WHAT'S THAT ABOUT BLOGGERS, AGAIN?
Someone mentioned the other day, that the SBC had a video archive, accessible online, of the Convention sessions. Well, since I had a couple shots of face time there, I figured I'd go look.
It always makes me really nervous to see me on video, so it was with a lot of trepidation that I fast forwarded through the sessions until I got to the matters which I addressed. Frankly, I was curious what I'd said. So, I watched it. Both of the episodes. Peg watched, too.
It kind of reminded me of the old line about how you always give three speeches (or announcements, etc). One on the way there, a really good one. One while there, the so-so one. And then the one on the way home, which is a real lulu.
Anyway, Peg and I were sitting on the deck with our coffee last night, and I shared how I'd gotten a little uncertain about what I'd said in the evening session, particularly after listening to Dr. Welch's response to it (which I hadn't really heard that Tuesday night as I was going back to my seat). But then I recalled that I had a chance encounter later that same evening which can only be interpreted as affirmation from God that what I said needed to be said, regardless of who did or did not like it.
Peg then pointed out how ironic it was that (A) The Chairman had derogatory "asides" about bloggers, and there was somewhat of an air that they were wasting time putting stuff on the internet, while (B) The SBC seems to have spent considerable money and man-hours (like bloggers do) making the sessions available on the same media used by bloggers.
The conclusion: the SBC leadership seems to think that it is ok to put out information .. to make many hours of Convention Sessions ... available on the web, but it is not ok for bloggers to discuss biblical and spiritual matters on the same media.
Does that seem hypocritical to anybody?