One Southern Baptist Pastor’s Response To
Dr. Thomas White’s Sermon On Psalm 127
By:
Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr.
Â
I certainly agree with the tenor, tone, thrust and thesis of the message of  Dr. White that children are a blessing to God and should be to us as well. I commend Dr. White for being an example of what he preaches by adopting a child.
Â
I am from a family of nine children and my mother was 36 years old when I was born and she graduated from college the same year. I am certainly grateful that my parents did not consider abortion, nor did they practice birth control – to the best of my knowledge – when I was conceived. Thank God abortion was illegal in 1956 and I wish it were illegal today.
Â
My concern with Dr. White’s message is that he taught taking birth control pills is sinful and wrong. He preached this message as if it was a mandate from God or a position in Scripture, that to take birth control pills is absolutely wrong for all Baptist believers. That, to me, is an extremely problematic, over simplistic, and unscriptural position. For this professor to preach a personal opinion as if it was the inerrant and infallible Word of God is to disallow diversity of thought and critical thinking skills to be applied to this subject matter without one scintilla of Scriptural backing for this extreme position.
Â
I am concerned because I see a pattern developing at SWBTS of adopting views not supported by Scripture, but preached as if they are in line with Scripture. Such as:
·       Placing restrictions as to how Baptists can pray in private and disqualifying them from missionary service and seminary employment based on their private prayers.
·       Preaching that women cannot teach Hebrew or church history when previous conservative, inerrantist Presidents and Trustee Boards have approved women teaching Hebrew and church history.
·       Disqualifying Baptist believers from service as missionaries because they were not baptized in a Southern Baptist Church, although their personal baptism experience met biblical qualifications.
·       And now, practicing birth control/taking the pill, is sinful and wrong
Â
This is bizarre to me. This is Fundamentalism run amuck. These views don’t represent all nor the majority of Southern Baptists. I don’t want the world to get the wrong impression of Southern Baptist based on the views of SWBTS that lack Scriptural support or SBC adoption and approval.
Â
I am concerned that this great Baptist seminary is slowly degenerating into a Fundamentalist indoctrination camp. These views represent a radical shift in Baptist life in the past few years. You would expect this kind of thinking to have come from Bob Jones University or some independent fundamentalist Baptist seminary, but not SWBTS. All of these aberrant views explain why the SBC is a denomination in decline.
Â
Dr. White has a right to his opinion. But to communicate his opinion as a mandate of God is totally wrong. Unfortunately, these non-biblical views are communicated from a podium financed by cooperative program dollars. I think the seminary should release a statement distinguishing between Dr. White’s view and the views of SWBTS and the Southern Baptist Convention. My question is, does Dr. White’s viewpoint on this subject matter represent the views of SWBTS? Are his views taught in the classrooms of SWBTS? As a Southern Baptist, I would like to know.
Â
I agree that the primary role of parenting is to lead children to a saving grace and salvation through the Lord, Jesus Christ and to pass on a godly heritage. However, I don’t believe the seminary needs to intrude into the bedrooms of Baptist couples to determine their method of birth control or to declare taking birth control pills is wrong without clear biblical instruction.
Â
Again, I commend Dr. White’s strong conviction that children are a heritage from the Lord and I share that conviction.
Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr. 
October 21, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Thank you, Dwight, for the post and your thoughts on the matter. I’m also concerned about several of the items you list about prayer languages and alien immersion, etc… However, I am not sure Dr. White’s sermon and comments belong in that same category.
(For the record, I am not willing to say that the pill is sinful like Dr. White.)
It won’t do to say that calling birth controls pills sin is adding to the commands of Scripture. Obviously there was no such thing and the Bible wouldn’t be expected to comment. On any issue like this, all we can do is draw our best conclusions from principles we see in the text.
I preach that abortion is sinful, not because I have a verse that says so, but because of the principles I see taught in Scripture. I’m afraid that you are limiting too far what can be preached with authority. To some extent, we all have to preach ‘personal opinion’ on any contemporary issue thats not directly addressed in the text.
It’s fine to disagree with him, but attributing fundamentalism to him seems to go too far here.
October 22, 2008 at 12:07 am
Bro. Hobbs,
I believe I understand the logic of what you are arguing here. However, I fail to see the “principles in Scripture” which you seem to allow as possibly supporting Dr. White’s thesis. Could you elaborate? Furthermore, I’m not sure I understand how you “are not willing to say that the pill is sinful like Dr. White,” but later you seem to allow that his position could be, in fact, based upon Scriptural principles. Maybe I’m misunderstanding your comments, but they seem less than cohesive. Could you please clarify?
Also, I do agree with you that this issue should not be placed in the same category as private prayer language. The prohibition of speaking in tongues is explicitly – not just in principle, but explicitly – condemned in Scripture. The use of contraception is not. Therefore you are correct, the two do need to be in separate categories – one for “explicitly addressed in Scripture” and one for “not addressed.”
Blessings,
Jason Epps
October 22, 2008 at 12:58 pm
All Christian denominations before 1930 taught that Birth Control was wrong. It was at the 1930 Lambuth Conference that Birth control was allowed on a limited basis. From there the flood gates were opened.
October 22, 2008 at 8:16 pm
Brent,
The problem may not be with what scripture says on this matter. It seems silent. You said, “To some extent, we all have to preach ‘personal opinion’ on any contemporary issue thats not directly addressed in the text.” I would agree with you but what I see in White’s message is that he took application way too far. I’ve never heard anyone preach that kind of application as far as he did. His application went farther than Solomon himself intended for Psalm 127. Haddon Robinson wrote an article called “The Heresy of Application.” It’s a good read on how we as preachers botch application by doing things with the text that the original author did not intend or do himself.
I empathize with Dr. White’s desire to honor and cherish children in a culture that says and does differently. I think he clearly brought that application to the text. The text does not say what he says it means in our culture. Even if he thinks it does, it was insensitive and too emotional and should not have been addressed. It’s not the main issue for a seminary family.
I’ve done what he did before though so I don’t judge to hard. I’ve come to the sacred desk with my agenda, my story. I’ve come with what I want to apply and found a text to come along for the ride. I’ve taken application too far when I should have only gone to level one, not ten. White could have made his point without decimating a portion of someone’s soul.
I’m just sorry for SWBTS, because this is just another crazy distraction from the mission.
October 22, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Alan,
If we believe that Christ is the Lord over all of life, then this certainly is an issue that needs to be addressed. And I don’t think most people understand our application as being limited to authorial intent. Interpretation certainly is, but I think most any preaching prof or textbook would agree that there must be some freedom in applying the text. How else would you preach on TV or modern entertainment? None of the biblical writers had that application in mind. Of course Solomon was not speaking to the idea of birth control, but that does not mean the text has no application to the issue.
Jason,
My personal position is that I don’t believe the pill is always sinful, but I am sympathetic to those who take that position.
You ask for the biblical principles that would cause someone to take such a position. Here are the ones I would point to:
1. The creation mandate: fill the earth and multiply. I also understand this to mean [as far as its application] that deliberate childlessness in marriage (ie. a couple just deciding they don’t want children) is rebellion against God’s revealed will.
2. Children are a blessing from the Lord.
3. Sex and procreation are things that God has, in his wisdom, joined together in creation. The advent of birth control has led us to the first time in human history that these two things can be separated. We need to understand the depth of this change and ask ourselves if this separation adds to or detracts from the glory of God.
4. Abortion is wrong and IF the pill has an abortifacient effect, then it is certainly ALWAYS a sin. It is known the pill creates an atmosphere that makes implantation more difficult. How often or if this actually happens doesn’t seem clear according to medical evidence that I’m aware of (and I admit I have to trust the judgment of others here).
5. The command to treat our bodies as temples of the Holy Spirit. The hormonal effects of the pill on women who take it is an important consideration. Side effects vary depending on who is taking them.
Others could probably name a few that I can’t think of here off the top of my head. I think it is certainly wise to recommend a very limited use of the pill. I don’t think its a stretch to say that using it as a permanent part of a couple’s life probably is a sin. I don’t fault anyone for saying it’s best not to use it at all.
I think very limited or no use of the birth control pill is certainly easily defensible as aligning best with biblical principles.
October 22, 2008 at 11:01 pm
Bro. Hobbs,
I’m sorry, but with all due respect, I think the principles to which you refer in Scripture should not be applied to birth control. Allow me to clarify:
1) I recognize the creation mandate. However, where does one draw the line? Should a couple have one child? Two? Ten? And when they are done, should they stop having sex? The logical implications of using the creation mandate as a prohibition of birth control must be addressed. The fact is that there are other Scriptural principles that come into play here as well – wisdom and stewardship for example. If I’m not making enough money to support a family with five kids, maybe I should stop at two, right? Just because God commands us to be fruitful and multiply doesn’t mean that we are to do it without any wisdom, stewardship, or restraint.
2) Children are a blessing from the Lord, of course! But again, where do you draw the line? Does this mean that as soon as a couple decide to stop having kids they are in sin? This brings up another point – at what point did we start listening to the opinions of seminary professors over the voice of the Spirit’s leadership in our own lives? Would Dr. White say that a Christian family that elected to use birth control (and by the way, my wife and I don’t use the pill and never have – and we believe in having as many kids as possible, but I do not wish to force my convictions on others) was not hearing from God or was twisting the Scriptures? Don’t forget – we’re Baptists – a people of the book. If we can support our position reasonably from Scripture – our leaders should support us in our endeavor to hear God’s voice. They should not claim to hear His voice FOR us. The whole point of pastoral ministry is to get people to the place where they can hear God’s voice for themselves, but I digress…
3) This is a reasonable question to explore, but I don’t think it qualifies as the “Scriptural principle(s)” I was asking for that would in some way support the notion of a biblical prohibition of abortion.
4) I understand, but this is a big IF. Even IF that is the case, what about other forms of birth control like condoms. The issue would still be on the table.
5) Understood, but again, this is a choice to be made by the Spirit-led married couple – not the theological know-it-all who wishes to force his conviction regarding a peripheral – even a tertiary – doctrine/teaching on another Christian who is as qualified as he/she is to hear the voice of God in his/her own life, marriage and family.
I appreciate the conversation – please know my comments are meant to convey respect. Unfortunately, this is sometimes hard to communicate without speaking in person. I’ll offer you the last word in our conversation if you’d like to take it.
Blessings,
Jason
October 23, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Brent,
You said, “How else would you preach on TV or modern entertainment? None of the biblical writers had that application in mind.” I agree.
My answer? They preach with caution and sensitivity. It’s funny, I’ve never heard that application in a church. I’ve been a Christian 20 years. Why haven’t I heard it? I’m not sure. But it’s easier to preach in a seminary chapel.
Anyway, like I said, he could have made his point in a more compassionate way. And his application is up in the air. We don’t know it’s true.
October 23, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Alan,
I’m not going to speak for or against the manner in which Dr. White addressed the issue. The fact that you have never heard this application may be more an indictment on our preaching and lack of courage than on Dr. White’s sermon. In fact, I think Dr. White brought up the issue precisely because we never hear about it. So arguing that you’ve never heard it before is really just arguing in a circle.
Since when are preaching topics and applications limited to what YOU”VE heard before?
Jason,
Just because these principles don’t make explicit “where to draw the line” does not prevent them from informing our decision making process in the matter. That’s an unwarranted jump in logic. So the creation mandate doesn’t tell us to have 2 or 10 children… Does that mean its irrelevant to the question? Absolutely not.
I’m glad you’re so adamant about the need for couples to hear God’s voice on the issue. I think my point and Dr. White’s point is that He HAS spoken quite a bit on the issue. Many Christians today just don’t like the implications of what He’s said.
Again, no one here is saying that birth control is wrong. What I’m advocating is a severely limited use or no use at all of the pill, and that we be slow to use other forms of birth control.
We should not look like the world on this issue. To society, being on birth control is the norm until they have a reason not to be. For Christians, I think we should take the position of not being on birth control unless we have a really good reason to do otherwise.
Thanks for the exchange. This kind of thinking (what I’m advocating now) sounded strange to me when I first heard it but I’ve become more and more convinced that it is more faithful to a biblical worldview. We need to hear this discussed more often.
October 24, 2008 at 7:09 am
All over the world Western civilization (and Christianity along with it to a great degree) is dying out because of below-sustainable birth rates. Countries are solving this problem with Muslim immigration. We will soon reap a terrible harvest.
Furthermore, with the common use of the pill and abortion, breast cancer has gone from being an old woman’s disease to a young woman’s disease. This is not coincidence, and there is science, good science, to support this. In this case, we are already reaping a terrible harvest.
Use of the pill is so prevalent today that it even threatens our environment as these hormone are found in our water everywhere and we are seeing fish and other living things becoming much more feminized. PC fears prevent even environmentalists from speaking out about this, even though they are seeing the revolution daily. Another terrible harvest coming our way?
While I appreciate Dr. White’s message–and his science about the tertiary effect of the pill preventing implantation of an embryo–I agree that it could have been presented in a more sensitive way. I am really unsure, however, which approach is better for jolting the masses into thinking.
I am slow to criticize however, as I am thrilled a Baptist is even thinking about this issue, much less putting it before a body of believers.
The Lord did say the people perish for a lack of knowledge. . .
Just don’t shoot the messenger.
October 24, 2008 at 12:03 pm
I am currently a student at Southwestern Seminary and I personally heard Dr. White’s chapel message on October 8. I greatly believe that the whole issue has been blown way out of proportion by the secular media and that Dr. White said nothing that was in-congruent with historic Christian teaching regarding preserving the life of the unborn. I believe Rev. Dwight McKissic’s comments about Dr. White and Southwestern Seminary are unfortunate since this is one of the finest academic institutions in America and had been a tremendous blessing to me and my fellow students. I am in absolute agreement with Dr. White’s chapel comments regarding abortion and birth control methods that terminate the life of an unborn child irrespective of how much time as transpired from its conception. As Bible believing Evangelical Christians and followers of Christ, we have a Biblical and divine mandate to stand up for the lives of the unborn and I am in full support of Dr. White’s chapel message and whole heartily commend his efforts to save the lives of the unborn. Sincerely in Jesus Christ,
Lee Edward Enochs
October 28, 2008 at 11:28 pm
Lee,
Thank you!
March 1, 2009 at 1:09 am
Just passing by.Btw, you website have great content!
_________________________________
Making Money $150 An Hour
August 24, 2009 at 1:08 pm
I have heard several minister/teacher/preacher types say that use of the pill is wrong. I would disagree that it is wrong based on the Creation/Dominion Mandate; and certainly the Bible is silent on the issue of oral contraception (but I must admit a certain deficit in the Bible as regards, for example, what car to drive, whether it is permissible to patronize certain restaurants, etc.) but the Bible is very clear that life is sacred.
That brings to the fore of the conversation the true issue: When does life begin? If life begins at conception, then use of the pill (and, of course, by extension patches and implanbts which have the same effects) then the pill can be, quite easily, seen as sin. Birth control pills (patches, implants, etc.) make attachment of the fertilized egg nearly imppossible (read those percentage effectiveness on the sides of the boxes gals). So, there is the fertilized egg – life… LIFE, if your definition of life is that it begins at conception – unable to attach itself to the mothe mother and, therefore, condemned to die.
What does the Bible say on this? I must admit to being part of the “life begins at conception” crowd for a long time, and I still like the sound of it. However, the Bible plainly states in Leviticus 17:11 that “life is in the blood.” (Before commenting, yes, it is speaking of anumal sacrifices, but that doesn’t negate the human application – No Blood = No Life) Blood is not infused into the embryo until the 18th day. With that rationale, life does not begin until day 18.
I don’t wish to linger overlong here, not do I really believe that the complexities of Life can be hashed out in a blog comment, but it seems that the arguments here are not focusing on the primary issues. Let’s leave opinion vs. God’s Word alone, let’s put aside what the Bible says explicitly vs. what it doesn’t say and look instead at what the Bible actually says and what we can logically deduce from that and information we can glean from the world around us.
James
October 10, 2009 at 12:46 am
If life begins at conception{it does} then taking birth control wich prevents implantation 7-14 later is a violation of the murder commandment. David
October 10, 2009 at 1:29 am
Mr. Mckissic , Richard land said southern baptist are not against birth control as long as they do not cause a fertilized egg to abort. The physicians desk reference cleary states that oral contraceptives prevent implantation of the fertilized egg. If there is something I don’t understand would you write me at my email address and explain it to me. Did you know abortifacients were widely used in the ancient world.Many early christians wrote about it. David
September 13, 2012 at 4:20 am
I believe what you said made a bunch of sense. But, what about this?
what if you were to write a killer headline? I mean, I
don’t wish to tell you how to run your blog, but suppose you added something that makes people desire more? I mean One Southern Baptist Pastor’s Response To Dr. Thomas White’s Sermon On Psalm 127 « Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr. is a little boring. You should glance at Yahoo’s front page and watch
how they create news titles to grab viewers to click.
You might add a related video or a pic or
two to get people interested about what you’ve got to say. In my opinion, it would bring your blog a little bit more interesting.
April 11, 2013 at 11:05 pm
Terrific work! This is the type of info that are supposed
to be shared around the web. Disgrace on the
seek engines for now not positioning this post upper! Come on over and consult with my web site .
Thank you =)
April 14, 2013 at 12:06 am
I was suggested this web site via my cousin.
I’m now not certain whether this publish is written by way of him as no one else realize such precise approximately my difficulty. You are incredible! Thank you!
September 5, 2013 at 2:38 am
Its like you read my mind! You seem to know so much approximately
this, like you wrote the e book in it or something.
I believe that you simply can do with a few p.c. to drive the message house a bit, however instead of that, this is
wonderful blog. A fantastic read. I’ll definitely be back.
September 22, 2013 at 12:46 pm
I comment whenever I appreciate a article on a website or
I have something to contribute to the discussion.
It’s caused by the passion communicated in the post I read.
And after this article One Southern Baptist Pastor’s Response To Dr.
Thomas White’s Sermon On Psalm 127 | Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr..
I was excited enough to post a comment 😉 I do have a few questions for you if it’s okay.
Could it be just me or do some of these responses look like they are left by brain
dead individuals? 😛 And, if you are posting on additional sites, I would
like to keep up with anything fresh you have to post. Could you
make a list the complete urls of your social sites like your Facebook page, twitter
feed, or linkedin profile?