Before we publicly excoriate @tomascol for publicy questioning a publicly broadcast decision consider a few things- 1/ https://twitter.com/NateSchlomann/status/1354058725280124928

The @NAMB_SBC assessment process takes months or years. Nowhere along that line did anyone pump the breaks for backing a church plant which openly breaks the BFM 2000? 2/

Have Southern Baptists not learned anything about our "keep it quiet" culture? The discussion of whether a woman can or can't be a pastor doesn't belong here b/c the messengers already determined that.3/

If Southern Baptists have a change of heart, then Southern Baptists can make that change. Until then, SBC entities are ultimately responsible for upholding the will of their messengers. 4/

I'm not judging @kevezell or the @NAMB_SBC but there seems to be enough questions to warrant a response, especially since so much of the material being questioned is publicly available. 5/

In the end, accountability is the key here. When pastors are not accountable, and covered by the culture of silence in our denom, the risk of abuse goes up. Same with denom entities. My goal here is not to defend @tomascol . 6/

It is to say that Twitter is not church and our entities/entity heads exist to serve the local church and her members not the other way around. Hopefully whatever resolution is reached, it is made widely available. 7/7