Would Steve take Hank's Job?

[mattrose]

I thought of a question on my way home from my Houghton Program today. Don't know why. But anyways, I was wondering...

If Hank retired from the Bible Answer Man show, and the Christian Research Institute came asking Steve to be the new Bible Answer Man...would he take the job? Should he? Would it be a hard choice? Would he be well received?

[schoel]

If Hank retired from the Bible Answer Man show, and the Christian Research Institute came asking Steve to be the new Bible Answer Man...would he take the job? Should he? Would it be a hard choice? Would he be well received?

No way they would ask him. CRI and the Bible Answer Man rarely leave room for more than one view on certain things. Steve's open approach to many Biblical subjects would disqualify him from the start. CRI's modus operandi is to have one answer to most, if not all, questions. Steve doesn't roll that way.

[mattrose]

It's a hypothetical

I'm interested in the process Steve would use to make such a decision, especially because we know that he says 'yes' to almost all ministry invitations.

Would he automatically say 'no' b/c of some aspect of CRI?
Would he automatically say 'yes' b/c it is a chance to minister to more?
Would he think it was a really tough decision needing lots of prayer and soul searching?

[darinhouston]

Besides, the ministry model is very commercial, and aside from Steve's desire to live by faith and avoid simony, it is a precarious place to be when you're ministry is as heavily leveraged as CRI appears to be from such commercial activities. I suspect he would require significant restructuring or at least financial separation of BAM from the rest of CRI. It would be interesting to say the least to see if the listenership of BAM would support the ministry through giving to replace whatever revenue it receives from CRI if they knew it was disassociated from CRI, financially. If it lasted long enough, I have no doubt that the spiritual lives of those faithful or habitual listeners would grow and enrich to the point that the numbers would play out, but those first months would be truly a faith exercise, I would think -- if they continued to listen, though, they have SO many listeners, it wouldn't take that many in each area to support such a ministry if they have grown in the way that we have through Steve's ministry.

[steve]

This is an interesting question. The last lime I ate with Hank, a few years ago, he was talking about his desire to do more travel and seminar-type teaching. In passing, he spoke of the possibility (perhaps a remote one) that he would someday be doing only writing and seminar-type ministry, and would have someone else take over his radio hosting role.

He gave no indication that he would consider me as his replacement at the microphone, and I assumed he would not, since he has many friends with better credentials than mine, who would probably be above me on any list of potentials. On the other hand, Hank made it very clear that he respected my grasp of scripture, and likes the way I explained things. So I was not sure whether he was "testing the water" with me, or just freely talking about his future plans.

I don't know if Hank thinks the same way about my ministry, today, or not. I have no specific reason to doubt it, though I have not heard from him for some time. He had me write a book review for his journal once, and he once phoned me to ask how I would argue against a particular dispensational point. However, the last lime he had me on the air, a caller to the program said, "Steve, I know you said you believe in conditional immortality, so..." and went on with some related question. That was awkward. Of course, I have never said such a thing, but I assumed Hank, upon hearing this, might think that I had done so—which, I assumed, would not set well with him. I even wondered if the caller had deliberately misrepresented me in order to place a wedge between me and Hank. Anyway, I went into damage-control mode, and said, "I have never claimed that I believe in conditional immortality. What I have said is that I believe that there are alternatives to the traditional view of hell—including annihilationism—which have a respectable amount of scriptural support. But on this program, we are talking about the Book of Revelation, so your question is off-topic."

I am not sure if Hank has contacted me since then, and I often wondered if that caller's misrepresenation of my views on Hank's show might have made him think more cautiously about having me on. I have no way of knowing.

Anyway, because of Hank's mention of finding a replacement someday, I have sometimes thought about what my response would be, if ever I were to be asked. Of course, the real answer must be, what would I feel the Holy Spirit leading me to do at such a time as this might come up?

I would not wish to run an organization, nor give up my present ministry. If the hosting of the BAM show was separated from the management of CRI, I would probably be glad to host the show, under certain conditions:

1. I would not accept any salary for doing it;
2. I would not endorse or advertise products, nor conduct infomercials;
3. I would hope for minimal (or none) commercial breaks during the broadcast;
4. I would mention that the ministry is donor-supported, but would not coax people to send money;
5. I would attempt to give a fair and balanced treatment of reasonable theological alternatives.

In other words, I would wish to follow the same principles that I currently follow on The Narrow Path.

Alternatively, if I were simply asked to sit-in and answer caller questions, but there would still be the present format (i.e. commercial breaks to sell products), I would consider doing so, without pay, but would wish to also continue doing The Narrow Path as a separate ministry.

Neither of these scenarios seems very realistic to me. As I said, Hank has many well-educated friends, whom he has known longer and better than he has known me. On the other hand, most of those people probably already have good ministry jobs, and might not be available. Also, to my surprise, I have often found that many educated Christians and pastors, whom I thought would do a good job sitting-in on my show when I have to be away, have expressed to me that they would not feel comfortable at an open radio microphone, fielding unpredictable caller questions...so who knows? Hank might not be easy to replace.

I could not give as informed answers as Hank does about cults and fringe Christian movements, which might disqualify me for the position. Also, the kind of people who support the BAM show today might not appreciate my teaching style as much as they like Hank's. Even though The Narrow Path now seems to draw sufficient support from appreciative listeners, the present support levels after 11 years on the air still would not be adequate if I were drawing living expenses from the income. Also, my announced gatherings do not draw large crowds, even in areas where I have good radio coverage—which makes me think that my teaching style might not appeal to the masses, and might, therefore, make me a bad choice as the front man for a ministry that must bring in millions of dollars annually from donors.

[mattrose]

Thanks so much for responding to my wanderings Steve. I think it'd be neat, if Hank were decide to fade himself out of the BAM broadcast, to have a series of 'guest hosts' and see which one's were most well received. Of course, personally, I prefer your style, you may be right that it doesn't appeal to the masses as much as the quicker, cliched answers.

[darinhouston]

Don't sell yourself short, Steve, as to the potential "income" from such a market. There is considerable power in the numbers due to the vastness of his market. The few markets you're in aren't exactly full of bible-belt ministry supporters (and I love that about you), and (aside from the power of the Spirit) the power of the brand and the existing goodwill of the ministry brand is pretty strong and may well reach more folks who are guided by the Spirit's leading in giving than your present markets (and potentially serve other markets which might have no support).

Basically, God may not be providing support of giving to BAM in the way that He would if it were being led by the Spirit and by Faith instead of commercial exploits (no offense to Hank, but it's a pretty overtly commercial enterprise with many of the shows being nothing but glorified infomercials for either his own or others' books). I have to think that the Spirit would revel in the opportunity to turn that resource into a light for changed hearts and lives instead of just tickling some ears (my own included some years ago -- that's how I came across your ministry, of course).

[steve7150]

Steve, I know you said you believe in conditional immortality, so..." and went on with some related question. That was awkward. Of course, I have never said such a thing, but I assumed Hank, upon hearing this, might think that I had done so—which, I assumed, would not set well with him. I even wondered if the caller had deliberately misrepresented me in order to place a wedge between me and Hank. Anyway, I went into damage-control mode, and said, "I have never claimed that I believe in conditional immortality. What I have said is that I believe that there are alternatives to the traditional view of hell—including annihilationism—which have a respectable amount of scriptural support. But on this program, we are talking about the Book of Revelation, so your question is off-topic."

I am not sure if Hank has contacted me since then, and I often wondered if that caller's misrepresenation of my views on Hank's show might have made him think more cautiously about having me on. I have no way of knowing.








No doubt if they ever offered you the job they probably would review your beliefs on all important Christian topics and this would come up anyway.