If there is anything that gets under Pastor Tim Rogers and Pastor Peter Lumpkins collective skins more than Calivinism and good theology it’s Seattle pastor Mark Driscoll. With the publication of “Real Marriage” with his wife, Grace, Driscoll has been all over news broadcasts including appearances on “The View” and “Piers Morgan Tonight.”

With all the dependability of Pacific typhoons-and twice as much wind-Plumpkins and Rodger Dodger have alternately attacked the Falwell brothers and Liberty University (Lumpkins), and Danny Akin and Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary (Rogers).

On at least three separate occasions Plumpkins has written about Driscoll’s April 2012 speaking engagement at Liberty University, always condemning the decision to have him. In his January 12, 2012 blog article he called “Real Marriage”

a book which encourages sexual hedonism

In fact, in two separate posts, Peter Lumpkins skipped the first nine chapters-over 170 pages-just to get to the “sexual hedonism.” He acts like a middle schooler who just found the Sport’s Illustrated Swimsuit Issue at the grocery store: “Articles? What articles?”
Read the rest of this entry »

If it was not for the wretched sinfulness of the whole thing, Pastor Peter Lumpkins recent blog article on “Holiness” would be delicious irony. Instead it’s a travesty of the seriousness of God’s word. On March 11, 2012, he writes:

I’m preaching a sermon today from the Old Testament entitled “Hungering for Holiness.” One particular corpus of Scripture which I find especially moving today includes the following (embolden added)>>>

Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name: bring an offering, and come before him: worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness (1 Chron 16:29)

Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name; worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness… . O worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness: fear before him, all the earth… . Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth (Psalm 29:2; 96:9; 110:3)

One is left to assume the “beauty of holiness” does not apply to Plumpkins since, on his blog, he continues to lie, deceive and distort.

His near obsession with Rick Warren’s supposed “Bridge to Mecca” yet again demonstrates his willingness to believe the worst about Christian leaders with whom he disagrees. (See my last post as an example of this typical Lumpkins behavior. https://spoutingnonsense.wordpress.com/2012/03/05/after-apology-pastor-peter-lumpkins-continues-to-attack-southern-baptist-leaders/)
Read the rest of this entry »

As noted here on February 25, 2012, Plumpkins was forced to issue a retraction for a deceptive piece he wrote about the North American Mission Board. He blamed his mysterious sources (likely the same ones he used for this erroneous conclusions about the SBC name change) instead of admitting what is likely closer to the truth: he made it up out of whole cloth. That’s what liars do, after all.

In Plumpkins retraction/apology, which was quoted here in full to give every benefit of the doubt, he said:

In addition, to the readers of SBC Tomorrow, I also offer my sincerest apologies. You deserve commentary on denominational affairs based on the most credible, factual information available. And while I sincerely thought I was basing my commentary on credible testimony, I hold no delusion that you should not be disappointed. The fact is, I am disappointed in myself. I broke my own strict protocol in making sure I have the goods before I deliver the message. This present post stands as the quintessential reason why that is so. And, know I have learned much in the process. I regret my lessons learned, however, came at another’s expense.

Finally, even though my normal commentary is based upon hard evidences like written, audio, and video–evidences which anyone may check and draw their own conclusions–and rarely base what I write on this blog on softer types like anecdotal, or softer still, verbal assertions, know I intend to be more careful still in the future.

May our Lord extend to us all His grace to be the best we can be for His glory alone. And, may our Lord forgive me as I look only to Him for my redemption.

His assertion that his normal commentary is based on hard evidences is enough to make one reach for Gas-X. His ruminations are based on speculation, mental confusion and wishful thinking.

Plumpkins must have enjoyed his earlier mentioned forgiveness fully since it took him less than a week to go off again half-cocked. This time the target of his verbal indiscretions was California pastor Rick Warren.
Read the rest of this entry »

This week, Plumpkins repeated an unsubstantiated rumor that a “gag order” had been issued to NAMB employees. Under the title, NAMB employees under new gag rule? by Peter Lumpkins, he said this:

I’m told by sources in close proximity to the situation that during the chapel service at the North American Mission Board this week, employees were required to sign a statement of confidentiality since information was “leaking out of NAMB”* In short, an order of silence became the norm. And, the sense I got was not private, personal information leaking out, information like social security numbers, salaries of employees and other similar private data which may very well cause pause for concern.

Instead, the “leaked” information apparently pertains to matters which should not necessarily be considered privileged information. For example, if cooperating Southern Baptist churches which give enormous amounts of monies to fund church plants desire to know precisely which church plants receive funding, how much funding, and for how long, no such restrictions such apply. In addition, all stats for church plants including all liaisons with other theological groups (if any) should not be hindered in the free flow of information.

In very short order, Mike Ebert, who works in the communications department at NAMB, made the first comment on the post:

Peter–Absolute fiction.

Posted by: Mike Ebert | Feb 23, 2012 at 07:37 PM

Read the rest of this entry »

In his December 13, 2011 post entitled, The International Mission Board and Uninspired Missions Giving, Peter “Plumpkins” Lumpkins rails against the establishment again. This time his speculative interests are aroused due to the selections of J.D. Greear and David Platt as being spokesmen for the Lottie Moon Christmas Offering for International Missions. Because the kind of evidence Plumpkins desired was not readily at hand (read: he was too biased to be thorough) he relied on partial evidence.

Very quickly Jared Moore “called out” Plumpkins and the blind he leads at his blog. Moore’s post of December 13, 2011 revealed Plumpkins poor research and erroneous conclusions. Plumpkins responded in form: deny, deny, deny, distract, distract, distract. Oh, and there was also an appearance by Pastor Tim “Roger Dodger” Rogers who commented ineffectually as is his custom.

Wrote Plumpkins:

According to the church’s website, Greear’s church sponsors a yearly “Christmas Missions Offering,” the goal of which is 625K for 2011. A full 75% ($468,750) will go toward “Church Planting” and the remaining 25% ($156,250) will be used for “Local Outreach.” One will look in vain for any specific reference that monies raised will be given to The Lottie Moon Christmas Offering. But if Greear’s church does not participate in cooperative giving toward raising the $175,000,000 the International Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention is pursuing, why is J.D. Greear a spokesman for the offering? Why would IMB allow him to be a catylst for inspiring others to give to a cause toward which Greear apparently has no loyalties? Emphasis added.

In his same article, Plumpkins turned his B-B gun toward David Platt, the influential author-pastor of The Church at Brook Hills. Lamenting the church’s lack of reporting via the ACP (Southern Baptist speak for “Here’s this year’s numbers”), he assumes they have given nothing to the Lottie Moon offering since 1996, which, incidentally, predates Platt’s arrival by nearly a decade. (As an aside, Platt was 17 years old at the time from which Plumpkins begins to assign blame. This is fair in the Plumpkins universe.)

You see how Pastor Peter Lumpkins plays the game? He places his presumed blame for the church’s actions under a previous pastor in the lap of the current pastor. One could only hope that Plumpkins church, Corner Stone (Cornerstone) Baptist Chapel of Waco, GA gives him a little more grace.

sign cornerstone baptist chapel waco texas pastor peter lumpkins

Before or after Deacons' meeting?

And speaking of Pastor Peter Lumpkins and Cornerstone Baptist Chapel of Waco, GA: what about their Lottie Moon giving? What pattern does this critic show for good Southern Baptists to follow?

Not a very good one it seems.

In a comment on Jared Moore’s article (time stamped December 14, 2011, 1:48pm), Plumpkins defends his foolishness:

Nor is it reasonable to assert the “did-you-call-before-you-made-that-statement” nonsense. That’s why we have data banks, Jared. And, I employed the data bank in no special or biased way toward either Greear or Platt. Emphasis in original comment.

What, then, does the “data bank” show?

In the year 2009-2010, Cornerstone Baptist Chapel gave:
Annie Armstrong- $460
Lottie Moon- $675

Not bad for a church with 45 attendees.

But, in 2010-2011, Cornerstone Baptist Chapel gave:
Annie Armstrong- $1,000
Lottie Moon- $0

Your eyes do not deceive you. Year over year, the church pastored by uber-gripe, Pastor Peter Lumpkins of Cornerstone Baptist Chapel, dropped their Lottie Moon Christmas Offering giving to zero, zilch, zip, nada. Not. A. Single. Red. Cent.

Plumpkins tried his best to make this a “poster boy” or “spokesman” issue, but in his above comment Plumpkins derided Greear for “[apparently] having no loyalties” to the Lottie Moon offering. Loyalty to the LMCO? Really, Peter?

Pot, meet kettle.

**The research methods employed for this article were the same as those employed by Plumpkins. Therefore, it matters not when he became the pastor. He is still to blame.

Since Gerald Harris, Plumpkins and Roger Dodger have speculated publicly and erroneously about the SBC name change, the following might help them get started on their next articles:

“I (I was) [choose more than one from the following] wrong, amiss, askew, astray, at fault, awry, bad, counterfactual, defective, erratic, erring, erroneous, fallacious, false, faulty, fluffed, goofed, in error, inaccurate, inexact, miscalculated, misconstrued, misfigured, misguided, mishandled, mistaken, not precise, not right, not working, off-target, on the wrong track, out, out of commission, out of line, out of order, perverse, rotten, sophistical, specious, spurious, ungrounded, unsatisfactory, unsound, unsubstantial, untrue, wide of the mark”

Get started, boys.

In his post dated February 19, 2012, Plumpkins again distorts some facts while omitting others all for the purpose of propogating his faulty ideas. His inability to correctly report is troubling. Does he lie intentionally or because he really can’t figure the facts? Is he mentally incapable or has he become so distorted that even the simplest truths are skewed by his over-suspicious personality?

Plumpkins writes with reference to the Lifeway trustee meeting:

Unfortunately, [Lifeway communications director, Marty] King did not report any response from the trustees concerning the 2011 SBC resolution in Phoenix expressing disapproval of the version. King did quote Greenway suggesting messengers to the 2011 SBC annual meeting were encouraged to vote for the resolution based on “incorrect information.”

What is the big deal about no response from the trustees? Why does Plumpkins imply that such “response” would provide new information? Note the BP article (written by King):

The task force and the trustee executive committee both unanimously approved the following recommendation: It is recommended that trustees reaffirm the decision of LifeWay to continue to carry the 2011 NIV alongside other versions of the Holy Bible.

The reason is clear and it isn’t nefarious. The vote was unanimous. Both the committee and the full trustee board were unified in the vote. There were no dissenters to interview, no press conference for some to air their differences.

When trustee Adam Greenway spoke, he spoke for the committee and when the trustees voted they conveyed the decision. Why? Because they had researched the information given and found the resolution to be without merit.

Besides the examples of conservative translations in the 2011 NIV given by Greenway there was also this line in the report that addressed the “incorrect information” given to messengers:

As an example, Greenway said the 2011 NIV contains no gender-neutral wording for the names of God.

What kind of “incorrect information”? This is normally the kind of thing Plumpkins spends 2,000 words blathering about. Why the silence on this?

Let us return momentarily to the summer of 2011. Twenty-four minutes into the Wednesday afternoon business session at the 2011 SBC meeting in Phoenix to be exact.

Messenger Tim Overton spoke about the 2011 NIV:

This is a feminist dream. What has stood in front of their agenda about the Bible. Now they have twisted the Bible into a gender-neutral translation.

This is an assertion; it is not evidence, and it gives an example of the misinformation fed to the messengers. It is likewise an example of evidence glossed over by Plumpkins and his disciples in their rush to condemn Lifeway for not taking Overton’s resolution at face value.

Russell Moore, speaking for the Resolutions Committee, said in response to Overton’s plea that there were significant differences between the TNIV and the 2011 NIV. :

We had an NIV that stands in a very different place in regard to the Bible buying public. We now have a multitude of good and faithful denominations, uh, good and faithful translations such as the Holman Christian Standard Bible, the English Standard Version, the New American Standard Bible, and so forth. And we did not believe that the NIV changes which, frankly, are just one of many Bibles out there which have very similar language. We did not believe that rose to the level of needing to be addressed by this year’s convention. Emphasis added.

Moore was followed by messenger Darren Lambert who, affirming he might not be the best person to speak in support of the resolution, proceeded to do that very thing. It’s from Lambert’s support that he concern of the gender neutrality of God is addressed:

This is God’s word, and if we affirm the roles that God has given to men and women. And we also affirm God’s revelation of Himself as He, and Jesus as He, and even the Holy Spirit. Emphasis in speaker’s vocalization.

So, the Lifeway trustees were being very thorough, addressing not only the concerns expressed in the resolution, but also in concerns expressed by the one who spoke in support of it.

BTW, if Plumpkins was the least bit interested in being thorough, he could have found video of the above exchange. It should be as easy to do as unearthing a 20-year old quote from Al Mohler on the purpose of resolutions at SBC meetings. (Hint, Peter: http://www.sbcannualmeeting.net/sbc11/)

Why does Peter Lumpkins consistently overlook the facts? It is either overt deception or lunacy. Whichever the case, no thinking, spiritually minded person should give him or his writings a second thought.