The previous post was “Avoiding Death By Nostalgia.“
I have a job, a home and a paycheck every month because the Southern Baptist Convention (actually the Kentucky Baptist Convention) believes in cooperative evangelism.
I was evangelized and won to Christ by a Southern Baptist Church.
I’ve spent my life- since I was a teenager- evangelizing and discipling young people in SBC churches across Kentucky.
Most of you don’t know me and never will, but if you came to where I live and work, you’d hear me preach…and what you would hear would be evangelistic. I preach the Gospel, Southern Baptist style. I preach with zeal and emotion. I preach for conversion. I appeal and persuade. I present the Gospel explicitly and call for the response of faith and following in 90% of my messages. I’ve done that here where I serve for almost 17 years, and I do it because this ministry holds evangelism as a priority. It is a priority for me. That’s part of the SBC/KBC heritage of the ministry where I serve and has been for 110 years. I’m happy to be part of it.
I have received hundreds of invitations the last few years to become Roman Catholic. With all due respect, before we ever talk about doctrine, ecclesiology or salvation, I would have already decided that no other place could be home for because of what I perceive as a lack of emphasis on evangelism. (I can’t speak knowledgeably about actual evangelism.) If that makes me an arrogant Southern Baptist, then I guess you’ll have to think so. I don’t want Wretched Urgency, but there is no healthy Christianity without a healthy, missional, active emphasis on evangelism.
If I were driving through town with a dying friend, and I wanted to go to a worship service where there was a good chance I would hear the Gospel preached and explained in the sermon, I’d start looking for an SBC church. Oh, I know…I know….it would be a roll of the dice in these days of evangelical deterioration, but it would be like shooting fish in a barrel compared to many (not all) other denominations.
I’ve watched the SBC/KBC train laity for evangelism, emphasize evangelism, pray for evangelism, guilt trip us about evangelism, confess a lack of evangelism and do an encyclopedia of dumb stuff in the name of evangelism. Some youth camp evangelism and conference memories still can make me shudder. But there was no doubt about one thing in the midst of the madness: we believed in evangelism and we weren’t going to stop.
We believed in personal evangelism (“witnessing,”) evangelistic preaching, evangelistic crusades, evangelism resources, evangelists, door to door evangelism, youth camp evangelism, evangelistic films, evangelistic tracts, evangelism through sports, music and anything else that you could stick evangelism on.
If I ever get fired and I have the opportunity to go somewhere that there actually are some church choices, my first interest will not be liturgy or the Christian yearc. It will be “Is the church evangelistic?” My second will be “Is it missional?” My third will be “Is it a church planting church?” After that, we can talk about a lot of things, but those are the marks of a gut-level understanding of the Great Commission in my book. I’m a post-evangelical to my toes, but I don’t think Christianity is just talking Calvin in the coffee shop. It’s finding ways to do evangelism with integrity in a postmodern, postChristian world.
All of this and more are the reasons I remain Southern Baptist in spite of the nonsense, and why I find it so frustrating that at the moment thousands and thousands of younger SBCers are prepared to make evangelism, missions and discipleship in healthy churches their priority, we are having a crossroad pile-up over secondary issues and “Baptist Identity” of all things.
The SBC has long been the best example of a cooperating network of evangelical churches doing significant Kingdom work together. When that network was majoring on cooperation, evangelism, missions and new churches, the SBC’s other problems were in perspective. It was nothing less than a minor miracle that a bunch of knotheads like us could cooperate on so many things, but it happened for most of a century.
But now “Cooperation” is being defined in ways that will not sustain that network. The Cooperative Program relies on a trust of one another that is being eroded.
The SBC can’t unite around issues like the public invitation or teetotalism. No matter how strong the cultural preference or denominational tradition, we can’t unite around it any more than we could have united around segregation in the 50’s. We unite around missions and evangelism.
The leaders of our denomination can’t tell individual churches what “style” of worship and evangelism they must pursue to be real Baptists. We aren’t Rome, where every detail of worship and church life comes from outside the congregation. We believe in the work of the Spirit in every step of creating the church, and that work of the Spirit creates freedom, trust, diversity and mutual respect among those who may differ at times.
There are limits to the wisdom of the denomination. Programs “handed down,” to churches from the home office are no longer going to be automatically accepted as the best route for a church in its own mission.
Individual congregations need the freedom to express their mission, message and theology within the generous bounds of the Baptist Faith and Message and local/state/national cooperation. No one needs to be taunted for not being a “real Baptist” because they have an innovative name or go about their message in ways appropriate for them. Baptist freedom has never been more important. We are in a time of maximum options around core confessionalism. Violating that trust by dictating universal Baptist practice, even rhetorically, is a losing proposition.
The leaders of our movement can’t vilify and misrepresent those who relate to historic Baptist beliefs like evangelical Calvinism. Hundreds of Calvinistic Southern Baptists are preaching the Gospel and serving as missionaries now. They are not baby baptizers, church splitters and despisers of missions. You can’t declare war on Bible-believing members of your own family. You can’t deal in untruths and impress those who care about truth.
Our denomination can’t act like we have nothing to learn from those outside the SBC family when we are experiencing our worst numerical showing in decades. We weren’t as hot as we thought we were. We aren’t now. We need to put up our arrogance. If you asked all members of SBC churches to show up for a census, does anyone think we could find 8 million? I’d be thrilled to know where 5 million are.
There are mistakes younger, dissatisfied SBCers must avoid. It would be foolish beyond words to see younger leaders cast off the Cooperative Program in favor of independent missionary funding models. The list of benefits we’ve all experienced from cooperation is long. I went to seminary for pennies compared to many people. Many who read this blog have received church planting assistance and sponsorship from the SBC.
It would be tragic to see our seminaries become anything less than innovative hubs of missional training for all evangelicals. A further decline in the SBC will hurt our missionaries, mission boards, seminaries and valuable resources. Many of us are in favor of eliminating the fat and waste in SBC/state programs, but the resources that our denomination offers the wider cause of the Kingdom are unprecedented in Christian history. They shouldn’t be thrown overboard to go back to the mistakes of independent anti-missionary Baptists of the past.
It would be ridiculous to see all that the SBC has stood for as a cooperative network be deserted for the comfort of hanging out with theological like-minds. Our churches were built on the cooperative ideal and any pastor or leader who recommends ending that legacy has made a weighty- and wrong- decision, in my view.
If you are a younger leader who has avoided denominational ties and meetings, I completely understand. I went to dozens of SBC meetings in the 1980s. I haven’t attended one since 1992. But if you are standing for evangelism with integrity, healthy churches, theological seriousness and church planting, YOU should stand up and say: “I don’t know about the rest of you, but this is what our denomination is about. I’m not leaving until the rest of you figure it out.”
Don’t be deceived by events like the John 3:16 Conference or the recent Baptist Identity rhetoric: the FUTURE of the SBC lies with a Great Commission Resurgence, a new commitment to cooperation and a relentless emphasis on the things that matter in the Kingdom.
No, a Great Commission Resurgence is a vital future for the SBC, not only for our priorities as a missionary and evangelistic force, but because it is that Great Commission task and the trust of the cooperative funding mechanism that created who we are as contemporary Southern Baptists. Whatever isn’t working in Baptist life, we can’t forget that the ideal of cooperation for missions was always an incredible blessing to us and to the world.
When our churches, leaders, denomination and people see the same worthy goal and support one another beyond our differences in secondary matters, age, style, feelings about being Baptist or local strategy, we demonstrate that our history was not a wasted exercise.
The Internet Monk Archives 
All I can say is WOW and AMEN. The resurgence will surely come from people who have the same feeling and commitment. I do. And I think this is the true liberalism and conservatism and biblical approach that Baptists established in 1787, when the Separate and Regular Baptists united. I thank God for Southern Baptists – not because I think they are perfect – they are not! But they are out their trying to do what they can in the midst of their shortcomings and sufferings. Let us learn more about what the Bible says about Love as well as correctness. In this day of PC when we are about to be read out of the public arena and have our freedom of speech taken from us by the perjorative idea that to speak against some sins or falsehoods is tantamount to hate speech, we need to reach out to one another as the writer of this blog has done with his spirit of gratitude.
LikeLike
In the real world (corporate, public, or private sector), the assessment of your blog would be:
YOU HAVE ACCURATELY DESCRIBED AT LEAST ONE PERSPECTIVE OF THE PROBLEM, BUT HAVE OFFERED NO PROPOSED SOLUTION. WHAT’S THE POINT? Only in ministry, is academic “philosophizing” viewed as productive.
As a “harvested” Christian (reached as an adult, not raised in church), I remain in a small minority. Most churches have less than 3% of their membership that fit that category. A great many things contribute to the inward focus of the typical American church of any denomination. Even those describing themselves as evangelistic long ago defaulted to “raising” Christians. That view will ensure Frank Page’s prediction last May that by 2030, that the number of SBC churches will shrink from the current 44,000 to only about 20,000.
Planting churches is a fine thing, but much less than “the” answer. Squandering half the existing bodies is inexcusable.
Here’s a thought:
1. INREACH – Can we reach the 50% or so of our members that are unregenerate, without “rooting out” those tares? Actually, some churches are having great success in doing so. There is at least one very effective practice that costs nothing and is appropriate for any size church.
2. FOUNDATIONAL DISCIPLESHIP – Is it possible to teach an entire congregation the essentials of historic Christianity? Certainly. Write them down and post/study/teach them.
3. REAL CORPORATE EVANGELISM – Is it possible to ensure that every lost church visitor hear a complete presentation of GOD’S plan of salvation, directly from His Word?…..and simultaneaously ensure that every member is equipped and prepared to share that at a moment’s notice? YEP.
One thing is for sure. If we keep doing what we’ve been doing, we will keep getting what we have been getting. E-mail me an address and I will send you a copy of a book being distributed to the SBC pastors of 16 states (to date), by their state convention. Kentucky is not on board yet, hence you haven’t received one.
Frank Fears
frankfears@everestkc.net
LikeLike
Another good post.
Being a cradle Southern Baptist now 48 years of age and still possessed of an apparently congenitally permanent SBC loyalty, I realize that my ability to comprehend how the SBC is viewed by outsiders is certaily impaired. This impairment also weakens my ability to explain to young theologically conservative leaders who have a passion for evangelism and church-planting why they should consider doing their work wihin a Southern Baptist context. That’s where people like Ed Stetzer and Matt Chandler give me hope for the SBC. Each of these men chose as adult ministers to join the SBC. I can’t help it. It gives me hope.
LikeLike
The best way to disciple someone is by doing evangelism. It is why I think EE is the best discipleship ministry out there. When you train someone in EE you are with them week in and week out in the battlefield. And it is a battle. When churches get active intentionally attempting to reach the lost in their community the enemy takes notice. Spiritual warfare is heightened. Prayer is needed, so the disciple learns prayer as well as scripture memorization, and an outline to share the gospel. On the job training eliminates the fear of the unknown, which is why so many Christians never share the gospel. If you are going out every week you meet many people and learn true compassion for the lost. I had a woman who I was training who could not stop crying after we went to a teen/coffee shop. It affected her so much she was unable to continue training. Much of the hatred for SBC churches is spiritual warfare as well since it is a denomination focused on sharing the gospel. Let us not eat each other up. To quote Adrian Rogers, “hypocrites in the church, do tell”. People criticize “churches” for not making disciples. Do you have a disciple? Who is you man or woman whom you have taken aside to train? Get to it.
LikeLike
Michael…
Have you read any of Clay Shirky’s writings? He is a secular blogger focusing on the the impact of communication technology on our culture. While he is writing on a different topic from yours, there are some powerful parallels when you apply his thinking to the issues of the church (lower ‘c’) that you explore. If you are interested, here is a link to an article on his blog that explores the desperate cry to ‘save’ print media. His critique could be applied to the parallel desperate cry of many to save the ‘c’hurch as it has been known for the past generations (death by nostalgia??)
http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2009/03/newspapers-and-thinking-the-unthinkable/
In any case, thanks for the time you obviously take in your insightful commentary. Grace and peace!
Ethan
LikeLike
Luke,
I am a preacher at a school where most of the students are not Christians. I said that 90% of my messages contain a clear evangelisitic invitation. (Not altar call) I don’t preach to Christians that aren’t there and it’s not a church. When I am at a church, I preach primarily to Christians.
Evangelism is a quality of God and the Gospel. A Christian cannot talk about Jesus and the Gospel without evangelistic implications.
I’m not sure what you meant by 90% evangelism, but I needed to clear that up. My ministry is evangelistic by commission.
ms
LikeLike
Imonk,
Balance is the key. Evangelism, missions, prayer, doctrine, fellowship, discipleship. I do not think 90% evangelism is the key? People then see that we want them to join our club, rather than know Christ through the Word and Spirit.
Thanks for the thought provoking conversation.
LikeLike
I join you in deploring the failure of individual churches to stand by missionaries.
In church planting, it should go without saying that a church initiated plant should have a high level of investment, a continuing relationship and a covenantal status with a church for X amount of time. (5 years for example.)
If a church starts a work and starves or deserts it, they have done a very bad thing.
And the same with networks. Church plants need to be loved. They need infusions of people, resources and support.
I see some significant differences between church planting and missionary support. But that’s another day.
peace
ms
LikeLike
iMonk, my experience is from the viewpoint of the overseas missionary who had to go and raise the money in contrast with the SBC missionaries I met who did not have to raise the money and got to simply visit a reasonable number of churches to share with them what they did, why they did it, and how they did it.
I was overseas with precisely the type of mission that requires the missionary to raise his/her own support, despite the fact that it was a “denominational” mission. My experience was of months of furlough spent on the road, of times of separation from the family so that our children could have a stable school during our furlough while I raised the money, and of an inability to either really relax or to do the type of studying that a missionary needs to do during a furlough in order to be ready for his/her next term.
My other experience is of times spent watching our budget overseas as churches and individuals dropped out because they had had a “budget shortfall” or because they had not counted the cost of three to four years of support. And, the hidden secret, of watching churches and individuals drop out during our first term because we were not doing enough exciting things. Mind you, the first term of a long-term missionary is often a learning term, when they go to language school, then are seconded to a senior missionary in order to learn their paces. But, there is little understanding of that or patience with that in local churches. However, there is an understanding of that and patience with that in a more national program, such as the SBC foreign mission program.
By our third term, I was field director for southern Peru in our mission. During that time, I was riding a mule into indigenous areas of Peru. A school was started as well as an orphanage. Churches were planted in new untouched areas. (I was directly responsible for that.) And the money poured in. But, I never forgot the first two terms, when our life was hardscrabble and at the mercy of inconsistent local churches and donors. No, I would have loved to have been supported by a national program.
As a result, I have few good things to say about that type of mission support. I am very much in favor of programs such as the SBC Cooperative program in foreign missions precisely because it interposes a layer between the missionary and the local church and keeps the missionary from the “tender mercies” of a local church that has little understanding of what it really takes to be and what is really needed by a foreign missionary.
So, do I have a harsh view of local churches “bypassing the middle man?” Yes. That middle man of a national program–among the SBC missionaries I met–was the buffer that prevented missionary mistreatment.
The issue is not hierarchical in the least, nor was I trying to speak from a hierarchical viewpoint. Rather, I was speaking from the viewpoint of the missionary who was at the mercy of the local church, a mercy which was not too merciful.
LikeLike
Fr. Ernesto,
>“If a Southern Baptist church wants to initiate their own work in partnership with other churches and bypass the middle man, isn’t that a good thing?†No, it really is not a good thing.
You won’t be surprised that I disagree with this statement, but I am surprised you didn’t at least say “may not be as good a thing as it first appears.”
Or at least note that a Southern Baptist church or group of churches would be virtue of that very fact approach this matter differently from hierarchical churches.
How a church or group of churches approach church planting certainly ought to be evaluated on what they do, not simply ruled bad on principle because they are doing it differently.
I’m puzzled.
peace
ms
LikeLike
by far the most clear and straightforward statement i’ve heard from you on your support of the SBC and why you continue to stay there. i had always really wondered why you continued to stay. i had just assumed you were stubborn and a sucker for punishment. thanks for sharing.
LikeLike
Alan – “If a Southern Baptist church wants to initiate their own work in partnership with other churches and bypass the middle man, isn’t that a good thing?” No, it really is not a good thing.
In America, we have an underlying culture of populism that always assumes that things are better done at home than with some executive somewhere else. But, that is not even close to reality and the reasons would be too many to list. But, among them are:
1. Most local groups of churches are unable to get a balanced focus on needs. They are unlikely to know either local or global situations that may require money to go from a place in Kentucky to a place in Colorado. They are much more likely to go with the “country-of-the-month” as far as missions go, rather than with a joint planning that will prevent overlapping missionaries in one area and scarce missionaries in another.
2. Most local groups will end up hiring, guess what, a manager or a “minister of evangelism” to oversee the contribution of the group of churches and to make sure that evangelism really happens. But, at worst one can end up multiplying managers, and headquarters, and newsletters to the point where resources are wasted rather than most efficiently used.
3. In America we love to speak as though anything below 100% efficiency (and perfection) means that we must now stop supporting the “institutional” structure. Be serious! There is no such thing as 100% efficiency. Secular companies that try to push for that actually end up lowering productivity because no human being can maintain that type of pace. Yes, there will be some waste, but less in the long-haul than with multiple overlapping local efforts.
4. Having been a missionary, and a local church pastor, I can tell you that I was treated better, with regards to pay and benefits by the “institutional” mission that sent me out than by some of the local churches with which I have been involved. The mission used appropriate tables and comparisons with other missions and churches to determine appropriate and fair funding levels, insurance coverages, etc. The local churches consistently complain about expensive pastors, even those who make more money a year than the pastor gets to see, and try to keep benefits at significantly lower levels than they would accept in their own jobs. I happen to be at a good local mission now, and the Antiochians have a, yes, national set of standards for clergy pay.
5. We love to talk about those “national” programs and teaching materials that do not work. Hmm, guess what? Few local congregations in the USA do much of anything that works, whether they use a national programs or not. Consider that the problem may not be the national program, necessarily. That does not mean that all national programs are good, but it does mean that with or without national programs, local churches are, by and large, not growing.
OK, I will end my mini-rant here, by reiterating that local is not necessarily good and national is not necessarily bad.
LikeLike
I don’t know a lot about the SBC but I do know that believers in this denomination are very strong in evangelism. It’s one of the strongest, or at least has this image. I have great respect for baptist leaders because of their love for the Lord, and for their love for others, and for their desire to see others to come to know the Lord Jesus as Lord and Savior. I will pray for the SBC.
Peace and blessings,
Kevin
LikeLike
Bob:
I want to echo aaron. The sweetest pastors I know are founders conference guys, but the SBC is full of mean pastors and mean chuches. (Sorry, but look at the average pastorate numbers.) Issues of Pastoral authority- which are usually the agenda of the Fundamentalists, not just the Calvinists- are the problem.
I do know one major Calvinistic split. Sad, but better for everyone and had nothing to do with Calvinism. I also know of several non-Calvinists under attack for being Calvinists because they quoted Piper.
It’s a lot of problems from a lot of places.
peace on ya
ms
LikeLike
Bob Sacamento wrote
“The number of five point Calvinists in my state convention is currently in the low double digits. As best as I can tell, every single one of them is splitting their churches.”
Personality quarks and bad leadership is shared by many Pastors in the SBC. The ones that are are unashamed of their Calvinistic theology and have these quarks get their Calvinism blamed and not their horrible leadership practices. When a pastor that is not claiming to be a Calvinist splits a church there is no easy group to lump him into.
I know many Calvinist starting churches and growing established ones. I think you would be very surprised to know who some pastors are of mega churches who are very reformed in their theology.
LikeLike
K. Bryan:
I don’t understand that Bryan. A church can send $100 to the cp if they want. They can reduce/increase and vary as they choose. It’s not a per diem like in so many denominations. I was in a church that gave 25% for years. Now they give around 12%. That’s not a sin, because the church is doing much more in their own community.
But I’m not a paid shill for the CP, even though we get 4-6% of our funding from KBC CP funds. I believe in it and think it is a key to much of what we’ve done right. If we lose it, we’ll lose missionaries, schools and church plants. We will regret it.
But to each his own conviction.
peace
ms
LikeLike
@imonk: 1) The CP doesn’t stop any church from doing whatever it chooses to do. Church planting, its own schools, etc.
I’ll have to respectfully disagree with you on this point. There’s only so much money to go around, so churches aren’t in the position of sending money to the CP AND doing church planting, schools, etc.
LikeLike
Alan:
The situation is plain:
1) The CP doesn’t stop any church from doing whatever it chooses to do. Church planting, its own schools, etc.
2) The CP commits a church to supporting some things they might not support otherwise while supporting a lot of things no church can do alone.
That’s the choice. Our guys go to seminary for much less than others because of the CP. Some churches care about that deeply. Others don’t.
I don’t like paying the salaries of consultants and program pushers. But I like paying all the salaries of missionaries and church planters.
That’s the deal.
A “cafeteria style” CP would be the end of the CP. And once its gone, Southern Baptists will be a people united by pretty much nothing that doesn’t unite us with a bunch of other people now.
Peace
ms
LikeLike
Michael, you said this:
“There are mistakes younger, dissatisfied SBCers must avoid. It would be foolish beyond words to see younger leaders cast off the Cooperative Program in favor of independent missionary funding models. The list of benefits we’ve all experienced from cooperation is long. I went to seminary for pennies compared to many people. Many who read this blog have received church planting assistance and sponsorship from the SBC.”
I agree that cooperation is good and that the CP has been a great thing. But, the work is not being done. Instead of seeing more people reached, we are seeing less. If a Southern Baptist church wants to initiate their own work in partnership with other churches and bypass the middle man, isn’t that a good thing? It seems that on some levels, we are afraid to tell our churches to do anything besides CP, even if they find ways to do far more with far less money. This perspective that everything needs to be funneled through a central office seems to slow down the spreading of the gospel rather than speed it up. Again, I’m all for cooperation and I think that the concept of the CP is a good thing, but the overall program seems to be broken and way to centralized. Those in the system benefit, but it is difficult for work to be done outside of the system. Local churches should be able to pick up the slack there.
LikeLike
Just an observation about the SBC and its current and future decline. While the church may still be about evangelism and discipleship, too many of the men and women in the pews are not. Evangelism, the natural sharing of your faith with your friends and family has become a relic of the past in too many believers lives. Now it’s delegated to the pastor who may try something new or still try to preach ’em down the aisle. The truth is that almost no one is led to belief in Christ through preaching alone. For many of us…even for most people I know…that process came through personal interaction with another believer who loved and cared about them. Church centric evangelism does not work because non-believers have no interest in coming. It never worked as well as it seems in our memory.
LikeLike
In one sense it would be good to establish Baptist identity in the churches. In a younger baptist church that was not tee-totaling, I could drink a beer or taste a wine now and then with my (yes, rather calvinist) pastor’s knowledge and approval. I didn’t find out that my identity wasn’t really Baptist until I applied to the IMB. After sending in all my (and my wife’s) medical records and resumes and hours of application process, a medical risk was identified — had consumed alcohol in the 6 months prior to applying.
I explained that my pastor knew and I was willing to abstain, only to find that my “lifestyle” was not a fit. Ironically, if I had drunk against my conscience or as an exception, I could have repented. But because my view was that drinking is not prohibited in the Bible (though drunkenness is) there was no hope for me. Actually, there was a hope. I was told I could wait for a whole year and if I had abstained and if I had also experienced a change in my convictions on this matter, I could begin the application process again. I didn’t anticipate that my convictions would change, so we found other means and went.
So, teaching membership classes at SBC churches and sincerely adhering to the BFM-2000 will not make you a baptist, my friends. Nor will it establish your alleged “Baptist Identity” before a representative of the IMB.
I still run into IMB missionaries and so many of them are great people doing excellent ministry. People like them are why I was drawn to the SBC.
LikeLike
@imonk: I’ve been SBC all my life. I’d leave if God led me to, but if not, I am happy here.
I’ve been SBC all my life too, but as I shared with you in an e-mail last December, I know that God is leading me elsewhere. This is one of the hardest decisions I’ve ever had to make, and I’ve said many prayers and shed many tears over the past 4 months. This coming Sunday I have to inform the Sunday School class that I teach that I’m going to be stepping down, and I well up with tears just thinking about it. But I know I’m doing what God wants me to do because he’s given me peace about the decision, and my spiritual life has been energized to a degree I haven’t thought possible.
I think God has done with me all he wants in the SBC context for the time being, and he’s moving me on to a new context. I’ve been visiting a Lutheran church, and I’m very comfortable there, but I’ve made no firm decisions yet. Maybe God wants me to try to inject some evangelistic fervor into a Church that has let evangelism slide as a priority. 🙂
LikeLike
You stay right where you are and continue to grow His Kingdom!
LikeLike
Brian:
I wouldn’t recommend anyone trying to “know” me from my blog. What I write is where I am, but it’s out of context of the life I live. I’ve been SBC all my life. I’d leave if God led me to, but if not, I am happy here. At age 52, being happy where I am is a big part of my life. Southern Baptists have made a lot possible for me, and I do feel loyalty to the team, but not in the same realm as loyalty to Christ.
peace
ms
LikeLike
I agree with you 100%.
Sorry for the weird questions. Just started to read your blog, and was just trying to understand where you stand on things and was a bit confused.
Maybe I should have read more of your archives. The older blogs probably would have answered my question.
Thanks so much.
Brian
LikeLike
Brian:
I don’t put my hopes in a denomination. It’s a flawed and fallen human instrument. But the cooperation that is encouraged in the SBC allows a lot of good to happen. It’s my home. I love it and will stay there and work for Christ from there.
But I have no desire to promote a denomination or a blog or a house church as anything. Only Christ.
peace
ms
LikeLike
Imonk:
Please do not take it wrong what I am trying to ask.
I definitely do not think people that are in a denomination are “doing it wrong” because they are part of a certain church. I have learned over the years not to judge others. I know God can work in anyone within any Christ-centered church despite their doctrinal views.
I am just trying to understand the heart of your posts.
Thanks
LikeLike
Imonk:
I love having the support of people too when I gather in Christ, I just do it with other believers outside the denominational walls.
Why do you feel the need to be in a denomination? As I read your posts (great posts by the way!) I get a sense that you are unhappy with the direction of the SBC. My question was geared toward a “why” do you defend a denomination that seems to be walking down the wrong path. Instead of trying to get the SBC back to the roots, why not leave and find the roots of the Church in Christ as the head?
I truly do not understand why so many denominations, but that is another story. The unity is in Christ not denominational laws. This probably all sounds weird, sorry for that, just confused.
Brian
LikeLike
Brian:
>Why do you feel you need the covering of the SBC when you can go out and do all that you are doing without the covering of a denomination?
Where and how?
Please explain.
I love having the fellowship and support of people who want to support me in my ministry. And I love not having to spend a third of my time raising funds.
ms
LikeLike
ScottL:
I don’t do door to door. That’s obnoxious.
I don’t give out tracts. I do use the 2 Ways to Live booklet with seekers.
I don’t give altar calls. I invite people to believe in Jesus.
So you were right. Where in the post did I lead you to believe otherwise?
ms
LikeLike
In our RC parish, there is not much “official” evangelism going on, but an increasing amount of one-on-one sharing through personal initiative. I’m not sure why the increase – I’d like to think it’s the Holy Spirit working.
Sometimes I wonder why Catholics don’t evangelize in the same way as our Protestant brothers and sisters. Could it be in part because Catholics require a more formalized period of study before entering the Church? I’d love to see a door-to-door effort to at least acquaint people with the faith and as an invitation to learn more.
LikeLike
Interesting that reading all of your previous articles for the past few months, I have thought you were not the typical SBC-er in regards to evangelism – tracts, giving invitation, knocking on doors, etc. 🙂
LikeLike
We believed in personal evangelism (â€witnessing,â€) evangelistic preaching, evangelistic crusades, evangelism resources, evangelists, door to door evangelism, youth camp evangelism, evangelistic films, evangelistic tracts, evangelism through sports, music and anything else that you could stick evangelism on.
I’m a life-long Southern Baptist, and I admire and appreciate the SBC focus on evangelism. But I’ve come to realize that the SBC’s model of how to do evangelism isn’t the only valid model, and it may not be the most effective one. I should probably speak of models rather than model, but the point is the same. Given the decline in Baptism and membership in the SBC, I think an hard evaluation of how we do evangelism is long overdue.
Don’t get me wrong: I think zeal for evangelism is good. But you can be sincerely zealous and sincerely wrong at the same time. I think the spirit of Charles Finney is too much with us, the spirit of method and manipulation, the spirit of trying “whatever works,” the spirit of seeking the next great evangelistic system. Maybe I’ve been reading too much Luther recently, but whatever happened to just sharing the Gospel and letting the Holy Spirit do his work. When we adopt all of these Finney-like methods, aren’t we taking on to ourselves the work of the Spirit?
I participated in FAITH Evangelism Training as both a learner and group leader. It was a good experience, but there were aspect of it with which I became very uncomfortable. The FAITH outline came a across as a slick canned sales pitch. I felt more like I was selling Amway than sharing the Good News. When we didn’t have any specific targets on a FAITH night, we did door to door “Opinion Surveys” to random houses. The ostensible reason for the survey was to gather information that would help the church serve the community. The real motivation behind the “survey” was to determine if the respondent was a Christian, and if not, we’d hit them with the FAITH outline. In other words, we were being intentionally dishonest about our motivation when we knocked on a person’s door. I can’t see how lying to someone in order to get an opportunity to evangelize them is good or right. In any event, going up to random people to tell them they’re sinners and need to be saved will be about as effective as going up to random people and telling them they’re fat, they need to lose weight, and we’re going to tell them how. And what does it say about the effectiveness of the FAITH program when my church, an incredibly evangelistic and mission minded church, can only maintain interest in the FAITH program for a couple of years?
The SBC’s focus on evangelism is good; they way it goes about it, not so much sometimes. Many of the SBC’s problems come, I think, from a lack of historical awareness and a distancing itself from the traditions and history of the Church. Robert Webber’s Ancient Future Evangelism would be an excellent place to start for us to re-evaluate how we do evangelism.
LikeLike
I want to agree with Michael about Catholics and evangelism. It is just not there, not on the parish level, as far as I’ve seen. Sure, there is the ocassional “come and ask questions about Catholicism” meetings. But nothing else.
I’ve raised the question a number of times, and the main answer that I get is “We have religious orders to do that.” Even in dying areas, evangelism is the last thing scheduled. (My parish cluster won’t be talking about evangelism until next year. )
But, some Baptist churches don’t seem interested either. At my last one, General Conference, I offered to go and visit the first time visitors. All that I wanted from the pastor is the name of a partner to visit with, and the names of those to be visited. His response was to offer me some hospital/nursing home visits. (While I don’t remember now exactly where I was in the leaving process, I was willing to tell him that I would not say anything to discourage any newcomer.)
LikeLike
iMonk,
I spent six years in Southern Baptist churches (2 SBC, 1 Baptist General Convention of Texas). All of them operated the way you are describing. All of them emphasized “evangelism and discipleship.” All of them had weekly alter calls. All of them were in decline.
I think there is more to the puzzle than just a lack of emphasis on evangelism and discipleship. I think the SBC needs to reevaluate what those things mean. It has been my experience that the SBC wants you to walk down an aisle, pray a prayer, get dunked, sign up for a “new membership” class, learn the Christian culture, and vote Republican. Is that evangelism?
I feel that a lot of churches have reduced the Gospel to “affirm our creed and join our club.” I have to think that this mentality is contributing to the decline. I vividly remember looking around in my Southern Baptist church one Sunday and asking myself, “Why would I ever invite one of my non-Christian friends to come here? What difference would it make in his or her life?” I couldn’t come up with an answer other than that the music was entertaining, the people were friendly, and the food was good.
LikeLike
Willoh,
I am not saying you cannot grow in Christ in different environments. If you are growing in Christ with a gathering of beleivers in that setting, so be it. I was asking the question because as I read it seems IMonk is trying so hard to keep something going that might be ready to die off.
Just wanted to see what he says. I am asking to learn, not to say one way is right and another wrong. I definitely do not think we should go it alone. Christ is very clear that he wants a Bride and that Bride is a COMMUNITY of believers, not a lonely person.
LikeLike
Amen, ProdigalSarah! I would add that less obsession with end-time prophecy would be helpful as well. Forget the end times; help me become a better follower of Jesus in the here and now!
LikeLike
I am at the moment happily SBC. here in the North East Pa. Baptist Assoc. To answer Brian’s question, why not go it alone, i need the fellowship and prayer of the pastor posse that has welcomed me with open arms. I love the Baptist Faith and Message. I came to the SBC because the BF&M expressed my beliefs exactly. When our church flooded ,twice, the NEPBA mus out team showed up in force to help, them went out into the neighborhood and scrubbed other houses.
I never got a salary from them, doubt I ever will, but community is important and biblical. Our new church plant would have no other way to participate in spreading the Word outside of our community without the cooperative program.
I echo my friend Jeff M, maybe it is because we serve in new territory, but I have been treated well, and god has blessed my SBC involvement.
There is incredible diversity here in our region, we have churches that seem pentecostal with dancing in the isles, some that seem almost Puritan. We all love Jesus and seek to honor god in our own way.
LikeLike
Michael,
Good post and having grown up and come to Christ in an SBC church I have much that I agree with in this post and yet there are the many issues that bug me about things that are going on and, admittedly, many of those are those secondary issues and that frustrates me because of my decision to leave the church I’m at now and part of that is worship and music related amongst other things….. some of the secondary.
As I’ve thought about what I would want in a church the priorities are much as you stated in this post and others of my own.
A church that is….. Christ centered, gospel proclaiming, disciple making, ministers to its own and to the commuinty around it and beyond, more liturgical structured, better emphasis on communion, a commitment to sacred music and hymnody with the contemporary sprinkled in where appropriate, a church in the world yet different from it. As I’ve said before, I think one of the attractions to church, to me anyway, is that fact that we are, or should be, different – not in a arrogant, smug, holier than thou way – just that living a sold out
to Christ life is bound to look very different and stand out in contrast to the world around us yet we must be willing to go into the places where people are, that are outside our comfort zone(s) and be salt and light as we’re taught in scripture as Jesus himself did yet the public place of worship – the Temple – and what was going on there was not overlooked by him either. He saw what was going on and with a correct and righteous anger he went in and cleaned it out – it was to be a house of prayer, indeed worship that was decidedly different that anything else happening outside of it yet a place where all could be welcomed.
I could go on and on but I think you get the idea and there are church bodies of all kinds, including SBC churches, that are doing those things above and more yet many are not. Thanks again for the post keeps me on my toes as my wife and I work through this change that’s coming.
The Guy from Knoxville
LikeLike
Thanks Fr. Ernesto,
The IMB and NAMB are two of things that I am most proud of. I still to this day carry a love missions instilled in me as a young boy in RA’s.
Austin
LikeLike
IMonk.
I am confused, and would like to ask a question. I am not trying to dig at you, I am just trying to understand.
Why do you feel you need the covering of the SBC when you can go out and do all that you are doing without the covering of a denomination?
Are we not all united in Christ’s Church, not the SBC church?
LikeLike
Let me put in a “ditto,” iMonk, for your joining evangelism and discipleship into one seamless whole. I so agree with you! For purposes of theological study we may need to separate the two, but in practice they should never ever be separated. Unfortunately, too many books and tracts on “evangelism” stop with the decision and then seem to simply throw in a sentence or two about how one should attend a local congregation.
A “decision” needs to be talked about as only the beginning of a delightful and wonderful journey, a journey with perils and adventures, a journey with peace and love, a journey with family and new acquaintances, a journey . . . . Well, you get the idea.
In passing, when my wife and I were overseas as missionaries, we met some of the wonderful people the Cooperative program sends out. They had all been trained and vetted. They had reasonable stipends which were more than just the basics. They had good insurance coverages in case of the worst. They had a working budget that allowed them to do that for which they had been sent. And, when the worst happened–one of the missionaries, and our friend, was killed in a plane crash returning from a journey–they quickly had the spiritual and psychological support needed to deal with the loss.
So, all you SBC’ers out there, don’t you dare give up supporting the domestic and the foreign cooperative program for missionaries!
LikeLike
Michael,
One disagreement with you,
Hundreds of Calvinistic Southern Baptists are preaching the Gospel and serving as missionaries now. They are not baby baptizers, church splitters and despisers of missions.
The number of five point Calvinists in my state convention is currently in the low double digits. As best as I can tell, every single one of them is splitting their churches. Now, mind you, I’m not real big on the SBC leadership that is going after the Calvinists either. You’ve described them pretty well. But SBC Calvinist leaders have been their own worst enemies and they need to own up to some things, starting with Al Mohler’s early shenanigans at Southern.
LikeLike
I cringe when I read anyone SBC use the word evangelism.
I read about the IMB, the Co-op program, Identity etc., I read Baptist history, I read comments from missionaries about to head out into the ‘field’ and I think, ‘please don’t come here.’
We have SBC in Canada, please don’t send us more, finish destroying each other and leave us be.
A terrible thought and plea from a follower of Jesus Christ, but God forgive me it’s what I think.
LikeLike
As others have written here, evangelism *and discipleship* make up the Biblical picture of the Christian life– not an all-consuming focus on an “evangelism” which is actually a sales pitch that seeks to “close the deal” at all costs, even at the risk of giving false assurance of salvation to people who have no idea who or what they have just “accepted into their hearts.”
I know that this sort of language grates against the “evangelistic zeal” of many in the SBC, but they need to ask themselves, is their zeal according to *Biblical wisdom*? This much is true– in order to be faithfully Biblical Christians, we must be evangelistically minded. In order to be *consistently* Biblical Christians (as much as sinful people can be), we must also be evangelistic in practice– but that does *not* mean a shallow sales pitch to non-Christians that leaves out the need to *count the cost* of becoming a Christian.
Being evangelistic in practice also does *not* mean that we do not speak to the (hopefully) newly converted Christian about the need for him/her to be not only a *believer* in Jesus Christ (as essential as that is) but also a *disciple* of Him. When more SBC churches encourage truly Biblical evangelism and practice serious discipleship, there will be a bright future for the denomination. I do think there is a substantive minority of SBC churches moving in this direction. May the majority (and the Convention) *listen* to, and learn from, them!
LikeLike
Good continuation of the first part. It looks like I should havewaited to comment. Good post.
LikeLike
I had another thought about the SBC structure at the state level anyway. I grew up in Arkansas and served as a youth pastor or intern at three different churches. In the time that I was on church staffs, I never once interacted with a single representative from the state office in any way. I did meet someone from the state office the year I served as a summer missionary in Eureka Springs, but that was only at the training sessions at the start of the summer.
I moved to the Dakotas about five and a half years ago. I knew the associational missionary in the area I started in from before day one as he was my point of contact into the area I served. But after moving here, I was invited and encouraged to attend the DBC conventions and conferences even as a bi-voc. youth pastor. The convention went out of their way to help with expenses if possible. The attitude of the state convention here in the Dakotas is unlike any other I have experienced. I think part of it stems from being a “pioneer” area of the SBC, but part of it is intentional. Next month there is a convention sponsored evangelism conference in Fargo (if Fargo doesn’t float away this week or next) and the convention does this kind of event every year in the spring. We have also been coordinating and sponsoring an evangelism focused ministry at the Sturgis Bike Rally as a convention for several years now with great success. From the articles you have posted, it sounds like we are not the norm in SBC life, and it is definitely different from the attitude and thinking about denominational life that I experienced in Arkansas.
LikeLike
iMonk,
I am glad you clarified on the discipleship issue in the comments. Evangelism without discipleship is definitely pointless. Usually that is a byproduct of “wretched urgency” as you call it.
LikeLike
This post, as well as the comments, have been thought inducing. I think I will sit this discussion out though…not because it is uncomfortable to witness a denominational sword fight, but because I learn far more in this case by watching from the edges of the field!
LikeLike
I probably shouldn’t complain since I’m the rebellious daughter who refuses to come to the family reunion. But if there are two things I would hope for, it’s this.
A little more distance between the SBC and politics/social hot-button issues. Issues are rarely as simplistic as they are so often preached. And it seems to encourage an Us vs Them mindset. Doesn’t it make it more difficult to evangelize to the Thems of the world?
The other would be to encourage pastors to stop bashing other denominations. My in-laws are Catholic. Ain’t no way I’m sitting through a sermon about the evils of The Vatican. What exactly is that supposed to accomplish anyway?
LikeLike
Thanks again for your writings and for your response to my post. As I said, I’m not familiar with your work and interpreted some of what you said in the above post in the light of my experiences with SBC and not knowing about your ministry.
Your comment:
3) Baptism is the conjunction of evangelism and discipleship. One only evangelizes into discipleship. I see no distinction between the two at any point. Your statement that the great commission is not about evangelism surely puts you in one of the smallest minorities in Christian interpretation. It’s about both, and must be. How do you have a baby to grow if its not born? Are you a Calvinist?
I completely agree with your last comment. The GC is about both – but the emphasis is on discipleship. In my experience, too much emphasis is placed on evangelism, and the new Christians are left on their own or neglected. Evangelism is the be all and end all.
Your comment:
5) My preaching congregation is 60% non-Christians and is not a church. At a church, I agree that we emphasize discipleship, though we still communicate the Gospel at the center of scripture. But in my preaching at the ministry where I serve, I am preaching to atheists, Muslims, Buddhists, etc as much as Christians. Woe is me if I do not preach the Gospel invitation to them as often as possible.
In this situation, you are correct. I hope that you are discipling and teaching them as well. My experience has been the opposite – preaching the Gospel week after week with evangelistic messages to people who have been believers for decades. As a result they know the basics very well, but they have stagnated at that point.
And yes, I am a Calvinistic Baptist. I’m not sure why you asked.
Thanks again, God bless
LikeLike
Atone/Brad:
I mean that you are probably viewing what I would even consider exaggerated, but I’d probably seem exaggerated to you. That’s the influence of revivalism on Baptist preaching. You can see it with Piper- he’s from South Carolina.
peace
ms
LikeLike
Oh it’s true everywhere as far as I know, though it varies culture to culture.
I shouldn’t have said Pope. Should have said church.
Ben, I’m 52 and I’ve learned that most anything anyone says about the RCC can be corrected by 5 other Catholics. I’m sure you’ll see that here at IM.
I appreciate the corrections as they pertain to misrepresentations and stay on topic.
peace
ms
LikeLike
“But we are talking about a church where the pope tells you if you have to receive the sacrament kneeling or standing.”
Case in point. It’s actually the Congregation for Divine Worship that offers recommendations on such things, subject to the decisions of the local Conference of Bishops. (And ultimately, it is not licit to deny Eucharist to anyone based on their posture.) Sounds like I’m picking a nit, here, but the nature and scope of ecclesiastic authority is important.
“…the point was that Baptists resist that sort of thing on any level, like telling us we have to have “Baptist†in the church name to be Baptist.”
Understood. In your opinion, is this kind of resistance common to Baptists worldwide, or more specifically in the U.S.?
LikeLike
All your description of voice, etc was negative and I interpret that as exaggerated, but I realize my preaching “toolbox†might be over the top in your church.
Michael, well, that’s why I asked. My sliver of a perspective is simply too small to make any broad based judgments. Appreciate the response and for setting me straight.
Brad
LikeLike
Ben,
I’m aware that the every detail doesn’t extend to….every detail. That should have been a “most.” Frequent error of mine. Sorry.
But we are talking about a church where the pope tells you if you have to receive the sacrament kneeling or standing. And hundreds of other things on that level. I respect and appreciate it, but the point was that Baptists resist that sort of thing on any level, like telling us we have to have “Baptist” in the church name to be Baptist.
peace
ms
LikeLike
Your reading of Vatican II is spot on and I’ll have to give some serious thought to how I use the term “evangelism” in the future.
Hope I didn’t leave you with the impression that I planned to evangelize you on your own blog. Just thought I’d offer a clarification on Roman Catholic matters occasionally (i.e., “We aren’t Rome, where every detail of worship and church life comes from outside the congregation.”)
If you’d prefer I didn’t, I’m more than happy to slip back into lurkdom. It’s a fascinating blog and I’ll remain a reader in any case.
God Bless,
Ben
LikeLike
Chris Poe:
I respect your view and I know many who share it.
I don’t, but that’s ok.
I don’t believe a Baptist converting to the RCC is renouncing Christ.
peace
ms
LikeLike
Atone/Brad:
Being SBC in a rural area, preaching has its own culture. I respect that and I work with it. If I preached like Tim Keller here, I would not be seen as preaching.
This is an issue when I communicate with non-Christians or people from outside our cultural area. And I have to deal with that because I am who I am.
All your description of voice, etc was negative and I interpret that as exaggerated, but I realize my preaching “toolbox” might be over the top in your church.
I just know where God put me and that I have a low view of trying to be anyone but myself.
peace
ms
LikeLike
I preach the Gospel, Southern Baptist style. I preach with zeal and emotion. I preach for conversion. I appeal and persuade.
One thing I was struck by, but then walked away to chew on and have now have come back to ask is this: Could an over-reliance on “preaching the Gospel Southern Baptist style” might be part of the larger issues coming up in the SBC?
Here’s my impressions: I can’t tell you how many cringe moments I have had over the years listening to SBC folks preach with an over reliance on presentation, voice inflection and cadence. It’s almost as if how the sermon is delivered is more important that what is delivered. There’s no rest, no sense of confidence, that Spirit of God will move as he will and use even the worst deliveries for his glory.
Now I’m not saying your guilty of this or that the SBC is guilty at large. What do I know? It’s just that I get the sense that the emphasis on presentation has usurped the faith that should be projected. Ironically, when the super syrupy “SBC style Gospel” that I’ve heard preached, even to a perfect cadence, inflection, etc., etc., comes off as hokey, less genuine and contrived.
Just wondering if you agree.
Brad
LikeLike
iMonk,
I am thankful that you set forth Christ in your preaching. I am also quite sensitive to your situation. However, I am compelled to respond to a comment you made earlier in which you stated that Roman Catholics are not a target for evangelism.
A Great Commission Resurgence that doesn’t aim at the conversion of those in bondage to damnable heresy (Roman Catholicism) won’t be much of a resurgence at all. A Down-Grade would be a more appropriate description.
If it takes that shape, (and I am persuaded up to this point that most who identify with the GCR would agree with me) then whatever disagreements we may have with Dr. Kelley’s prescription, we really are on a path to becoming the New Methodists. Being raised Methodist and attending a Catholic high school and living my whole life in Louisiana, I am well acquainted with both.
This is not Baptist Identity rhetoric or Calvinist rhetoric. It is Gospel rhetoric.
LikeLike
GEO: Don’t resent it. I was talking about independent in the context of the SBC, i.e. church based missions rather than cooperative missions as in the SBCs cooperative program. That was the historical controversy that birthed our cooperative program. Sorry to have confused.
I’m not so ignorant that I don’t know indy churches do lots of missions.
LikeLike
Of all the sermons, blogs etc that I have read over the years you are the only person (that I can find so far) who has made this statement:
“but the resources that our denomination offers the wider cause of the Kingdom are unprecedented in Christian history”
Amen!
I’m not from the SBC, but it seems to me that the technological tools available are grossly under used. I believe this to be a problem of an aging church population, and general lack of understanding but not apathy to the cause.
It just seems that the Christian church could be harnessing an army of people to spread the Word using the open source technological tools at our disposal.
I do understand that human to human evangelism is excedingly important, but it seems that commodity hardware and open source tools could put the Word in front of millions more eyes. If the Christian church could understand how to use these blessings I believe we could break the exile and spread the Gospel like the world has never seen.
Exodus 31:1-5
Thank you for making your thoughts available.
I really appreciate reading your blog.
Drew
LikeLike
Um, speaking as a long time Independent Baptist, I resent your connecting of “independent” with anti-missions thinking. Independent Baptist regularly work together to support missions through para-church missions boards. This system allows each church to select its missionaries individually and yet still send support from several different churches.
I was part of a VERY missions minded independent church, that at one time was sending support to more missionaries then the church had members, (We had a controversy involving our then Pastor and several people left our small country church.)
That being said…
I totally agree. Evangelism IS the Great Commission. Discipleship, when understood as a part of sanctification, is a form of Evangelism.
(BTW, I’m cool with the SBC. I have family in it. I am just personally highly concerned with denominational structure for several reasons.
LikeLike
Ben:
Get in line behind about 130 other people, and realize that I have a “no evangelizing other Christians” policy on the blog. Mostly I mean me. I don’t tolerate it in its advanced forms.
During my wife’s move to the Roman church, I’ve read the Vatican II documents on Protestantism, ecumenism and the Church extensively. It appears to me that Catholics who are trying to bring me into full communion with the institution they see as the true church are imposing a special definition of evangelism on Protestants.
Protestants who evangelize you generally believe you are not a Christian and are going to hell because you believe a false Gospel. In my understanding of Vatican II, you are inviting me into full communion with Christ and his church via the sacraments which I currently reject. But VII says that you are to view me as separated brethren. That is a form of reconciliation.
If evangelism refers to Christians reconciling with Christians, then we need a word for what I do when I preach the invitation of God to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ to unbelievers.
peace and thanks for the comments,
ms
LikeLike
I suspect we don’t share quite the same understanding of the word “evangelism,” but I don’t think I’m in the right venue to pursue that further.
I quite agree that we need an increased emphasis on reaching out to the lost, but I don’t see it as an either/or situation with reaching out to each other. I may not be a candidate for evangelization, but I hope that I am still a candidate for the truth.
I sympathize with Protestants who wish to “convert” me, because I have similar desires for them. We can dispense with the word “conversion” altogether and call it what it is: a desire to reunite the family. We are broken, and something in us remains restless until we are one.
P.S. By saying, “I have an impression on this score that won’t be removed easily,” you’ve left the door open just a crack. 🙂 I hope you don’t mind if I chime in occasionally to clarify some Roman matters.
LikeLike
Stephen:
Let me clarify:
1) Invitation does not mean altar call, come to the front. I don’t do that except when required.
2) The entire Bible is an invitation. I would challenge you to examine the possibility that a passage by passage exclusion of the Great Invitation that is the revelation of Jesus as THE message of scripture is serious move.
3) Baptism is the conjunction of evangelism and discipleship. One only evangelizes into discipleship. I see no distinction between the two at any point. Your statement that the great commission is not about evangelism surely puts you in one of the smallest minorities in Christian interpretation. It’s about both, and must be. How do you have a baby to grow if its not born? Are you a Calvinist?
4) I have said many times on my blog that I spend my life in evangelism and discipleship. What God has joined together, let not man put asunder.
5) My preaching congregation is 60% non-Christians and is not a church. At a church, I agree that we emphasize discipleship, though we still communicate the Gospel at the center of scripture. But in my preaching at the ministry where I serve, I am preaching to atheists, Muslims, Buddhists, etc as much as Christians. Woe is me if I do not preach the Gospel invitation to them as often as possible.
May every preacher include the invitation to faith in Christ in every sermon, because it is the great word that all of scripture is about. Forrest and trees, as we say here in Ky.
peace and thanks for the comment.
LikeLike
I just started reading your blog a week or two back. Excellent work. We attended Southern Baptist churches in Colorado and the Chicago area for about three years about ten years ago. Otherwise, we’ve been members of E Free and Baptist General Conferences churches for over fifteen years.
Your post makes it plain to me what the problem has been with the SBC. You’ve majored in evangelism, rather than discipleship. When you preach, you said that you nearly always – 90% – of the time include an invitation. I grew up in churches like that, as well, but I don’t think that it’s Biblical. Instead, we are called on to teach whatever God’s word calls us to do in whatever passages we are preaching. If that includes the Gospel and an invitation, that’s fine. But if not, then so be it.
The Great Commission is about discipleship, not evangelism. Perhaps the problem with Evangelicalism as a movement – not just the SBC – has been the emphasis on the getting born, rather than on the maturation and growth after the baby has arrived.
LikeLike
Not my chapel preaching to students. I do have some sermons at a nearby Presbyterian church on the category “London Presby” on the sidebar:
https://internetmonk.com/archive/sermon-in-the-water-with-bill-maher-a-sermon-on-the-baptism-of-jesus
LikeLike
Is there a sample of your preaching we can hear on the net? I would love to hear it.
LikeLike
Ben,
Thanks for the clarification. I can see that you feel strongly, as I do.
I would suggest to you that inviting Protestants to become Catholics is not evangelism. If my Catholic friends- and if we as Baptists- were as interested in the lost as we are “converting” other Christians, none of us would have anything to complain about.
I am not a candidate for evangelism. This seems to be a point on which many Catholics – especially Protestant converts- are unclear. I apologize that some Baptists believe you are a candidate for evangelism. I do not. (Baptism…well….. 🙂
I assure you of my great respect for the RCC but at 52, growing up in a Catholic community and now having my wife convert, I have an impression on this score that won’t be removed easily.
Peace
Michael Spencer
LikeLike
I greatly enjoy the blog, Michael.
I read this one and just had to comment:
“I have received hundreds of invitations the last few years to become Roman Catholic. With all due respect…I would have already decided that no other place could be home for because of what I perceive as a lack of emphasis on evangelism.”
Excuse me, but a church that has invited you to become a member *hundreds* of times just over the *past few years* lacks an emphasis on evangelism?
You go on to say:
“(I can’t speak knowledgeably about actual evangelism.)”
It’s disappointing to read that you’re making a decision based on your perception of something in the full knowledge that this perception may not reflect reality. As someone wishing to learn more about the SBC, would you recommend that I take a look at the “actual,” or stick with my “perception?”
“We aren’t Rome, where every detail of worship and church life comes from outside the congregation.”
This is untrue. If “every detail” came from outside the congregation, we’d be spared the humiliation of liturgical dance, Marty Haugen hymns, and tie-dyed vestments. As for “church life,” you might be surprised at how much originates in the parish itself. You might also be surprised at how many of those directives from Rome “trickled up” from the parish level to begin with. (Yes, we have a hierarchy, but the Rome/Diocese, Diocese/Parish, and Clergy/Laity relationships are recursive in a way that only becomes apparent if you back up and take the historical view.)
Sorry if I went on too long there. I’ve learned a lot by reading your blog and just thought I’d return the favor in some small way. God bless.
LikeLike
No, a Great Commission Resurgence is a vital future for the SBC, not only for our priorities as a missionary and evangelistic force, but because it is that Great Commission task and the trust of the cooperative funding mechanism that created who we are as contemporary Southern Baptists.
Amen, Michael. And a Great Commission Resurgence is vital for the future of all Christendom.
LikeLike