The New Testament keeps pointing me to local communities of believers as the primary visible outworking of the church. There are occasional times of cooperation, and submission to apostolic leadership. But mostly the local church is busy preaching the Gospel and living out the implications of God’s Grace.
So, I’m a typical young pastor trying to work out how denominations fit into a biblic understanding of the church. I keep hearing smart people say we can do more together than we can apart. I’m not sure I can agree with that. Can’t most churches do more missions with less money through other non-SBC missions organizations?
What do you think?
I know many guys my age who lose interest in the SBC. Usually, they become discouraged by all the negative aspects of denominational debates. But I’ve known others who believe their continued engagement can advance the Gospel in some small way – either by seeking reforms or promoting missions.
Convince me . . . Why should I care about the SBC?
{ 33 comments }
Because they have 16 million…, er 8 million…, um 4 million…, ah what was the question again?
Darby Livingstons last blog post..When a Wife Should NOT Submit
At the least, the SBC (as with all denominations) serve to unify Christians and create standards and accountability. Why do we (rightly) make fun of the fundie independent Baptist church with 17 points on eschatology in their credal statement? This happens when sectarianism (especially intellectual sectarianism) manifests itself. Ordination standards and academic peer review are important for the health and balance of any denomination. If for nothing else, that is one reason to care about the SBC. The SBC is far from perfect on these matters of accountability, but it could be much worse. I think the Baptist and Free Church movement as a whole would be much worse off if it were not for cooperative programs.
Kevin Daviss last blog post..Nancey Murphy and Jeffrey Schloss on Science and Theology
my Grandfather, before the forsaking of the Doctrines of Grace, would have said as an engine for world evangelization.
My Father would have said because of its missions.
I say, the only cure for apostasy is Judgment. It’s time to get out.
I won’t try and convince you to stay in the SBC because I’m trying to understand why I remain here myself. Our church gives around 18% to missions and ministry, but every year we send less through the CP and more through other agencies that are more efficient. I’ve asked our boards for years to support national missionaries but we still insist on only supporting North Americans. Our church has also divided our CP giving in that we give half through the normal channel through the state and half directly to the mission boards. We do this because our state (NC) seems to do very little with the money other than place a lot of pictures of people in the staff directory while very little actually goes to missions.
I don’t even think in terms of “staying in the SBC.”
Our church supports the SBC, but there are other missions agencies (and individuals) we support as well. But on a personal level, I’m generally discouraged about the need for such a large organization – especially when their is little real unity of purpose, belief or vision. I think we should always ask what is best for the Gospel’s advance.
Bill;
I would not like to be in their shoes, when God asks them, why they didn’t send the money to the field, instead of using it on organizational expenses at Home.
tony,
this one is hard. every time i think the SBC isn’t getting anything done, some disaster hits and the SBC – churches working together – does more to help than any other religious organization out there. when i was in KC, MO katrina hit. hundreds of SBC churches set up meetings and formed various teams to go down and help out physically (with chainsaws and boats) and spiritually (with witnessing, tracts, counselling, etc.). the missouri baptist convention has had turmoil the last decade or so, but when push came to shove its infrastructure – down to the local churches – showed what the SBC is capable of.
that said, i think you’re in the right to look elsewhere, but i personally don’t know what organization is more effective. some of my seminary friends went to e-free churches and such.
of course there are other issues. one of my friends was totally qualified to plant churches with a plan and everything after seminary, but kept getting turned down by NAMB b/c of their hoops and such. another friend is called to do missions in japan, but got turned down by the IMB for being in a mixed marriage (white guy and japanese wife), apparently for strategic purposes. that’s where my blood starts boiling – those at the top get to hand pick who gets help, NOT local churches.
a lot to think about,
mike
Mikes last blog post..who would you put on arkansas’s mount rushmore of sports?
Tony,
I think you should stay in the SBC because the Lord calls us to stay where we are called. To plant ourselves where we are put and work for His glory to the nations. Regardless of all the junk going on in our denomination there are SBC churches out here that are preaching bible doctrine, practicing everything the Lord tells us to do in His Word and is honoring Him. I think of one passage of Scripture in 1 Cor 7 where Paul is talking about a person’s status or condition and it kinda fits this situation:
“Each one should remain in the condition in which he was called.” (1 Corinthians 7:20, ESV)
“So, brothers, in whatever condition each was called, there let him remain with God.” (1 Corinthians 7:24, ESV)
I know this is really loose argument and I wrestle (a lot) with the question – should I stay or should I go? There are days when I think it would be easier to just move out of the SBC and into a more friendly fellowship (my church is a Reformed SBC Church) but then I see all the other Founder Friendly churches who are staying in and it encourages me to continue to fight another day.
Of course, at the end of the day each man has to go where the Lord takes him and to remain captive to the Word of God only! Not bound to tradition, denomination or any other unbiblical union. I hope you choose to stay but if not I still thank the Lord for you and for this site.
Love & Blessings in Christ
Jeff
Jeff Browns last blog post..Just as He Commanded Us
Tony,
You should be thrilled that the SBC is no longer funneling millions of dollars a year toward the wolves as they did for decades prior to the conservative resurgence. But I don’t know of any reason why you should become/stay affiliated with the SBC. The SBC is still very inefficient and it still tolerates rabid Arminians.
*Inserts tongue in cheek.*
Why, in order to preserve baptist distinctives of course…
Thank you. I’ll be here all week.
John Meches last blog post..If I really had any friends…
MIKE; Look At The GARB or Baptist Bible Fellowship.
Jeff Brown; I Cor 7;20 has nothing to do with The SBC.
This is to continue the conversation with Dr. Foltz and Mike about national missionaries and this quote of Mike’s, “but i personally don’t know what organization is more effective”
What I learned on the field with the IMB was that a North American family costs about 75K a year or more to support. They do great work and are called to be there, but I like helping others too. For example, in some countries, that money would support 50 national families who already know the language and culture! We support Gospel for Asia, Alpha India Minsitries and a few others in our church, but I love these agencies that support nationals. Heart Cry, the one Paul Washer works with is another good one to consider. I just wish we could use our wealth to get even more bang for our buck. That’s what has caused us to be so frustrated with the SBC at the state level. We see almost nothing while 60% or more stays here. With modern communications, we have too many layers between local assocaition, state convention, and national entities. Let’s streamline and send more to missions!
God bless you guys,
Bill Pfister
Brevard, NC
Dr. Foltz,
I know 1 Cor 7 has nothing to do with the SBC. Notice in my post I said “kinda” in other words kinda sorta.
In my opinion I don’t see any Scriptural evidence for any denomination or local associations.
What do you think?
Love & Blessings in Christ
Jeff
Jeff Browns last blog post..Just as He Commanded Us
How about a Top 10 Reasons to Stay a Southern Baptist list
I will start it off:
1. You were born in a baptist hospital
2. You are Lottie Moon’s cousin
3. You knew William Bullein Johnson personally
4.
jeff brown;
4. don’t carev where mission money goes
5 . don’t care if compromise is the name of the game
6.
Mike,
“…those at the top get to hand pick who gets help, NOT local churches.”
That is the most insightful observation concerning what is wrong with NAMB, the IMB, and the SBC as a whole that I have heard so far.
The problem in the SBC is that the SBC and her agencies are no longer being steered by the local Churches. And in fact, we have reached the point where the SBC and her agencies are attempting to dictate (through ever narrowing parameters of cooperation) both doctrine and direction to the local churches.
The Trustee system of oversight has failed… Period! Entire Boards have been co-opted for the purpose of perusing personal agendas, Nepotism and Cronyism can be found throughout the SBC, and decision are made in smoke filled board rooms with the curtains drown tight and the doors locked and bolted. It is sad when there is more openness to how decisions are reached by the secular government than the Board of Trustees of the SBC Agencies.
Well… I think I have said enough.
Grace Always
Greg Alfords last blog post..Pastors and Concealed Weapons
Jeff Brown;
Paul said it is needful that there be heresies [GREEK-''Sects''] among us, that it
may be manifested which are approved of God
Great post! Thought I was the only one to ask my self this question. I was hopeing for some scripture to back staying, I have never found any and it seems I’m not alone in my search. I love the church God has placed me in, but if He ever moves me I’ll do some looking outside the SBC. (then God will send me where He wants me)
Why stay in the SBC?
None of the following reasons argue that the SBC is perfect. We all know it isn’t; but then, you and I aren’t either.
1. Millions of members that love the Lord, the Bible, and lost souls.
2. We really can do more together than separately. Examples include missions, evangelism, seminaries, literature, church starting, training, fellowship and encouragement, disaster relief, accountability. For examples just read your State Baptist paper, attend a SBC church, read bpnews.net. I have a part in all that through participation, prayer, and by giving through the Cooperative Program and other SBC missions.
3. You have the freedom to also use non-SBC and unofficial SBC sources for literature, missions, programs, etc. You can be a Southern Baptist and still be an “independent” Baptist. We have tremendous freedom. When the SBC is wrong, you can still do your own thing.
4. Millions of members and tens of thousands of churches minister in innumerable ways each Sunday and each day. The Bible is taught, ministry provided, and thousands baptized each week throughout the USA.
5. The SBC strongly and unapologetically stands for the divine inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible. Stands for the truth that personal faith in Jesus is the only way to Heaven.
6. What para-church organization do you know that has stood for biblical truth for 150 years. The SBC has. Not perfectly, I know, but it has.
7. If it were not for the SBC, most of us would not know Jesus as our Savior. (I know God is sovereign, but I guarantee He works through the SBC.)
8. If not for the SBC, most of us would not be as theologically educated as we are. Some want SBC money for their education, all the while showing contempt for the SBC. I see a lack of integrity in that attitude.
9. Few other denominations have the multitude of opportunities to present a biblical world view like the SBC.
10. The SBC is right on the basic biblical doctrines. As A. T. Robertson said, “Give a man an open Bible, an open mind, a conscience in good working order, and he will have a hard time to keep from being a Baptist.” As a local church goes through different pastors, members, and changing times, that church is going to change. But it will be more likely to stay lashed to the Gospel, if it is part of an organization like the SBC.
11. Be a part of something that is making a significant difference in the world for Christ.
Just a few thoughts.
12. The SBC is much more stable than so many of the passing fads.
David R. Brumbelow
1st of all, bill
i love the work of gospel for asia, and i believe in the strategy of aiding indigenous missionaries. good word! still, part of the task remains “going,” not just “supporting.” but, good word
2nd, greg alford
i’ll admit that my line you quoted was too far, a little extreme. still, what about the examples i gave? i know qualified people – called people of God with impeccable christian character – who were turned down by NAMB and the IMB with unsatisfying explanations. so, if “handpicked” isn’t accurate, what word would you choose? and when you state what the real problem is, how is it any different than what i pointed out?
i personally take issue with many things in the SBC right now, but i’m sticking it out. i don’t feel comfortable demanding this loyalty from others, and so i can support tony’s examination of whether or not the SBC is the best or only organization/structure/whatever for cooperating with other churches in kingdom ministry. and, i hope that others would not find fault with my extreme loyalty, which i don’t think anyone here would do. my wife and i feel the SBC is worth our efforts and contributions, not necessarily the monetary ones, but rather our blood, sweat, and tears.
mike
Mikes last blog post..who would you put on arkansas’s mount rushmore of sports?
David,
Thanks for your comments. I am listening and trying to think the whole thing through. For me it’s not really a matter of leaving – I’m not sure that’s even the right language.
The SBC is not a place or organization that a single person can leave – unless you’re a denominational employee. Our church partners with the SBC in various ways, so as a member (and pastor), I’m part of that partnership. We support CP by default and the congregation is mostly uninterested in where the money goes. But now we see God raising up missionaries from our church who are serving international via Campus Crusade and some other missions groups.
My questions is more about my interest level and desire to be involved in the denomination. All of your reasons are good reasons, but I still see the SBC as a para-church organization.
Would it not be better to have a strong association of 15 churches with real fellowship based on doctrine, shared missions and personal relationships among the leaders? This is the kind of para-church cooperation that would appeal to me.
Tony,
Hope I didn’t come across negative; I didn’t mean it that way. Just trying to give some general reasons. As you can see, I’m pretty pro-SBC.
One of the neat things about the SBC is that we do have the flexibility to do things our way. You joining with 15 other churches and doing your own thing is in no way prohibited. At least not unless someone was to really get out in far left field.
We can do missions through official SBC channels and other groups and organizations. I’ve seen some who were turned down by the IMB, still go as unofficial SBC missionaries through raising their own support, working to make a living in another country, and through another mission sending organization. Some just raise their support from several individual SBC churches. I think that’s great.
I’m all for the IMB and NAMB, but that does not mean I’m against every other mission organization. I understand why the IMB cannot accept some otherwise good candidates because they are just not a “fit” in their particular program. Doesn’t mean the candidate is an ungodly person.
On the other hand, when you fairly compare the IMB with other programs, I think the IMB comes out looking very impressive.
By the way, one of our successes is also a negative. The larger the IMB, the less you often know of both the missionaries and the IMB leaders. some of that can be solved by preaching / SS teaching on missions, having IMB missionaries in your church, etc. But it is true that a small organization usually is more closely and better informed.
We give our small amount through the CP, IMB, etc. But we also occasionally give through other organizations. Gideons, Wycliffe Translators, Campus Crusade, American Tract Society are great organizations. I know there are other good ones out there you young guys know better than I.
Do your own thing, but I think there are great benefits to staying within the orbit of the SBC.
David R. Brumbelow
David,
Thanks again for your reply. I didn’t take it negative at all.
I’m really wanting to be convinced and you’ve made a good case. I appreciate the idea of a cooperating convention of free churches. There are many good men & women who work for the SBC. The seminary was a blessing in my life in many ways.
My main hangup is all the baggage that comes along with it, especially when our church can do missions in so many different ways. My default position is to be a nominal supporter of the SBC and encourage my missions committee at church to do their own research. On the other hand, I’d love to see God work a revival across 40K churches.
Tony and all brothers serving in the SBC,
You should care about the SBC primarily because the Lord has placed you in the SBC right now. Just because we may or may not like certain aspects of the SBC does not mean we have the right to become disinterested or ignore it. If all the young pastors who griped about the SBC’s problems on their blogs (I’m not thinking of your post, Tony) got involved in the affairs of the Convention (i.e., attended associational, state, and national meetings), we would be making the first step to solving some of the obvious problems which even the older generation agrees are there (such as the unproportional percentage of funds split in the state versus national level).
It is easy to sit in our desk chairs and lament the ills of the Convention; it requires effort and work to improve what need improving. Serving faithfully in the churches and seeking to build genuine bridges is hard work.
Joseph Goulds last blog post..Regarding the SBC Generation Gap
First, Jeff left out two key verses.
1 Corinthians 7:21, 23 (ESV) 21 Were you a slave? when called? Do not be concerned about it. (But if you can gain your freedom, avail yourself of the opportunity.) 23 u?You were bought with a price; v?do not become slaves of men.
It’s a tough choice. The main reasons for staying seem to be pragmatic which are those that point to size advantages. However, most of these reasons, as in David’s points above, for example, are benefits from the local church rather than the SBC at large.
In some sense, small empires have been built within the organization. This takes away from the biblical prescription of the local church and her authority. Maybe to the detriment of the local church. Missions, theological education, etc. have all been outsourced and the local church suffers.
I also agree that foreign missions should be done by those indigenous to the area where it can be done. How often do you see missionaries from Africa travel to an unevangelized part of Georgia in the USA? (Extreme example, I know.)
It seems like everything in America has to become a democratic republic. Is this what the church should also become? Is it biblical?
Yeah, this can be a touch decision. Especially, when people feel like they can’t *do* enough *alone*. When in reality just sending money isn’t really *doing* to begin with.
Mark
johnMarks last blog post..Instant Millionaire!
As a pastor and former IMB missionary let me say I have struggled with some of the same issues raised. I have been around long enough to have had friends who did choose to leave and now gripe about the new church structure they find themselves ministering in. I know that I am grateful for the opportunity to go and plant churches overseas without having to constantly worry about my support as my dear brothers and sisters who were independents did. We often helped in times of crisis as churches dropped support to build their new buildings or just forgot about their missionaries. There is much I would change if I could and change is coming one way or another. As a pastor I’ve never had the privalege of pastoring a perfect church but I have been amazed that God has chosen to work with imperfect saints (some of which I wished would join another imperfect church) and that in spite of our stumbling bumbling and grumbling spirits God has extended us grace. God doesn’t need the SBC or the PCA or any pastor or church to build His kingdom but He has allowed us to be partners in the gospel. I’m not always proud of The SBC any more than I am proud of all of my own attitudes and actions, but I’m confident that there is a large body of commited disciples (not 16 million) that in humility are seeking His glory in the nations.
Great discussion, although I skimmed through several comments.
My humble observation on the matter is that the early church seemed to have similar associations although local churches were relatively autonomous. Why was it that Peter and the apostles determined a standard for what they would require of Gentiles? Why was Paul advising churches he could no longer visit? Sure, he planted them, but someone else was pastoring them. And Paul asked money to fund mission efforts from one church but not another.
It’s natural for churches to want to associate and it seems okay from the scriptures to have leadership to govern the association. We know that the apostles were not perfect people and they even strove to keep each other in check. So while the local churches were the core for biblical accountability, there was still a unifying association between them insofar as they agreed doctrinally. After all, we see strong warnings against false teachers in the epistles and I don’t think the intent was that we should continue to be associated with them or their followers. Nevertheless, local unity was certainly encouraged by Paul who also practiced associative unity between churches.
Does this mean that we should stay in the SBC as is? Not necessarily. However, I doubt any association we make otherwise would be any better.
Jim Pembertons last blog post..So Quote This
Interesting and curious discussion. From a missions standpoint I would like to make an obsevation, regarding the different points of view.
The methods and effectiveness of the SBC, IMB orNAMB, if someone is “doing it better” (or whatever)- are not valid reasons for any decision. Neither are our comparing our concepts of the early church model, Stetzers model or Washer’s model, with the SBC. (2 Cor 10: 11-13)
The esscence of the issue for me is; What is God calling YOU to do by FAITH? Is he calling and defining a role for your church in missions that are outside the scope of the IMB? DO IT! Is God calling you to change the mission culture of your church by doing some missions yourself? DO IT! Follow Him! Will you have to re-prioritize CP giving? maybe. Remember, God will supply for the IMB if they continue follow Him! Is God calling you to involve your church more with the SBC and it’s missions. Do That!
The spiritual power of the SBC is not in uniting our efforts and giving, but power is God’s alone! (PS. 62) Our “FAITH”ful obedience to his leading and Word is how His power is manifested! Nothing is accomplished without Him!. It is God who is head of the Body. ONLY He knows the best way to direct it. He can fit it together to work His will perfectly. Follow God with whole hearts, seek Him and follow where ever he leads. As you follow, make the changes that he directs you to and trust him help you to do so.
There is no benefit to anyone, including the SBC, if you and your church do not follow GOD where he is leading you.
Remember the SBC is NOT the Church. It is an agency to assist the church in its missions. If they do not assist you in your missions, IT IS OK to move in another direction God that has called in, even if just for a season.
The one reader is right, we have a freedom within the SBC to follow God as he leads, and still be a viable part of a very Godly organization. There is also nothing biblical about being legalistic about the SBC and belonging to it as “God’s Visible Organization on Earth”. The Jehovah witnesses claim that, among others.
If you following God means The SBC doesn’t like it, if they come down on you or constrain you to change- part ways.
It is just a Co-Op- not our identity in Christ!
Brian
Brian,
I agree with you in general, but I’d say you have to be willing to discuss how you discern God’s calling in faith.
Many have fallen into error by following a false faith to their own self-delusion. Or I’ve even seen people provide seriously flawed leadership in mission efforts because they “felt led” rather than by heeding wise counsel. I’ve been involved in church planting in some areas and evangelism in other areas to people where no local visible church is possible among them. I’ve seen the hand of God work through, and in spite of, his flawed people. “Have faith,” or “trust God,” is a good admonition. “Do what you feel God is calling you to do by faith,” is not always helpful where clarity is required.
And yes, my church cooperates with the IMB and NAMB in some matters, and with other mission groups in others. For continuity, we have developed our own small missions board to keep track of it all.
Thanks Jim,
I also agree with you in general and apologize for not spell checking my last entry!
I would say you have posed two different arguments though.
Following God in a self motivated, self delusional, “feels good to me” way is not following God at all, is it? In missions or anything else?
It is the difference between a Saul and a David, a Cain and Able and so on.
I was talking obviously about REALLY following God, by REAL faith and as He REALLY leads. and not in false pretense, but in a biblical and God honoring way.
It is wrong for me to assume that Christians should know the difference.
Point noted.
Please go on about finding Clarity. I’m all ears and would ask you to expound on that issue as it regards to the direction of missions of the SBC , it’s policies and finding clarity on how to resolve the conflict between what the SBC believes is God’s direction and what many churches believe God is clearly calling some of them to do, and the two are not the same direction.
I’m listening intently and respectfully.
I have to add concerning delusional- that I would say that there are not a few Southern Baptists who “discern” that the SBC is self-delusional and self-contextualized in uber-researched, shared missional strategy of following God through storying, by GPS, all made possible by YOUR participation in the Cooperative Program. Copyright Lifeway. It was funnier in my prayer language!
Just kidding on the last paragraph – I could not resist!
Brian
The SBC is not a denomination. It is simply a cooperative.
Mark Mitchells last blog post..A CALL TO PRAYER FOR OUR NATION
Brian,
Thanks for your comments. My issue with clarity is a matter of practicality. Where it is not a bad thing to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit and God works in many ways beyond our human institutions, saying it the way you said it can be easily misconstrued whether such is to delve into obvious error (heresy) or less obvious, to pursue a mission endeavor unwisely because one mistakenly “felt led” to do it that way.
For example I’ll draw a contrast between two real missions I know about:
Mission 1: Two missionaries from completely different mission boards working in different countries focusing on the same people group meet and envision a strategic mission endeavor in yet a third country to the same people group. They each go to their respective boards and enlist the help of churches and parachurch organizations to take the leadership of different aspects of this endeavor. On the ground in the third country there develops a cooperative leadership structure between these divergent groups consisting of teams that come literally from all over the world. On top of this an elaborate communications network is developed that has no central control, but works like a charm. Despite all kind of problems that can arise from such divergent participation, the leadership cooperating together has wisely developed a method for defining responsibility between the groups and the mission has seen great success. For this people group, it actually works best if there is no central command structure and God has worked through the wisdom he has imparted to the people he has called to cooperate together in this.
Mission 2: A very small and new parachurch organization establishes a loose connection between a church here in the US and a church in a third world country which is reaching out to local communities with the gospel. Once on the ground the team encounters a local associate of the parachurch organization who is in need of support and direction. The church team interprets all of this as an opportunity to expand their ministry in this area and establishes a continuing ministry with the church there. They pick up support for this individual as their partial representative with the church there to act on their behalf in carrying out continuing outreach ministry throughout the year and facilitating team logistics. Sound good? The individual is still considered part of the parachurch organization to some degree, but the relationships are never well established between the US church, the Organization and the local church. The pastor of the local church, confused by the activities of the associate feels threatened and tensions arise between the US church and the Organization over what the associate’s duties are. Without clear boundaries, the mission is now threatened although everyone involved sees the great need for and the success of the actual work and earnestly feels led to continue in it.
In the first, clarity of direction and wisely developed boundaries have resulted in one of the most exciting and significant short-term mission outreaches you’ll likely never hear about – details must remain on the QT.
In the second, lack of clarity has resulted in a good mission that will die this year if nothing is done to resolve it.
So clarity can make a huge difference. Simply feeling led to do a ministry a certain way doesn’t necessarily result in effective ministry.
I’m a member of a Southern Baptist Church, and have been for most of my life. However, I’m not sure I could muster a convincing argument for caring about the SBC per se. I care about local churches, and could argue passionately for caring about them. But denominations? I’d have a hard time convincing you, Tony, because I’m not convinced.
Barry Wallaces last blog post..Great high school basketball, Neal E. Boyd, and Blake DeWitt… all in one place, all on one night
Comments on this entry are closed.