A week ago, I thought it would be a good idea to share some of my thoughts on the Southern Baptist Convention. I had before me some chicken scratch on a napkin from a conversation at the Founders Cafe earlier that week. If I had known that that chicken scratch would result in 12,000+ words on eleven articles with nearly 200 comments, I would have reconsidered that idea. I honestly don’t know what happened or where all this came from. None of this was planned, so maybe I did have a fire in my belly I didn’t know was there. I must say, however, it was somewhat cathartic. π
I chose to write about some issues and problems in the SBC that very few people seem to be talking about. In the course of this past week, I undoubtedly said some things that offended some, while at the same time, those same words received a hearty “Amen, brother!” Such is the nature of the SBC. In any case, I hope to bring to the table something substantive to talk about regarding the SBC and what can be done to see that we become a Convention focused on the gospel, mission, Christ, and the Church. These posts demanded quite a bit from me this past week, and as a result, I will have quite the time of catching up with my class readings and papers. Nevertheless, I do not regret for the way I spent my 2007 Fall Break. I love the SBC. I am passionate about our local churches. I am committed to the gospel. And I want to see reformation and revival in our land.
With that said, here’s how the 12 posts ranked in popularity:
1. The Fleecing of the SBC
2. Together for the Church
3. 2:00 a.m. @ Mars Hill
4. Decisional Regeneration and Southern Baptist Eisegesis
5. Outsourcing the Local Church?
6. From the Cruiseliner to the Battleship: What Will It Take?
7. Depopulating the Denomination
8. Ecclesiological Foreclosure and the SBC
9. Toward a Missional SBC, Part 1
10. From Rural to Suburban to Urban, or, The Kellerizing of the SBC
11. Disconnect
12. Toward a Missional SBC, Part 2
Yesterday, I took the time to compile these posts into one PDF document, and should you be interested in have a copy of it, I would be happy to send it to you via email. To obtain a copy, simply email me at outpostministries[at]yahoo[dot]com. Be sure that leave your first and last name.
So I am done talking about the SBC, and regularly scheduled formatting will resume. But before leave, I would like to hear from you. I want to know what your thoughts are on the SBC. I want to know where your heart is on these matters. And finally, I ask that you respond in summary form to what I have written whether you agree or disagree with the content I have provided and why you feel that way.
So please, share your thoughts. I will not be posting for a couple days as I hope to listen, discuss, and learn from others like yourself. Thanks for participating.
Dude, I was BLESSED by this series. Thanks a million for pouring your heart out and spurring us on to love and good deeds. The tone of the posts was full of conviction and yet gracious, and the content was convincing, convicting, and thought provoking. You have earned a permanent place on my “links” page.
I was raised in Baptist churches, but I’ve never been terribly attached to a denomination. I see the SBC as a microcosm of the problems that abound in the church at large — at least in the US.
A common theme in your SBC musings is a message that people have been preaching for some years now: The Christians need to get out of their country clubs and into the world. (Your posts above labeled 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, and 12.)
We need to get rid of the notion that we have to focus on the gospel OR ministering to those in need. We have to purge the idea from the members that evangelism is inviting someone to church. And we need to get away from this fear of doctrine and get people to understand that it does matter what you believe and why you believe it.
On those counts, I say to your posts, “Amen!”
I also have to ask, since we’ve been talking about all this for years now, and little has changed, what are we not doing? Why is everything still basically the same? I don’t know, but I hope we find some answers soon.
Then there’s the Calvinism. I am not and will probably never be a full-blown Calvinist (or Arminian, and certainly not a Pelagian). Baptists used to be Calvinists. They’re not now. Get used to it.
Calvinism properly understood is, in my humble opinion, an error. Calvinism poorly understood — which is by far the most common state — is a force to drive people away from the gospel and from the church. Whether or not it should, Calvinism seems to inhibit evangelism as well. Given my position on Calvinism, it should be no surprise that I would like to see it stay far away from the SBC or any other church. I may like to listen to Sproul or Piper, but it is as a mature believer who can filter out the Calvinism just as I can filter out charismatic or Roman Catholic theology when I listen/read their work.
Given the theological sloppiness in the church today, the fact that they’re not Calvinist enough is nowhere near as important as the fact that too many today don’t understand the atonement or think that Christ’s deity is important. They’re willing to give up morality and the exclusivity of the cross. The fact that they don’t hold to TULIP is the least of our worries.
Chris B. what on earth do you mean by “We nee to get rid of the notion that we have to focus on the Gospel….” What would you say our focus is to be?
You ask what we are not focusing on – Could it be the whole counsel of God….
Praise be to God for the Doctrines of Grace! Chris you are something even if you chose not to label it. If you haven’t figured out what you believe just understand we all fall into some camp of understanding revealing what we stand on and believe.
Calvinism is clearly understood by those of us who believe in it. For true believers this understanding only drives them to the depths of the Gospel and their love for God and his Church. Calvinism puts evangelism into its right perspective – God saves man, man can’t save himself….I pray for the day we come back to our roots. Sproul and Piper are pillars of Christian maturity. I do hope to follow behind such men of God. If more understood and embraced the Doctrines of Grace the issues with the atonement and Deity of Christ would be understood. Morality is a byproduct of a relationship and a clear understanding of doctrines and TULIP can only help those God calls into relationship with him to narrow down essentials we as believers need to know.
Some of your comments seem to sound so prideful ….
KEM, please re-read my sentence: “We need to get rid of the notion that we have to focus on the gospel OR ministering to those in need.” That “OR” is important to understanding that point.
I am, of course, “something.” That is someone who is unconvinced by both Calvinism and Arminianism — I think neither answers all the questions adequately.
As for understanding Calvinism, my concern is not that Calvinists don’t understand it but that non-Calvinists and especially non-Christians don’t understand it.
I don’t mean to sound prideful, but I think Timmy’s picking the wrong battle here.
Chris,
When you have time, I would be interesting in understanding why you think Calvinism rightly understood is in error and how in particular it drives people away from the gospel and the church. That’s a strong statement to make, and I would be interested in hearing your rationale.
Regarding the picking of Calvinism as a battle, Calvinists have primarily only been putting up the shield in the past five years. I think it would be more accurate to say that we have been putting up with the attacks. If you would like a 19 page documentation to verify that, I would be happy to send it to you.
And as I have said earlier, the point is not to convert everyone to Calvinism. The point is to encourage one another to be honest and fair. That’s a challenge I present to you with your commnents, and a challenge I hope to fulfill in my writings.
I do appreciate your candor and forthrightness, though. π
ChrisB,
You seemed to try to be fair and level headed in your comments. However, and this drives me nuts, you then said
“Whether or not it should, Calvinism seems to inhibit evangelism as well.”
I’m not trying to be rude, but have you looked at the history of missions and evangelism? Carey, Spurgeon, Edwards, Whitefield, etc.? I’m going to guess that you are familiar with these men and others so why would you make such a comment?
Previous to the above statement you said.
“Calvinism poorly understood β which is by far the most common state β is a force to drive people away from the gospel and from the church.”
Is is possible given the above statement that you fall into this category? Please don’t take this the wrong way as I mean no offense. I also echo Timmy’s question to you.
BTW, do you think it’s been Calvinistic pastors/apologists who have been advocating that evangelism is “inviting someone to church”? That drives me nuts too. π
Mark
So what’s wrong with Calvinism? Given the time invested, I decided to post my answer on my own blog.
I really don’t have a lot of interest in debating Calvinism. It’s not an issue on which we should divide. Far more important is the question of how to get the Church to get out and act like Christ. I appreciate your work on that area and have enjoyed and will continue to enjoy the Blue Collar Theology series (saga?). Keep up the good work, and don’t let my non-participation in the Calvinism debate bother you.
Timmy, I like what you have posted for the last week or so, and it causes me to wonder why there seem to be so few “voices of reason” that are willing to face the issues and do something about them. Many have been vocally hoping for a Mohler presidency in Indy. I think many of those who think he can fix all the convention’s problems will be painfully disillusioned if they do place their hopes for this convention in him. I think Asco’ls campaign for his accountability and integrity in church membership resolution risks becoming an annual drama and failure, but his resolution is more necessary with each passing year. The SBC ship is steadily taking on water, the deckhands can see it, but nobody on the bridge seems to care. I hope this can be solved without a mutiny, and without more crew jumping ship at the next opportunity.
Chris,
I look forward to reading what you have written. I am not really interesting in debating Calvinism either. My only contention is the claims you made above which I considered to be unwarranted and inaccurate. On my end, while there is considerable weight in the truth of Reformed doctrine, there is much more to be said about the presence of Reform-ation. My hopes are that what I believe will be more readily seen on the screen of my life than the doorposts of my blog. I look forward to discussing these and other issues with you more in the future.
Guillaume,
That was a very pithy and vivid comment. I enjoyed thinking about the imagery. Although, I have to wonder if I am being thrown overboard after this past week! Just kidding (others may not be though). I do have to wonder why the SBC is in such a conundrum that we can’t even have serious talks about important matters. Maybe we are afraid that it will fracture the presumed unity of the Conservative Resurgence. But wait, we already saw that in San Antonio didn’t we? I don’t know what those on the helm have in mind or what map they are using to navigate, but I am going to continue to work with these two oars. I might sometimes rock the boat just a little bit, though.
ChrisB,
Thanks for the reply. I appreciate your demeanor and attitude. I’m glad you’re open to understanding and it looks like you’re willing to flesh things out and your future studies just might do that. You’re so close. π
immy,
Speaking of Missional, have you seen the paper on this site that is entitled Is βmissionβ our only mission – Revisiting the Missionary Nature of the Church? Or this mp3 Watch Your Mission: To Be, or Not to Be, “Missional” ?
I haven’t read the paper yet, but the mp3 is very good, IMO. Hopefully, you haven’t posted on these yet. If you have, sorry.
Mark