Bobby Welch Gets It Wrong – Again

Yesterday, I read an article by former president of the SBC Bobby Welch in the upcoming issue of SBC Life. After having read this article, I felt that I needed a full day of thought and reflection, because it seems that our beloved convention will stoop to no level to put out articles that are inaccurate, inflammatory, and dishonoring to Christ. Florida Baptist Witness was the first to disappoint with their string of op-ed pieces after Greensboro, and now the Executive Committee of the SBC hasn’t the wisdom or the discernment to see the folly in following such adolescent behavior.

It was just a year ago when Bobby Welch took the shoddy research of Dr. Steve Lemke’s white paper called “The Future of the Southern Baptists as Evangelicals” and wrote a piece in his church’s newsletter which stated that Calvinism is detrimental to the Great Commission according to the “hard evidence” proposed by Lemke. Welch got it wrong last year, as he has clearly shown that he knows very little about evangelical Calvinists as well as the history of Southern Baptists which is fully of passionate soul-winners who are yes, Calvinists.

This year, Bobby Welch has chosen to misrepresent the issue of the alcohol resolution and throw in some unnecessary rhetoric which sounds good in a sermon I suppose but does nothing to argue his case. I have been told that when you are seeking to present an argument against an opposing view, the first thing you must do is accurately and fairly present the opposing argument as though they were saying it themselves. Then, only after having done that, does one critique that position and offer a corrective or alternative position. For the Christian, this is a moral matter, as integrity, truthfulness, and honesty should characterize our presentation of not only those who agree with us, but also those who we disagree. At this crucial point, Bobby Welch has done his worst work—a work which I would call immoral.

Bobby Welch has all the rights in the world to disagree with those on the other side of resolution number five, but he has absolutely no right to misrepresent them and lie about it. What makes this matter all the more appalling is that the Executive Committee gives him a pass and publishes his article in spite of this. What does this say about the Executive Committee? What does this say about our leaders in the SBC? And they tell me we shouldn’t criticize! For something to be as distasteful and repugnant as Welch’s article, I hasten to see whether any of the SBC leaders will step up to the plate and distance themselves from (if not denounce) Welch’s statements.

Aside from the pleas of “more, more, more”, “accelerate, accelerate, accelerate,” and “now, now, now,” Bobby Welch says that the victory was against the “theology of moderation.” Theology of moderation? What is he talking about? Welch goes on to say that those arguing against the resolution “publicly promoted the drinking of alcoholic beverages and wanted the SBC to do the same!” Four times in his article he argues that the resolution was about the use or promotion of the use of alcohol. Where he gets this I have no idea. Those in Greensboro and on the internet have argued against this resolution because we believe that when the Scripture presents two viable options, neither should be dismissed, and when the Scripture is silent on an issue, we should not make new laws and bind them on the conscience of others. It is fine if you hold to the preference and conviction of total abstinence (I personally do), but you cannot absolutize your preference and assert it on a brother who can just as biblically hold that drinking wine is NOT a sin. The issue is not the promotion of alcohol but the promotion of the sufficiency of Scripture. If you notice, the tactic of personal testimony is used (again) to stir up an emotional appeal, but there is not a Scripture text in his article anywhere.

Welch says that those against the resolution are “blinded by a theology” that encourages and promotes drinking alcoholic beverages. First, this has nothing to do with “theology.” This matter is not a doctrinal issue, though some would like to think it is. It is a social issue and a hermeneutical issue. Welch wants to spin the issue to make alcohol appear as an essential matter by talking about “theology of moderation.” Trust me, Bobby Welch, none of us against this resolution are blind to anything here, especially your empty rhetoric and shameful comments.

Such shameful comments come at the expense of taking pot shots at Wade Burleson for example, whom he calls “a pathetic joke(!)” when referring to his article about witnessing to a lady over a class of wine. In such a short article, what is surprising to me is how easily Welch can throw in comments like “blinded by theology,” “such foolishness,” and “sipping saints.” As I look back on this article, the only part that I am happy to see written is found in the title, “A Word from Our Former President.”

Our Convention needs a new attitude and new leadership, and thankfully we have received it in Dr. Frank Page. In the same SBC Life issue, our new president is leading our convention to broken hearted repentance and humility which is too far gone from recent years of triumphalistic braggadocio. Furthermore, we would do well to hear the hopes of Dr. Morris Chapman who said in his SBC Life article, “Sometimes we seem better prepared to compete than to cooperate, to boast than to be brokenhearted, to stand proudly in the synagogue than to kneel at the altar, to judge than to be judged, to call for repentance than to repent.” May God be gracious to us and give us leaders in the SBC who will not only issue a call for repentance, but also lead in doing just that.

Ultimately, the problem in SBC is not alcoholics—the problem is atheists. The endemic crisis we find ourselves is not that we have people in churches who are “sipping saints” but unregenerate sinners who don’t know God or live the life of faith but have been convinced that they are upstanding Christians. After all, they have prayed the prayer, rededicated themselves again, and have a decent track record in church attendance. But the point is, of the 16 million we tout, I am convinced that we are plagued with functional atheists where God is nowhere on their radar screen in everyday life. If our convention wants to see real change, let’s put God on display and exalt Christ. To go down this road of our former SBC leaders by polarizing our convention through politics and punditry is the fast-track to a dead-end road. After all, I would much rather have a God-besot brother in Christ who happens to drink wine in moderation than a functional atheist who doesn’t.

For a list of bloggers responding to Bobby Welch’s article, go here.