Theologically Sound. Culturally Relevant.

Ed Litton

Ed Litton soft ball interview shows the elites will defend him over sermongate

The newly elected Southern Baptist president has been engulfed in the sermongate scandal after it was exposed that he was delivering the sermons of the outgoing SBC president, JD Greear. In the latest damage control, Vice President of the SBC Executive Committee, Jonathan Howe, gave Ed Litton a soft-ball interview to justify plagiarizing numerous sermons. In his podcast, SBCThisWeek, Howe begins cordially and then gives Ed Litton free reign to reiterate his previously released statement. The first actual question, according to the transcript, he asks regarding the scandal is what Ed Litton’s team looks like.

Ed Litton paints a romantic picture of discipleship which certainly contrasts the understanding, noted SBC whistleblower Bobby Lopez has that the sermon “writing” team was likened to a college professor taking credit for grad students writing a research paper. Ed Litton describes the process as effective, but it’s hard to imagine how expedient sermon writing by committee can possibly be.

Ed Litton then makes a bizarre analogy in which he states that a diamond miner who uncovered a diamond holds up the diamond, not the tools used to recover the diamond, crediting a seminary professor. As pointed out on social media in response to this metaphor, Ed Litton is the guy who had a is showing a diamond he did not mine. Moreover, JD Greear’s sermons should not be compared to diamonds.

The first mildly challenging statement comes when Jonathan Howe asks about the perceived discrepancy about Litton’s prior statement on the matter and his church scrubbing the sermons, claiming, according to Howe, the elders did not want Ed Litton “unfairly maligned” online.

And so to protect the church and the wellbeing of the church and their pastor, they said, ‘We’re pulling these down.’ But what they left was the last 18 months, which is all of all of 2020’s sermons and all 2021 sermons.

Ed Litton

Here Ed Litton lies about what sermons were left up. Nothing over 11 months old was left up, not 18 months which would include many of the sermons in question. Jonathan Howe refuses to call Ed Litton on this. Instead, he shifts the conversation off the subject and gives Ed Litton a chance to frame himself as a victim of online attacks motivated by secular politics.

This was never a serious interview, and Jonathan Howe demonstrated a Sean Hannity level of shilling. The idea of plagiarizing sermons as a sin was never addressed. Obvious lies were never called out. This was a hack job by those in SBC elite circles (this is especially true given that Baptist Press touted the interview) to defend one of their own disciples.

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on google
Google+
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on pinterest
Pinterest

9 Responses

    1. Not particularly. So there was added emphasis on calling out Jonathan Howe for being a stooge.

  1. Dude, seriously, STOP!

    This is a NOTHING BURGER.

    1 Corinthians 1:10-17 (ESV)

    Divisions in the Church

    10 I appeal to you, brothers,by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.

    11 For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers.

    12 What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.”

    13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

    14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius,

    15 so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name.

    16 (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.)

    17 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

    It seems like what you desire is some kind of a preaching “Academy Award” COMPETITION to see who the BEST ORIGINAL ARTIST FOR CONTEMPORARY PRECHING is.

    This is not supposed to be a competition. NO ONE can plaguirize the word of God.

    The preaching is about Jesus, not about JD Greer, or Ed Litton. Stop making this about them.

    We are supposed to be ONE here. Like minded. The preaching OBJECTIVE is to UPLIFT the congregation, not tear it down.

    You are creating a problem where there ISN’T ONE, calling it SermonGate? Knock it off and GROW UP!

    Ed Chapman

    1. From your posts, some commentary on what I’ve noticed, I’ll selectively call out what I view as aberrance on virtue signalers, as with you, even when it’s futile, and I’m urinating on my shoes, as I believe it feeds your ego, so this be my one and only time. I’m afraid the evangelicals on here are either too cowardly, or too indifferent, to step up to the plate and call you out. I’ve been around for 63 years now, so I’ll speak my mind. I’m speaking more so now from a conservative perspective, as from my faith tradition.
      1.Your disdain for the RCC (a given). Protestantism, and subsequently evangelicalism, came out of the RCC, whether or not you, or anyone here agrees. It’s an empirical historical fact. This includes your non-denominational church.
      2. Your Exegesis for agendas, and arm chair theology. Example, a litany of scripture verses to supposedly support the 2nd amendment in a previous post, as Mr Fava previously pointed out, is invalid, and at best ridiculous. For the record, I’m a gun owner (own two 1911 colt .45 autos), a staunch 2nd amendment supporter, and have held a Kansas CCL since 2007, when it passed into law. The 2nd amendment is a given right in America, be it ever threatened, but there’s no biblical commandment for privately owned firearms.
      3. You’re clearly a male feminist, and that’s your prerogative. That’s fashionable, especially with the ever present feminized mega churches (yours?). You stated in your past commentary with your service in the US Navy reporting to female COs, and your clear admiration on how great it was. Ok, well and good. But you further clearly extolled the virtues of feminism. I couldn’t agree more with Mr Fava’s opposition, as with some of his guests, on the darkness of feminism. One would have to have their head buried in the sand, or be a total mid-wit, not to see what it’s done to the family, the economy, order, and especially to Western churches.
      4. Your incessant dismissive and pejorative barbs on Mr Fava’s age; telling him frequently to “grow up”. This is a tactic I’ve seen on both the left, as well as with many on the right. I don’t know this young man, I wouldn’t probably break bread with him, and our view on aspects of Christology differ. However, he’s a married man, and from listening to his YouTube videos on this site, and reading his articles, he articulates his points well, and he clearly is on his game more so than your garden variety Gen Z and/or millennial men I encounter daily. You stated you were born in 1964. I was born in 1958. That doesn’t make me any better than you, or anyone else for that matter, just six more years of life context than you. I notice a lot of posters on this site are middle- age folks, and these folks are clearly concerned about the progressive drift of their faith traditions. Speaking as a conservative man, I understand why they are concerned.
      5. This is Mr Fava’s site, and as editor, thus his show. He doesn’t need anyone’s permission to submit articles, nor voice his opinions or concerns. You’re free to create and monitor your own blog or site.
      6. With all due respect, your posts show a misguided naivety, or fuzzy headed and unrealistic world view of what’s at stake. I have little credence for evangelicalism, but for the sake of many conservative laity and clergy in their faith traditions, they have every right, and responsibility, to speak up and push back. The opinions expressed here,
      are a grave concern by obviously traditionalist and/or conservative laity, and perhaps even some clergy, as to a progressive direction their faith traditions are headed. One can live in a world of Ted Talks and rainbows and puppy dogs, or live in denial, or one can live in reality, and the reality is blatantly clear that Mr Fava, and the evangelical posters on here, are seeing the encroachment of liberalism in their faith traditions. One look at mainline Protestantism ought to be evidence enough of what’s in store for conservative evangelicals (and I’m not one). The question then begs, will evangelicals (especially the males) grow a pair, stand up and push back, or run? I think from articles by Mr Fava, and others commentary, that they have cut their loses, and walked. Sometimes you can’t win. But to my past points, it’s invariably the conservatives who have to walk, while the liberals prevail and take over Protestant and evangelical churches. So be it.

      1. Antonio,

        You had said:
        “but there’s no biblical commandment for privately owned firearms.”

        My response:

        You are WRONG. There was no prohibition to carrying any arms by anyone. Jesus told his Apostles to SELL their belongings to get swords. They ALREADY HAD TWO. Key word ALREADY.

        So please don’t tell me that there is no biblical commandment for privetely owned firearms. There was no biblical commandment to NOT have firearms.

        I’m 57 years old. You aren’t that much older than me.

        I have the advantage because I am non-denomination, meaning, if I don’t like the church I attend DUE TO liberal ideologies creeping in, I’m not obligated to stay. I can let the door kick me in the ass on the way out. I’m NOT obligated to stay.

        And if you think that I believe in ANY form of Church Discipline, I don’t. I think the “EVANGELICALS” have perverted Matthew 18, and yes, that perversion began with the RC.

        There are tons of church’s out there. In my town, there must be about 20 church’s within a two mile radious. And a lot more in surrounding cities.

        Ed Chapman

      2. Antonio,

        Regarding feminism, you had said:
        “But you further clearly extolled the virtues of feminism. I couldn’t agree more with Mr Fava’s opposition, as with some of his guests, on the darkness of feminism. One would have to have their head buried in the sand, or be a total mid-wit, not to see what it’s done to the family, the economy, order, and especially to Western churches.”

        My response:

        I don’t like men abusing women, and abuse comes from the HARDLINE “TRADITIONS”, as you call it, from “evangelicals”, keeping women as prisoners, barefoot and pregnant.

        Why do you think that there are lots of problems in the SBC regarding sexual sins? It’s because of these idiotic TRADITIONS that keeps women down, as if they are your personal slave/prostitute.

        Women in many “evangelical” church’s must go to the pastor to report rape, or sexual assault, instead of bypassing the church, and calling the law on their own.

        That’s a problem. Keeping FELONIES hush hush in the church is NOT justice. A jail cell is justice. Forcing a victim to forgive is INJUSTICE, because we all know that the FORCED forgiveness is NOT forgiveness at all.

        Victims are afraid of their rapist, and the church is NOT being an advocate for the victim, but they sure wish to RESTORE the rapist!

        Let’s be clear. Women were the FIRST to PREACH the gospel to MEN. The men were too busy sulking, thinking that they bet on the wrong savior!

        Did they retort with, “Shut up woman!”?

        Yes, blame the HARDLINE “Traditions” of the “evangelicals” for their ANTI-FEMINIST movement.

        Even the King of Persia listened to his wife! You can find that in the book of Ester!

        Abuse against women is rampant in the Evangelical world. And they don’t like SECULAR LAW that would bring them JUSTICE.

        Ed Chapman

    2. Just because you say something isn’t a real story, doesn’t make it so. Moreover, even before this, there should be no unity with Ed Litton, or JD Greear, as they are men who undermine the gospel and are entrenched in corruption, which is why it behooves Baptist churches to leave the denomination. Unity was never to come at the expense of truth.

      But I think you don’t understand the distinction between expository and topical preaching. In this case the sermons were topical, meaning that the message was tackling ideas rather than exegeting a text verse by verse. Ed Litton was taking someone else’s exact ideas, first person illustrations, jokes, mannerism, and passing them off as his own on several occasions. It’s also further an issue the substance that Ed Litton is teaching. He’s president of the SBC but routinely doesn’t do his own job to his local congregation(s).

      1. If this is in fact a case of plagiarism, and this guy is in fact as inept or unqualified as you’ve indicated, then it stands to reason that perhaps he should be removed from his office? I’m not familiar enough with the polity of the Southern Baptist denomination, and the bylaws of the SBC, to know just how this is accomplished.
        I assume on his specific parish level that they have some means of censoring him, up to and including removing him? But, that apparently rides on his church, and I assume again it’s up to the laity and/or the diaconate to follow through with this. If his congregation is progressive, or has been bamboozled, then I imagine he’d retain his clerical office. One thing I do know, a fallacy I see with Southern Baptists is not defrocking guys like this. There’s no oversight in that what’s to stop him from going to yet another Southern Baptist congregation, still ordained with his credentials, and continuing with plagiarisms, or even apostasy?
        Expository sermons, I do know something about. But Ed Chapman’s inane exegesis and scripture quoting, well again, we’ll agree to disagree, but this is where I stand on what I believe is a real problem with sola Scriptura.
        Setting faith on the back burner, as an old blue collar white guy, there’s a reason I see you young guys are disillusioned with your faith traditions, and with all due respect, girly clergy, and equally feminized churches are a major contributor.

      2. Well, Ray, I’m NOT a fan of expository. You don’t learn anything by expository.

        I’ll give an example.

        Forget for a moment that there are writings of Matthew thru Revelation. Pretend that you are a Jew during the days of Jesus walking the earth, and you are NOT a disciple.

        Now, read the story of Abraham, and the PROMISES of INHERITANCE that was given to Abraham, and to whom that one promise was going to be for.

        1. What was the inheritance PROMISE?

        2. Who was that inheritance going to be thru? A PROMISED SEED, right?

        Now, from your EXPOSITORY, who is that promised seed? Isaac.

        But NOW bring in Galatians 3:16.

        Expository FAILED.

        I can give a ton of examples.

        Expository can’t spiritually interpret scripture. What do you suppose the PROMISED LAND is, which is the INHERITANCE that WE Christians get.

        Expository tells us it’s a SMALL piece of real estate in the middle east! But is it? No.

        Ed Chapman

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Join The Evangelical Dark Web

Join 2,771 other followers