Brandon Durham's Sermon Notes

Did This Help His Case?

Yesterday, during my lunch break, I posted an assessment of Brandon Durham’s termination as pastor of Fairmont Baptist Church in Red Level, Alabama. He had posted a video explanation of his account of matters (to which I linked).

At the time, I did not have any details of his actual sermon, as he had not provided them at the time. At about 3PM—after I had posted my own assessment (it was scheduled for 6:30PM)—Durham provided his sermon notes. They are added here for reference. And I will provide some commentary as to what this does for my initial assessment.

So now that we have a general outline of what Durham preached—we don’t have the actual sermon delivery, but I think this gives us a reasonable portrait of its content—it gives us a more complete picture of what went down. So let’s have a look.

First, to Brandon Durham, thank you for providing the notes.

I will give credit to Durham for one thing: this is not the worst Mother’s Day sermon I’ve seen. But I think it’s problematic. Why?

For one, there is no presentation of the Gospel. And don’t kid yourself: you can preach a great Mother’s Day sermon—from Scripture!—all wrapped into a larger presentation of the Gospel that glorifies Jesus. (Don’t believe me? Study the Incarnation.)

But Durham doesn’t do that. Not even a little bit.

In his video, Durham cites SBTS as a hub for Calvinism. And I can attest that that is true; SBTS is very Calvinistic in their theological orientation.

I can also tell you that, at SBTS—even today—his Mother’s Day sermon would have been given a failing grade and he would likely have been told to re-write it. I know some folks to whom this happened.

(Seminary is a humbling experience: if you pay attention, you get a great appreciation for what you don’t know.)

Secondly, the sermon is summary eisegesis; he has an agenda, and he used his own theological grid and proof-texted the Biblical text to match his own points. He did not go to the Biblical text and seek to glean the meaning from the text—that is what exegesis is. Exegesis is good form; everyone should do exegesis. Exegesis can go as deep as you want, and then some. I have a passing interest in exegetical commentaries—conservative, liberal, and everything in between. It’s fascinating to see the insights of great Bible scholars. When I prepare lessons, I compare my own notes with the commentators. I’ll even compare translations. Oftentimes, I’ll share those insights from other scholars in the process of formulating where I am on the passage.

But there is none of that in his notes. Yes, there are occasional references to Hebrew words, but that’s not exegesis. That doesn’t even qualify as a word study, which is one of the bare-bones-basic tools of Biblical exposition.

Third, this is not a sermon; it is a culture war promotional speech. As I said, there is no presentation of the Gospel; I would argue that it’s not even about motherhood, but rather about a Motherhood™️ paradigm.

Here’s where things get muddy, though: is it appropriate to address culture issues in a sermon? To that, I say absolutely! And it is definitely a good thing to extoll the goodness of motherhood. And there are great examples in Scripture.

Durham, in all fairness, brought up Hannah. I wish he had expanded on her, and developed her devotion, keeping the promise she made to God, and dedicating Samuel to the Lord’s service. Samuel went on to become the greatest of the judges in Israel’s history (with Deborah a close second).

If Durham wanted to take a culture wars angle, could have brought up the midwives in Exodus. They defied the Pharaoh and saved lives.

Zachariah and Elizabeth would have been good to highlight, especially against the backdrop of that day. You know what made their character? It wasn’t that God gave them John the Baptist while they were yet octogenarians; it was their perseverance—in the suck of life, enduring the shame and social rejection, still serving God with honor—through the years to that point. And Elizabeth lived to see the real Deliverer. Her son would light up the runway for Him.

He could have pointed to Lois and Eunice, and their influence on Timothy.

He could have pointed to Mary, as I pointed out: you can’t do much better than Mary and the Incarnation.

But instead, Durham took what should have been a wonderful time to deliver a conservative, exegetical sermon that was both uplifting and provided a glimpse into the counterculture that the Church contrasts with the world and points to the great finished work of Jesus and the world to come, and instead eisegeted a Culture Wars promo that didn’t even present the Gospel.

Here’s the thing: Durham preached that sermon in May, as it was a Mother’s Day sermon.

He wasn’t fired for another two months. So it seems that they extended a modicum of grace to him to see if he would adjust his style, given the feedback he received from Mother’s Day.

So that also begs the question: what were his other sermons like during that time? Were they also Culture Wars-heavy? Were they expositional sermons? How often was the Gospel preached? What kind of culture did Durham foster in his sermons and teaching?

If his Mother’s Day sermon is any indication, and if his doubling down is any indication, then I’d say that the picture is not encouraging.

In his initial response to me, he pointed out that the youth pastor was 20+ years his senior. That tells me that he should have treated the YP with the respect due an older man, not upbraiding him (1 Timothy 5:1). My experience in life: if a man 20 years my senior—especially one in a ministerial capacity—admonishes me about a sermon, I’m going to take it seriously, as he may have an insight that I’m overlooking.

Oh, and if his wife takes offense with something I said, then I owe her the deference that Apollos gave Priscilla. She may be right; she may be wrong. But if I’m pissing off someone who is well-respected and with whom I otherwise have no reason to have contention, then I’d better take notice. Humility is inexpensive, and yet of utmost value.

Personally, after looking at his sermon notes, I feel bad for Durham. Why? The sermon does not look like the product of someone who has been given good guidance. I know that’s not what they teach at SBTS; they are conservative, they are Calvinist, but they still are very expositional in their preaching standards. And, it pains me to say this, but what he has shown here doesn’t even rise to the level of bad exegesis.

Still, I know what it’s like to be unemployed. It can be a horrible, depressing existence. You learn a lot about yourself in those situations. It took me years—long after I had re-established employment—to recover from that trauma.

Personally, what I wish Durham would do: take 5 years and get a regular job. Forge a career that doesn’t depend on being a pastor. Bivocationality is stability.

But during that time, get involved with a church that has a healthy culture. And in that church, befriend some elderly ministers who’ve been around the block. Learn their rhythm of life, what drives them, what they like to read, how they treat their wives and kids, how they treat people in the church body. Gain some insight into the “feed my lambs” charge.

I promise it won’t make you a liberal; you may get a better idea of what it means to be a conservative, though.