How should the guy in the pew react when he sees a headline like “IMB Baptisms hit lowest level since 1969”?
Overseas baptisms for 2015 dropped to 54,762 from the 190,957 reported for 2014, according to information submitted by the International Mission Board in response to a request by the Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee. Likewise, the number of new churches fell from 13,824 to 3,842 over the same one-year period.
The baptism figure represents the lowest level reported in 46 years.
Or when we get the annual statistical report which most years includes the depressing phrase “baptisms decline”?
Southern Baptists also experienced a decline in baptisms, down 3.3 percent to 295,212. Reported baptisms have fallen eight of the last 10 years. The ratio of baptisms to total members decreased to one baptism for every 52 members.
In the bizarro world of SBC statistics no metric is more scrutinized than that of baptisms but there is also no figure less meaningful in some contexts than that of total baptisms. So, how does the pew-sitter sort this stuff out? Maybe by considering a few things.
In regard to the celebrated SBC annual statistical report published each year at the annual meeting, the number reported for total baptisms have trended downward for quite a few years. Ed Stetzer said in 2011 that, “for now, SBC membership is in decline, membership change is in a 50-year decline, and baptisms are in a decade-long decline and trending down over time.” The past five years have extended the downward slide of baptism numbers.
Churches baptize according to generally accepted practices: someone is saved, they are then immersed and the church reports one baptism for that person for that year. It doesn’t matter how old the person is, or whether or not the individual has had a previous baptism (even in the same church). I haven’t seen hard data on how many of our annual baptisms are re-baptisms but it would be a significant proportion, particularly in the roaring years of the 1970s through 1990s when Baby Boomers who had been dunked at young ages got old enough to fully grasp the concept of following Jesus. We all know evangelists who specialize in re-baptisms. Some pastors embrace the approach, though they will not tell you that they do so partly because it bumps up their church baptism numbers and thereby adds to the pastor’s stature among his peers.
A good percentage of churches fail to report their statistics and numbers are extrapolated and plugged in to the annual statistical report. Generally though, the baptism numbers show us what is happening in the SBC in regard to evangelism and church growth.
No argument from me that baptisms are down, any way you slice it or figure it, and have been declining for decades.
Overseas baptisms, on the other hand, are not so comparable or valuable in explaining our SBC work. According to the quote above, the number of baptisms reported by IMB dropped a staggering 71% from 2014 to 2015. Fully 136,195 less in 2015 than 2014.
What accounts for that calamitous drop? Our missionaries on strike? God takes a vacation in many countries?
Nope. Nothing like that. IMB changed the manner in which baptism are reported. It’s mildly complicated, but the article by Robin Hadaway, Understanding the IMB statistics, explains the changes made and why. Essentially, IMB practices had progressed to where our personnel were reporting data from some overseas national bodies with whom they worked or had worked. The general principle used now is for IMB personnel to report only “those numbers directly associated with IMB personnel who are also able to authenticate them.” While still rather loose, this policy avoids the massive numbers earlier reported, numbers that perhaps represented some historical ties but not any direct IMB personnel activity.
With IMB’s emphasis on UPGs and work in difficult, remote, and restricted areas, we should expect less reported baptisms. Critics can, and have, ignored the story behind the numbers and have assailed the IMB for being less effective. Such is SBC life these days.
I’m guessing that NAMB will be in for some criticism in regard to their church planting and baptism reports. We are starting more churches but some are reporting that these churches are showing fewer baptisms. I’d look at the raw data and chew on that before I conclude that the earlier NAMB was more effective than the present NAMB. NAMB statistics on church plants, church planters and other things were highly unreliable pre-2010.
I would note that the Florida Baptist Convention has stopped reporting the considerable numbers of baptisms in Haiti where FBC churches are heavily involved in the work. The FBC report on baptisms said, in part
According to our preliminary report we rejoice with 25,158 baptisms for the 2015 church year in our Florida Baptist churches. This number reflects 53.8 percent of our churches reporting their baptisms. We celebrate the 50,000 plus reported baptisms for the year in Haiti, but we will report only the baptisms from our Florida Baptist churches. The baptisms from Haiti have been added into the total Florida Baptist baptism numbers in the past. The number reported for Florida for the 2015 church year will only reflect the baptisms from our Florida Baptist churches and will not include Haiti.
If one had scrutinized the SBC state convention statistics for last year, one would have seen that the Florida Convention was far beyond all the states in baptism totals and baptism/membership ratio. This was because the Haiti figures were added to the FBC’s reported totals. No longer, though.
There are times when I think we would be better off by not being so number-focused. My church baptized several last month. Thank God for that and whether they get compiled into a grand number for 2016 or not, those represent individuals who have been buried with Jesus and raised to walk in newness of life. That counts.
But, alas, we are Southern Baptists and numbers are in our DNA. No escaping that.
I greatly appreciate the move toward care and integrity in reporting of baptisms – especially that by both IMB and the Florida Convention (don’t know much about them recently, but I like a LOT of what I’ve read about them).
Quick quiz: How many Southern Baptist churches are there in Brazil? In Tanzania? In Taiwan? In India?
It is surprising how many people do not know the answer to that question.
The answer of course is ZERO. There are no Southern Baptist churches. There are Baptist conventions in each of those countries – autonomous – and we affiliate with them. Our missionaries work with those conventions to plant churches. They are not in charge and do not run those conventions or hold authority over them.
So, how do you define a baptism that should count. At one time, as I understand it, we counted pretty much all the baptisms by all our affiliated conventions. Stats looked good but that is not really fair, is it? So, what should we do? I don’t know.
I know that some will point to the stats and say, “See, this current group isn’t baptizing as many.” We know where those articles will appear – we could just about write them, couldn’t we? But there is an apples and oranges element here.
*How do we count baptisms. What baptisms do we count?
*Our new strategy of focusing missionaries on unreached people groups is going to yield lower numbers. There’s a lot of plowing, planting, and preparing before the harvest there. We used to use a different strategy that yielded a greater harvest.
*Our reduced missionary force is going to have an effect.
As for Florida, I applaud them for their decision to not count the Haiti baptisms. They can simply list them separately.
As we make disciples, our Great Commission mandate, three terms modify the process: Going, Baptizing and Teaching. These three areas provide meaningful biblical metrics.
I agree that what happens internationally is a far murkier picture. But the baptisms here at home, it seems to me, are not nearly so muddled. I am not sure we are Going and Baptizing as much as we have in the past. And I’m not pointing the finger at any one group. I think it’s true of all of us, or at least most of us.
You will have noted that I make no argument about the trend of declining baptisms stateside. Those numbers (save for the odd circumstance like the FBC and Haiti) come from individual churches. Many other figures come from central admin for various entities. Those are more susceptible to variation.
Anytime we talk about baptisms dropping this much, it should cause us to weep. You’ve explained some of the reasons for the drop in numbers. But, to see that much….and to see such a drop in Church plants…well, that’s sad; truly sad.
We need revival. We need a new desire for evangelism. We need fresh fire to fall on us. We need to fall in love with Jesus, again, like we first loved Him.
Dear God, be patient and merciful with us. We’re sorry for loving the world, too much. We’re sorry for losing our hearts, and for throwing cold water on others. We’re sorry for being lazy, and not getting out there, more, and preaching the Gospel more. Stir our hearts, and set us on fire. The Churches of the SBC need revival. And, we pray for awakening. Dear God, we’d love to see people getting saved by your grace and power. We’d love to see crowds of people getting saved; not to stroke anyone’s ego; not so that some Pastor can get a bigger Church, or get a job at the state office. But Lord, just to see lost, hopeless, guilt ridden people be saved, set free, and filled with hope. Dear God, grant it. In Jesus’ name, Amen.
David Worley
@ David Worley – Amen
We should all heed the words of David Worley.
We need revival. We need to pray for revival.
It wouldn’t hurt if more returned to having Revival Meetings.
http://www.sbcevangelist.org/COSBE-Home.html
David R. Brumbelow
First, I appreciate ‘Mr. Thornton’s’ substantive posts. Honest & Irenic.
Second, the Metric found in the NT that we should be applying is NOT baptisms, but, TRANSFORMATION. The Apostle Paul gave thanks that he baptized none except Cirspus & Gaius, 1 Cor. 1:14.
Third, in the first century when a person entered the waters of baptism they were declaring that Jesus is LORD, not Caesar. The consequence of such a declaration may well have been death. We have no such reality in America.
Fourth, the statistics we accumulate from the ACP are spurious at best. Many do not submit this report and for good reasons. I stopped doing so many years ago. The SBC stopped reporting the ages of those baptized because frankly it was embarrassing due to the number of very young children etc. that were included in the report.
Finally, I think it is accurate to state that the SBC is and has been defined by numbers ad infinitum. When I stand before Jesus to give an account of 47 years of ministry he will not be impressed with the number of people in the congregations I served. He will not be impressed with the size of the buildings we erected. He will not be impressed with the size of the offerings we collected. He WILL be pleased with the faithful and fruitful declaration of TRUTH that resulted in the TRANSFORMATION of the people I pastored into the fullness of his image.
The sooner we rectify the METRIC by which ministry effectiveness is evaluated the better. And, when we do so, we may actually see the revival that was called for in some of the earlier comments.
In Grace,
Tom Fillinger
803 413 3509
Thanks for the kind words, tom.
You could make a case that the IMB baptism figures were spurious, though I wouldn’t choose that term. The earlier figures were misleading. That’s been fixed.
The ACP figures are not spurious at all. That 80% or so of our churches voluntarily submit the data is remarkable and sufficient for a valid look at where the SBC as a whole stands.
If the SBC ever collected a number for “transformation” such would be far more subjective than anything counted now.
That is an assumption not necessarily according to FACT William. Peter commands regenerate people to ‘Grow in Grace’. That being the case we CAN measure Transformation. Most, nearly all, will not submit themselves to such a process because it is very revealing. It pulls the curtain back on what I label ‘brutal reality’.
Paul in Romans 12 commands that regenerate people be ‘transformed by the renewing of the mind’. That is a passive imperative. What follows in that chapter is a declaration of true life in community which is absolutely necessary for transformation. This requires of me that I live with transparency & vulnerability, i am open to the observations and input from my fellow pilgrims.
I stand by my appeal for TRANSFORMATION as the proper METRIC of ministry effectiveness. The text supports that premise.
In regard to baptismal statistics in the USA, some years ago the HMB/NAMB published a study by their Research Department, showing 60% of SBC baptisms were actually rebaptisms of our own members and others coming from different denominations. If you then deduct the numbers of our members’ children being baptized, then the percentage of folks being rescued from the pagan pool is quite small. I wish I could provide a link to the study; perhaps someone can help with that. The bottom line is that we win and baptize very few as a result of our evangelistic efforts. Beyond that, about 10,000 SBC churches baptize no one each year, and another 10,000 baptize one person. We Southern Baptists have a reputation for being evangelistic, but generally speaking that is no longer true.
I saw that. So far as I know, ACP baptisms are comparable over the years. We’ve always re-baptized folks. I’d be interested in the rates over the years. Some PhD candidate ought to sort that out.
I agree with your premise, Mark, but based on biblical theology, my children were part of the pagan pool until they were converted and baptized. I wouldn’t discount the conversion of our own children (which I know you aren’t actually doing).
But I do think there ought to perhaps be a special category in the ACP for baptisms of previously converted people from pedobaptist denominations – what you called rebaptisms, or second baptisms of previously baptized people. (I’ve only done that once in my ministry – baptized someone who was baptized by immersion previously).
It would seem to me that a bigger problem than re-baptising would be those we baptize and no longer attend fellowship. What is that number? 1/3rd of our rolls across the board? Wouldn’t it be fair to say that many of these who do not attend church anywhere were never saved? And wouldn’t also be fair to say that there are members who attend who are not saved?
Since I am relatively new to SBC life [I only joined a SBC church about 5-6 years ago], I can’t quite figure out why such an emphasis on numbers. Its as if there is a supposed cause and affect mechanism in place: go out and witness and you will get converts to baptize. And if you are not getting converts, go out and witness even more and do it better [here is a program that works] and God will bless your efforts with converts. I do think we should go out and proclaim the Gospel
and that God will bless our obedience, but not necessarily with converts.
I don’t know a whole lot about trees, but I do know that they need pruning so that the dead branches and the ‘sucker’ branches are removed so that the tree can grow. And that pruning a tree makes it smaller for a season but it grows stronger, bigger, and healthier after pruning.
I also know only a little about muscles. But that when we work out, it breaks the muscle down, but with proper diet it grows back stronger than what it was.
But it -seems- that many churches and groups [like the SBC] want bigger and stronger attendance but fail to prune. How many baptized people on our rolls that never attend our services? And why are we baptizing unsaved people?
“Wouldn’t it be fair to say that many of these who do not attend church anywhere were never saved? And wouldn’t also be fair to say that there are members who attend who are not saved?”
“..And why are we baptizing unsaved people?
At some level, we need to admit and accept some level of uncertainty and trust God here. Yes some who have been baptized and left were never saved…and some present baptized attenders are not saved…but there is NO WAY to prevent baptizing some unsaved people. We must at some point trust a person’s profession and observe their life and decide if we THINK they are saved .
There is truth to the need to acknowledge the reality that we can observe, which is that we have some former and present members who are not saved…BUT, we must also acknowledge that we cannot observe the heart, and we don’t always know for sure who is saved.
Andy,
WE can’t observe the heart. you are right. But 33% f our membership is a huge number.
Baptism doesn’t make salvation: people who are truly saved do not need baptized asap. But people who ‘confess’ and are not truly saved would be better served if baptism is delayed somewhat. All who profess Jesus as Lord can be educated in what being a disciple of Jesus entails before they are baptized.
Many churches draw people to the altar with emotional strings like Just as I Am and words that play to the very real guilt ridden conscious each has. And then they soon baptize them. And their ‘numbers’ pile up. And these peopler told they are now right with God, and once saved always saved, so… why bother with church…”we are IN!”
Mike,
The problem I see with waiting to baptize people is that you don’t see that in the bible.
You mean you don’t see it in Acts. I agree. But wasn’t the culture different there than in the last 150 years in America? Wasn’t it a risk to defy Rome? Thus people didn’t [for the most part] take up the cross unless they truly believed.
But in the last 150 years in America, we preached Jesus saves and many times leave out taking up the cross. Or counting the cost. There was no pain in ‘getting in’ so nothing to lose. many times [especially the last 30 years in the Republican party] it was a must do for social acceptance.
But now the pendulum is swinging back. The culture says “who cares?” and “no need to be a Christian” and “no need for the baggage, I’m just as good or better without it.” And so baptisms are down. people don’t feel the cultural push to be saved.
And oh i was wrong. Not 1/3rd missing… 2/3rds missing!
“About a third of Southern Baptists show up in church each week, with attendance dropping to about 5.67 million Sunday worshipers.” Christianity Today
Where is the other 10 MILLION?
If we subtract those 10 million baptisms from our totals and recalculate baptisms, maybe we are not looking so bad!
YES I am accusing US of preaching easy believism since 2/3rds or 10 MILLION of our enrolled members do not even come to church on Sunday.
The way forward must include a realistic assessment of the errors we have made in the past.
The good news is that our culture doesn’t care if its Christian any more, so while we may see significantly less baptisms, true salvation experiences are probably higher.
By this:
“The good news is that our culture doesn’t care if its Christian any more,”
I meant:
Christian IN NAME ONLY.
Otherwise its not good news at all.
It is interesting to me that this post is not inspiring lots of responses. William, I guess you should have mentioned Calvinism. 🙂 As I recall the NAMB study on SBC baptisms, the rebaptisms included members who were rebaptized and folks from other denominations. The folks from other denominations would include a Methodist man who marries a Baptist woman, and she asks him to join her church. Rebaptism of members includes lots of folks who decide that they were not truly saved when they were baptized the first time. As a pastor, I spoke with lots of teenagers who said, “I was baptized when I was nine after VBS, but now I realize that I did not know what I was doing.” Evangelist Junior Hill says it is important to get your baptism on the right side of your salvation. Of course, that is true. I’m not saying it is wrong to rebaptize folks. I am saying that for statistical analysis we are counting these folks twice. In regard to counting folks twice, we have lots of African-American churches that are dually aligned with the SBC and the National
Baptist Convention. They are being counted and claimed by both conventions.
Dave, I take your point and appreciate your spirit. Of course, we should evangelize our children and youth; however, those youngsters are already “in” church. My concern is that our SBC churches are not winning folks outside the church.
Mark, I suppose the more fervent discussions come on stuff like drinkin’ and politics.
I think a separate article on rebaptisms might be good. But, in regard to the statistic we use of aggregate reported baptisms, the ACP number for this year is comparable to that of last year, or 2000, or 1980 or whatever year. Not so for IMB reported baptisms.
The only concrete data I have seen on SBC Calvinists and baptisms is that Cals and non-Cals baptize at about the same rates. The anti-Cals will try and make some points with NAMB’s church planting but such is conjecture. Perhaps they are too lazy to get real data.
A lot of churches no longer submit an ACP, so that makes it hard to determine accurate numbers. I know the statisticians make allowance for the non-reporters, but that makes our numbers “fuzzy,” it seems to me. As to the IMB, it is correct that the IMB no longer reports statistics from overseas Baptist conventions. That is a big factor in the lower numbers reported by the IMB. Another factor is that the IMB has tightened up its definition of “church.” By that I mean the IMB is insisting that all new churches reported must meet certain criteria. Beyond that, for some years the IMB accepted “estimates” from missionaries who served in high security areas. In those areas it is hard to verify all the statistics being reported. Now, the IMB will only accept reports that have or can be verified. (Recall that I am a retired IMB missionary and current missions professor.) I appreciate your posts; keep writing.
I think about 80% file the ACP and the totals are adjusted to account for that. Not ideal but still plenty enough response to get good data for the whole.
Hadaway’s explanation of IMB baptisms was well done and helpful, I thought.
If your PhD guy publishes his dissertation I’d love to see it.
Perhaps I can get his permission to share it with you. Very few dissertations are published.
I forgot to address your comment on Calvinism and evangelism. I recently supervised a PhD dissertation on the effect of Calvinism on evangelism and church planting in the SBC, namely NAMB and the IMB. The student was not a Calvinist. He found that Calvinists and non-Calvinists in the SBC evangelize and plant churches at the same rate. He did not find that Calvinism was affecting our evangelism and missions one way or the other.
Good discussion topic presented by William. Mark Terry, I remember that report on rebaptisms by the NAMB. I think it was in the 90s. I seemed to me it stated that around 60% of adult baptisms were rebaptisms. In any case I was surprised at the large number. I wondered if it would not be honest to go back and subtract numbers from the previous totals but I know there would be no way to accurately do that. I appreciated Robin Hadaway’s writing and Mark Terry’s comments on IMB statistics. This is a subject I have had interest in for many years. I am also a retired IMB missionary. I am not sure exactly what criteria the IMB uses now on baptisms or church starts. I don’t think the statistics on baptisms have ever meant and do not mean now that an IMB missionary personally baptized each person counted or personally started each church. I probably only baptized around 40 people while serving. But the churches I helped start and the pastors I helped train have baptized hundreds. As missionaries we wanted national pastors and leaders to do the baptizing and leading the churches a quickly as possible. At one time I was responsible for reporting baptisms, churches and church starts for the country where I lived. I reported only those statistics provided by the local Baptist convention. I was required to do that but had no problem reporting that way because our missionaries were very involved with almost all the churches, many had been started by missionaries and most pastors had been trained or discipled by IMB missionaries. Things have changed in most countries or regions in recent years. Even in those countries not preciously part of CSI or working with UPGs, we were organized in to Strategy Coordinator led teams. The strategy coordinator reported statistics for his team. This numbers may not be in any way connected to the local Baptist convention. The criteria for being a church varied with the SC. There were situations in which almost any group of believers meeting together were reported as a church. That was in most cases corrected as time went by. Many of the church planting movement church starts were difficult to verify. That doesn’t mean they weren’t true. I am familiar with one of the largest. It would be impossible to verify the numbers without making a best guess.… Read more »