Acts29 Rap at SBC

A bit of comic relief followed the long and arduous session debating the GCR Task Force Report at the Southern Baptist Convention. Many of the messengers were leaving the hall when this happened, but I was there and heard the whole thing. An SBC messenger came to a microphone and offered a motion to affirm the Acts29 church planting network. But this wasn’t just any motion. This guy offered it in the form of a rap. After he finished making the motion, the chair called for a second, and the place erupted with seconds. I think everyone appreciated the light moment. The motion was subsequently ruled out of order.

UPDATE: The rapper is Josh Shank, pastor of Youngstown Metro Church in Youngstown, Ohio. Twitter: @JoshShank.

UPDATE 2: Parliamentarian Barry McCarty took it all in stride, writing to Josh Shank, “Loved your motion rap. Best presentation of a motion I’ve seen in 24 years as chief parliamentarian.” I guess Shank made some history.

(HT: Peter Smith)

14 Responses to Acts29 Rap at SBC

  1. Craig June 17, 2010 at 5:07 pm #

    Will Acts29 and the SBC ever have a strong relationship? It saddens me that the divisive issue is seemingly over alcohol. I know some states support both, but Baptist conventions in Georgia and Missouri especially will not have anything to do with this exponentially growing church planting network. This should not be!

    It also strikes an ironic tone that this motion was later ruled out of order. I mean, c’mon folks!

  2. barry June 17, 2010 at 5:29 pm #

    It was awesome. My whole section gave the motion a “SECOND!”

    Did he say “Papa D”? I love this guy. Who is he? Did anyone get his name? And, why exactly was he out of order?

  3. Barry June 17, 2010 at 5:35 pm #

    You do realize, of course, that “Teamwork will make the dream work!” has just become the sbc equivalent to “Pants on the ground.” Look for t-shirts in Phoenix 2011.

  4. Jaxson June 17, 2010 at 6:11 pm #

    but everyone agreed that he looks like a prepackaged A29 Halloween character(beard, hair, glasses, shirt), right?

  5. Rick Patrick June 17, 2010 at 8:22 pm #

    It was ruled out of order, along with several other motions, because it was actually a resolution. The process for submitting resolutions does not allow for spontaneous submissions from the floor, whether they are rapped or not.

    BTW if it was a serious affirmation of Acts 29, I would have been among those opposed, not with animosity or anger. We’re just not on the same page.

  6. Ryan K. June 17, 2010 at 9:54 pm #

    How are “we” on the same page Rick? There are many pastor’s that are SBC and A29.

    Or are you just speaking for yourself here?

  7. Ryan K. June 17, 2010 at 9:55 pm #

    Insert “not” in that last post. Lack of sleep is rotting my brain.

    How are “we” not on the same page Rick?

  8. Aaron Tant June 17, 2010 at 11:09 pm #

    That is Joshua Shank. I am proud to say he was my youth pastor for a stint before heading to Youngstown, Ohio. Brilliant and funny and godly… all rolled into one. You’ve got to love it! Miss you, Josh!

  9. D.J. Williams June 18, 2010 at 7:52 am #

    Yeah, I’m with Ryan here. What about A29 is not on the same page as Baptists?

  10. Rick Patrick June 18, 2010 at 8:57 am #

    Ryan,
    To clarify, the Acts 29 network and I are not on the same page. I did not intend for the indefinite “we” to imply that other Southern Baptists were not on the same page as Acts 29 since clearly they are.

    For that matter, I am also not on the same page with the CBF Baptists still in the SBC. From an organizational standpoint, though certainly not a theological one, a case can be made that both are, in a sense, something of a denomination within a denomination, with their own leaders, followers, doctrines, methods, financing structures, etc. While I wish both well as they share the gospel, I am not really part of either.

  11. Nate June 18, 2010 at 12:15 pm #

    I don’t understand what the purpose of the motion was to have done. Did he want a formalized association with Acts 29? There are already plenty of SBC churches, local associations, and state associations, giving money and property to Acts 29. Driscoll and others preach at SBC churches and seminaries, their books are used, etc. In the overwhelming majority of situations Acts 29 churches, who choose to participate with the SBC, give money to the IMB, but none to NAMB, the state or the local association, of whom they receive money, etc. This seems contrary.

    In short, it would seem that Acts 29 should approach the SBC, not that we approach them. We are already funding many of their churches and plants.

  12. Ryan K. June 18, 2010 at 2:35 pm #

    Thanks for the clarification Rick, I really was just curious if there was something major that would have the two groups on different pages. Especially considering Matt Chandler seems to be an influential member of both the SBC and A29.

  13. Rick Patrick June 18, 2010 at 3:47 pm #

    Ryan,
    Another motion at the convention, offered by Mike Shaw, indicated some of the major differences. He speaks for many who have reservations. I agree with you that Matt and many others have ties with both groups. I enjoyed Matt’s sermon at the Pastor’s Conference and pray for his continued healing.

  14. Amber Walsh June 22, 2010 at 12:09 pm #

    Oh yes. 🙂 This was just great!

Comment here. Please use FIRST and LAST name.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes