Comments on: A List of Factors Affecting Current Events in the SBC

By: Lance Athanasius

Lance Athanasius — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 01:25:24 +0000

I have attended an SBC church for 11 years. I am actively involved in my local Association and have been Moderator as well as other posts. Although I am not married to the SBC I remain faithful while I am in it, just as I am to my local church. I criticize while at the same time try to effect fruitful change. My observations of so many christians is a total lack of knowledge of church history. There are reasons that denominations formed and that they exist. Baptists were a persecuted group and were regularly jailed & killed for not baptizing their infant children. The whole notion of freedom of worship, separation of church and state, teaching all children to be able to read, etc… all originated from Baptists. Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, Presbyterians, etc… all had Baptists arrested, jailed, removed their children from them, and even had them killed. Henry Dunster, the 1st president of Harvard College, was fired for his belief in “believers baptism”. He was removed from the home that he himself built. I guess I am answering #12 in a roundbout way. While I am gracious to all who proclaim Jesus as Savior and Lord, I am also ready and willing, if they will, to point out where I disagree with them and why. There is nothing wrong with correcting one another as long as it is done in a spirit of Love, and historically, that Spirit has not been extended to Baptists. More Baptists were jailed in Salem than were “witches”. If not for Roger Williams and Rhode Island who knows what may have transpired.

By: Kevin Sam

Kevin Sam — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 17:44:44 +0000

Someone mentioned about SBC membership numbers being overinflated but I have to inform you that mainline membership numbers are probably much more inflated than SBC numbers. More than half of those who are baptized never attend church. And half of those who do attend attend maybe once or twice per year (Christmas & Easter). I would say that SBC numbers are not as bad as most mainline protest numbers.

By: Bob Brague

Bob Brague — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 20:35:21 +0000

I guess I was the other “irrelevant” comment since mine was also removed. What I have always appreciated about the internetmonk blog has been its overall candidness, spot-on descriptions, and across-the-spectrum-of-the-church character.

I don’t know why my comment incurred your displeasure, Michael. I wasn’t trying to tell you how to run your blog. I was simply making a comment. I apologize for any disturbance of the peace, unforeseen by me, that it caused.

I am non-confrontational. I was not spoiling for a fight. As much as lieth in me, I try to live peaceably with all men.

By: JBM

JBM — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 23:41:15 +0000

I grew up in the SBC, but left because of the unjust and unrelenting focus on culture wars. As the earlier poster said, all of the talk about those issues failed to disciple me, encourage me or teach me anything. As I grew in my Christian walk, I had to break away from the whole denomination, because it was toxic.

By: Timbo

Timbo — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 21:01:40 +0000

iMonk,
I hope mine was not one of the “irrelevant” comments but I see my post was removed. Since you said to fire away questions if we aren’t SBC, my questions I thought were relevant in that they pertain to SBC but all denominations in general. It bothers me more and more often that we have to segment ourselves and put titles and names on buildings that pigeon-hole us into a particular set of sub-beliefs beyond Biblical and apostolic teachings. I am not SBC nor member of any denomination, but their concerns are mine, in as much as they are concerned about how we teach others about Jesus, and how we make disciples. I would love to hear from you individually when you have the time. This is the only blod I follow routinely and love reading your comments, even when I disagree.

By: iMonk

iMonk — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 22:01:39 +0000

The SBC was controlled by moderate/liberals for most of the 60’s and 70’s. They did the right thing on race, but theologically gutted several of the seminaries. The conservatives began a takeover in 1979 and completed in in the early 80’s. (SBC polity allows the President to appoint a certain number or institutional trustees every year. So if you elect your man at the national meeting, you will get approximately what your team wants.) After the takeover was complete, however, the conservative movement began to fracture and denom decline has set in.

That takeover is called the “Conservative Resurgence” in the SBC.

By: Donalbain

Donalbain — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:58:26 +0000

So, no clue on what “retaken” means for the outsider?

By: Austin

Austin — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:38:57 +0000

Imonk,

I think the charismatic divergence will be one of the big issues coming down the pike for SBC churches. I know a lot of small wooley-bug type country baptist churches around here where just about anything is allowed to go on as long as it is “led by the Spirit”, but those same churches will not hesistate to stop the service and actually ask someone to leave who starts speaking in tongues.

I’m certainly no prophet but I have said many times, we, SBC, will continue to hemorage members from both ends of the spectrum. We will lose members to the growing non-denom charistmatic movt. and we will lose members to mainline denoms or even the RC’s due to our lax of worship and sloppy discipleship.

My SBC take is that we are in a funk. We are sort of luke-warm, too sloppy for some, not wild and hairy enough for others.

By: acme

acme — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 02:21:21 +0000

I’m sorry–I just reread my post and can see how confusing it is.

I’m concerned that SGM is influencing the Southern Baptists, through cozy get-togethers at the Louisville seminary, through shared platforms, through SGM books and materials, and through donations.

My concerns with my former “family of churches” influencing other churches include

– the authoritarian polity–where congregations have no voice in budget or decisions, no recourse if there is a conflict with a pastor, no say at all. This has led to many serious abuses–a number are identified on [Mod edit]

- the emphasis on male leadership so that women may not even teach the two-year-olds or a women’s Bible Study, let alone lead worship or preach.

By: iMonk

iMonk — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 01:26:37 +0000

Myrddin: There are a lot of Baptists who are Charismatic in sympathy. Tongues as a private prayer language is not an issue in 95% of the SBC. The Prez of the IMB speaks in tongues, so the rule was hypocritical to say the least. The Baptism issue needed to be clarified, but if it means we reject believer’s baptism in non SBC churches, then it’s too close to Landmarkism, which again, 95% of SBCers reject.

acme: What specific concerns?