Every Number Has a Story . . .

12 thoughts on “Every Number Has a Story . . .”

1. I just had to laugh when the guy said that the resolution “infringes on church autonomy.” What made it even funnier was that he said it with a straight face. I think that statement more than anything else influenced the vote negatively. No one likes being told what to do, especially if it’s a Baptist church. But unil Baptist churches man up and realize they’ve been fooling themselves with this unhealthy focus on numbers, we’re not going to get anywhere. We got to admit the problem before we can start solving it.

2. Timmy,

   This was sobering. Thank you for posting it. I can’t help but feel heartbroken that such a sound resolution was argued for well, and yet was still defeated. I am thankful for men such as Tom Ascol.

   I also feel a bit confused that a two-thirds vote trumps Scripture.

3. Pingback: Dead Yet Living » Harder to Watch

4. As much as it hurts that the SBC has yet to endorse an official resolution to repent of decades of poor stewardship of membership, the lack of a resolution should not stop us (as current/future pastors or just devoted lay members/leaders) from doing the good work in our own churches. If the churches can be strengthened from the ground up then the passing of an official resolution will be a certain result.

5. Two good points to take: 1) Dr. Ascol’s reflection that the convention isn’t ready for this radical biblicism is indeed correct; 2) Next year, the Ascol/Yarnell Resolution on Church Membership would be a very important and keen strategy to inform our brethren that regenerate church membership isn’t calvinist, anti-baptist, nor anti-church-autonomy.

6. I’ve addressed the autonomy excuse at Tblogue:

   http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2007/06/force-of-resolution.html

7. Brandon said,

   “I also feel a bit confused that a two-thirds vote trumps Scripture.”

   I think that is what a whole bunch of us is trying to figure out. Aren’t we heirs of the Conservative Resurgence that fought for the inerrancy of Scripture?

   Adam is right. There is a lot that we need to be doing, not the least of which is using whatever influence or means we have to communicate that responsible church membership matters. Genuine, lasting change will not happen overnight, nor will it happen in a week of Convention meetings. It will happen when a generation rises to the challenge to plant, reform, and revitalize the local church to reflect the biblical and irreducible marks as revealed in Scripture. Gene has given some practical and helpful words on this in a previous comment. Here’s the link:

   http://timmybrister.com/2007/06/11/your-thoughts-on-san-antonio/#comment-7767

   Last year, we were told that the reason why the resolution did not make it out of the committee was because if we purged the rolls, we would lose evangelistic prospects who just happen to also be church members as well. This year we are told that the resolution is an infringement on the autonomy of the local church. When are they going to run out of ridiculous excuses for not passing the resolution on the most important issue facing SBC churches today?

8. Thanks Timmy for posting this. It is very telling. May I have your permission to post this on my blog?

9. I was not there, but I think that I would have voted against it.
   There is a very sound kernel in this resolution. But I do not see church autonomy as a ridiculous excuse.

   I have often wondered about this 1/3 present 2/3 absent split. How is it calculated, if you know? Yes, there are people on my church’s roll who never come. But on the other hand, if this 1/3 present data is merely a snapshot of one Sunday, then I would think it is inaccurate.
   For example, when my kids were younger, they were sick a lot and not at the same time, naturally, and quite often at the last minute on Sunday morning, too. My husband had a job in which he had to travel, so sometimes our oldest and I would stay home because the younger one was sick. He was not a member, but we were.

   Recently, the same oldest went to a different SBC church on Sunday morning to visit his fiancee. He was counted absent in our church but not particularly counted present in her church.

   Two everyday examples, the likes of which happen all the time. So is this 1/3 present figure a snapshot of one Sunday, or who comes at least some Sundays of the month?

10. Pingback: What if? « Ramblings, Thoughts, and What We Think . . .

11. Mike,

    You didn’t ask me, and you posted it already on your blog?!

    Just kdding man. 😉

    BTW, glad to hear the positive reviews of your interview with Driscoll. Looks like it is getting a lot of atention . . .

12. Karen,

    The fact that hardly one-third of Southern Baptists show up on Sunday is a serious problem. Historically, this has not been the case. I don’t think it is only a Sunday morning snapshot, rather it is the ongoing reality that reveals we have more unregenerate church members than we do regenerate church members.

    One may argue, “Are you equating being a Christian with being a faithful member of a local church?” My answer would be “Yes, I am.” Some who profeses to be a Christian and is wilfully disobedient to Christ’s command to love, serve, and give their lives in covenant community with other believers causes me to believe that they are very likely not believers. As John reminds us, they went out from among us because they were really never one of us.

Comments are closed.