others are also. At the same time I follow Christ who took up whips when necessary. When your husband calls people names he certainly does intentionally disrepectfully speak about other persons. The same rule then should apply to him. If a Christian brother is not to be “out there” doing that, then why is he?
Mrs. Allen,
Interesting encounter we have here…
But one question remains; do you reject the content of the original post?
Clearly, your husband would…but on what grounds? Tradition?
The only real issue here is that now that YOU KNOW the exegetical response to John 3:16’s traditional usage (god is trying to save everyone who ever lived and whoever will live) as an offer of the gospel to everyone, and not a statement about those that believe, what are you going to do with that knowledge?
You must find a way to reject it on more solid grounds than just dismiss it out of hand, or walk away and forget, or say that what’s been asserted cannot be true…you must look at the text itself, look at the words used, the syntax…the context most of all…and make your decision based on those grounds.
I would ask you to go deeper that hurt feelings…deal with the content of this thread.
What do you say?
Good morning all!
Mr. Twitchell, please accept my apologies for saying anything on this blog, especially one that would be disrespectful to you! Was certainly not my intent.
I have never blogged before in my life! You are all men of God who study the scripture deeply as does my husband. I strive to live my life to please Him in everyway as well, and have an interesting ministry in DFW working with troops deployed to Iraq and families of military who are dealing with many emotional problems. I would covet your prayers as I minister to those who’s parents are in harm’s way, and pray as opportunities arise for me to share the gospel with the families and troops.
I feel that I walked into territory that I should not have, only because I allowed my ‘feelings’ to get in the way!
And, thank you for praying for my husband that God wil greatly use Him in his ministry. If you are ever in Dallas, we would be honored to meet you and have you for dinner in our home. I can imagine you would all enjoy the conversation!
God bless you!
Mrs. Allen,
I know that these comboxes can get cluttered and it’s easy to miss a comment but can you go back one comment and take a look at my “challenge” to you (and by extension, your husband?)
The real “meat” of this whole thread is the juxtaposition between the “traditional understanding” of John 3:16 and the “exegetical understanding” of that verse.
I’d be much more interested in hearing your (and your husband’s) thoughts on that; I think it would be beneficial to everyone.
God bless,
bob
I most certainly will pray for you and your husband as well as the the families of and the men defending our freedoms. May God grant you always an open door for the Gospel to be shared.
And thanks for calling me on my feelings. It has been a bitter time for me and my family and these issues are at the heart of why my anger spills over in what sounds like malice but is not intended to maliciously hurt. Be assured Mrs. Allen, that I bear no ill will. My desire has always been that the truth be spoken in love. Though I am pushing the second half a century and have been a believer for more than half that time, my fruit is more like turnip greens than grapes. By the grace of God, I am what I am, having been dealt the measure of faith according the Son of God. So, you know how you can pray for me, also.
Is Dallas in the Unitied States?
Mrs. Allen,
I’m saddened by the fact that you came here to uphold your husbands good name; seeking to “straighten out” some of the statements used, while at the same time your husband addresses the John 3:16 conference using misleading statements about Calvinism. Either he is ignorant of something that is very easy to research, or he’s just dishonest in trying to win his audience over…I can’t decide.
Once again I’m reminded of the difference between them reformed folk; Calvinists…and the “other guys”…honesty in representing the other side’s position to find the truth, rather than using any tactic to “win.”
My earlier comments challengng you or your husband’s understanding of John 3:16 stands…
I pray that your husband treats the scripture honestly, and fairly in an effort to find the truth.
bob
Bob–
Respectively, Mrs. Allen doesn’t speak for her husband, nor came on here to defend what he teaches. She rather defended her husband’s character (as any good wife would!), and then even apologized for her initial reaction. So I think your pressing her for a response is a little out of line. She has been nothing but kind and respectful on here, even though we have been critical of her husband, and I’d appreciate it if she was treated the same.
If you have concerns about the teaching of Mr. Allen, as admittedly, I do, then I think we should go directly to him with our questions/concerns.
Grace and peace…
Nathan,
You put it in perspective for me…I apologize to Mrs. Allen and you.
bob
Hi all,
Mr. Twitchell, Thank you for sharing from your heart… you certainly have a prayer partner in myself – we’ll pray for each other that God will use our lives to reach others! Absolutely – Dallas is in the U.S!
Sorry, I didn’t mean to ignore your comments…
Again, please accept an invitation to dinner with us sometime! (that goes for anyone)
Bob, I will certainly pass your comments to David when he returns to Dallas, – I certainly would not want to speak for him! He kinda does to a good job of speaking for himself!
And Nathan, thank you for your kind words, you have a true spirit of kindness and I pray that this blog will glorify the Lord in the words and attitudes of all! My ”bear claws” came out, as I am sure your wives would do for you all too… we wives (and mothers) just have that instinct!
Please do come see us sometime! I promise you, you would enjoy David!
Warmly in His love,