I am the pastor of Grace Church in Alpharetta, GA. I have previously pastored churches in Texas and Georgia. Amanda and I have four children.

I have a B.A. in Biblical Studies from The Criswell College in Dallas, TX, and a M.Div. from New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary.

Read my first post here for more info on me and this blog.


15 Responses to About

  1. So good to see how the Lord is using you my dear old friend. God speed.

  2. JP says:

    What is gospel? As I see you have achieved a lot of letters after your name, try to be real and not theological… 😉

  3. Scott W. Kay says:


    How is being theological antithetical to being real? Is it not possible that by including my theological/educational background it helps give readers an idea of my perspectives when I write (conservative, evangelical, Bible-believing, Gospel-oriented)? Isn’t that part of the reason people go to a blog’s About page, to get an idea of who the author is, and where he’s coming from theologically and/or philosophically?

  4. JP says:

    What is gospel?

  5. cindy says:

    i loved your blog on paula white. i am a christian and all your thoughts were mine. i have gotten sick over the prosperity message. i have gotten so angry at God for not judging it. why does He allow Benny to go unjudged? God please do something. souls are going to hell because of these people. anyway, thanks for speaking the truth

  6. Scott W. Kay says:


    Thanks for the kind words. Just remember, God will judge and He will not spare. Just be patient. His timing is wise. I’m glad He knows what He’s doing, and that He promises that He won’t loose any of His sheep! : ) Thanks for loving the truth!

  7. Scott W. Kay says:


    Simply put, Gospel = the message of Christ’s substitutionary atonement for our sins in His death, burial, and resurrection. Believe on Him and be saved.

    That’s the center of our theology, our lives, and our eternity as Christians. Hence, the aim to keep the Gospel central on this blog.

  8. JP says:

    nice theology.

  9. amtog says:

    “So they set out and went from village to village, preaching the gospel and healing people everywhere.”

    Luke 9:6 (New International Version)
    New International Version (NIV)
    Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society

    At this time, the disciples did not preach the substitutionary atonement for our sins in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus…so, what was their gospel?

  10. Scott W. Kay says:

    Answer: the same gospel that was preached to Abraham.

    “The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.” So those who have faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.” (Gal. 3:8 NIV)

    The Gospel has always been the message that we are justified (declared righteous) by faith alone in the promise repeated in that verse: the promise of the delivering work of the Messiah (Jesus Christ), who would come to establish God’s kingdom on earth – a work He ultimately accomplished by his substitutionary atonement on the cross.

  11. JP says:

    Theologically correct. Down in the trenches less than revealing.

  12. Scott W. Kay says:

    Thank you for your kind approval JP. Feel free to read the blog itself to see what and how it is revealed in the trenches.

  13. JP says:

    Pharisees and Sadducees were the theologians of their times and didn’t understand gospel. So saying you are theologically correct is not necessarily approval.
    Admittedly I am having a bit of enjoyment at our repartee. The gist of my thought is that we Christians throw about terms that have little relevance outside of our world view.
    In the instance of Jesus’ preaching the gospel. I doubt seriously if he actually said “The Gospel has always been the message that we are justified (declared righteous) by faith alone in the promise repeated in that verse: the promise of the delivering work of the Messiah (Jesus Christ), who would come to establish God’s kingdom on earth – a work He ultimately accomplished by his substitutionary atonement on the cross.”
    Probably more likely told them of the Father’s love and how much He wants to have relationship, how much He is concerned with their day to day lives, how little He is concerned with them “being right” with the law or the theologians of the day.
    For instance a few weeks ago I felt the Lord say to me “There is no FUBAR with Papa”. That was unbelievably awesome good news to me.
    BTW I have read much of your blog and you do have some good stuff. I just enjoy a bit of midrash with my brothers and sisters.

  14. Tom says:

    Scott, tell me about your church…what is the role of the family and how does it play out in the programs of your church?

  15. Theodore A. Jones says:

    “and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”
    When I was a kid the church my parents and I attended had the practice of observing the Lord’s table each Sunday. Always 1 Cor.11:23-31 was read to the audience from the KJV. After reaching the age to become a participator in this ceremony I became aware of an unsettling issue mentioned in 1 Cor 11: 29 in that a participator in this ceremony can become guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. Many years have passed since that time and this issue troubled me for a long time. For answers about misunderstanding is it wise to obtain an answer from the theologian or is it wiser to continue in Jesus words to reach the correct understanding? There is a small narrow gate that has been perfected by Jesus’ crucifixion, but only a very few people ever find it.
    There are a number of things wrong with the doctrine of substitutionary atonement. This doctrine assumes that Jesus’ crucifixion is the death of a man caused by bloodshed sacrificed in place of yourself. If this proposal is the true explanation of why Jesus was crucified why is it that he says “When he comes he will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin” but this conviction of guilt relative to sin is AFTER his crucifixion? For the theoretical logic of substitutionary atonement to be true there cannot be the remaining issue of guilt relative to sin.
    The problem the doctrine of substitutionary atonement cannot get around is the fact that no man’s life can be taken by bloodshed and escape the requirement of God’s demand of accounting for this action. Gen. 9:5.
    The truth about the crucifixion of Jesus is that his crucifixion is the sin of murder caused by bloodshed. For this reason one word has been added to the law of God but only relative to this one sin. Therefore the only sin that can be repented of to obey the Acts 2:38 command is the sin of Jesus murder. For God demands this accounting from each man Gen. 9:5b NIV. regarding the sin of crucifying his only begotten son. God loves obedience rather than sacrifice. So the law is added AFTER the sin. He became sin for us to repent of not in place of. If the assumption of substitutionary atonement were to have been true the Acts 2 event would never have happened. However a man must be taught the only correct Way the command Repent must be obeyed or no sin is forgiven, but only a few find the Way to obey this command. You see Jesus was crucified at Passover for no person can benefit from the sacrifice of the Lamb by refusing to admit of participation in the Lamb’s slaughter. Since God loves obedience and the sacrifice of an animal is not a sin there is no accounting required for an animal sacrifice. But the sacrifice of a man is an entirely different matter whenever bloodshed is the factor causing the loss of life. ‘This is my body which is broken for you” to repent of “This is my blood which is shed for you” to repent of; any other understanding about jesus’ crucifixion at the Lord’s table a person participates unworthily. The Lord’s table is prepared in the presence of the Lord’s enemies. The Lord’s table is not for remembering what he did for us rather it is for remembering what you are by law held accountable of doing to him. Selah.

%d bloggers like this: