Adrian Rogers Starting New Association?

I had heard(of course I have no written info--just "Hand me down" talk) that rather it was Bob Pittman from Kirby Woods Baptist in Memphis.

I was in Memphis this past week and toured Bellvue while I was there---the tour guide said that Dr. Rogers is still recouping from Bi-Pass surgery and won't be back in Bellvue office until May.

Blackbird

 

They (fundamentalist) didn't get their way in state-wide Tennesse elections and appointments, so they are doing what they have done in Virgina and Texas, start a group of their own. Should be interesting to how this plays out in Tennesse, they have been on the edges of this conservative verses more conservative debate for a while now.

 

From the article...

"The model of an association configured along county and/or state lines is no longer sufficient ..."

Methinks go2 would probably have agreed with this statement at recent BGCT annual meetings...

And I would hardly think the groups in Virginia and Texas were the first to start their own group when they didnt get their way. Seems like Baptist History is full of examples. Just ask the folks who did it in 1990. I think they operate out of Georgia or something....

 

I got excited when I read that they will expand to "south of Jackson"----man, oh man!! That is right in my backyard!!!!

Brother David

 

You do know that most SBC churches today are the results of a split. So I guess it goes along with their practice.

No need to get along, just take their ball and run.

 

I was making reference to recent history, if you want to go back in history you could go all the way to the days of the Particular verses General. If those churches want to start another association/ convention, more power to them. It is obvious that one group isn't going to ever follow the 2000 BF&M, so it probably best that the two groups serve God and expand the Kingdom of God in a manner consistent with their conscience. I don't have a problem with that in the least.

 

I have a feeling that this new Association is not in direct result of receiving/rejecting the BF & M 2000 but more along the lines of state conventions controlling CP funds----here in Mississippi---of every CP dollar a church sends to the state convention---only $.35 actually reaches the SBC's IMB and NAMB board. I believe if you investigate---that will be the main issue in Tennessee

 

I have a serious problem with splits. What does that demonstrate to the world? If churches can split and the SBC blesses that, then they are in fact endorsing a practice that does not force people to do what scripture teaches about another offending you. It teaches that if you don't like or agree with the other person then just leave. If we lived under communist rule I doubt that practice would exist. See any evidence of churches splitting in scripture. We see people having troubles and fighting. But I can't think of any case where church splits are encouraged. The SBC has this mentality that the more churches there are the more evangelism will occur. It sure isn't happening where I live. In fact it is quite the opposite. The SBC churches are nearly extinct. It is the larger churches that have a good testimony and are leading people to Christ. It is the larger churches that have kept their pastors for a long time. The largest church in the area has had its pastor for 12 years and the pastor before him was here for over 30 years.

Let me give you and example. My next door neighbor pastors a Lutheran Church. He is a man of God that leads his church in evangelism. People are being saved and he preaches the gospel. His family are Christians and share their faith. Their children share their faith at school. But he told me of an incident where things were coming to a head. One person in the church was causing tremendous trouble and he was about ready to resign. So he told his leaders that and they told him they would take care of the problem. They did and he is still there several years later. If that group of troublemakers would have been allowed to start another church just imagine what that would have done. There would have been no discipline exercised. As I am sure most are aware that the issue of discipline is virtually nonexistent in most SBC churches. The person can just leave and go to another SBC church if they want and take their sin with them.

I saw one church split and then one of those groups split again. Now none of them are doing very well. They are all small and struggling. The initial problem was that the pastor was teaching some false doctrine. Rather than take a stance against the issue some just left and started another church. Some of those fought and split again. Finally the pastor left and the church was much smaller and was without a pastor.

How does one explain that the average tenure of a pastor in the SBC is about two years? It is one of the lowest of any denomination in the US. Doesn't that say something?

 

Excellent thoughts.

 

Well since this is now 2004 and the SBC makeover started in 1979....I think it is time to move on, this fence isn't going to be mended. The message it sends, we are not perfect and we all have opinions and convictions that we aren't willing to compromise. Is it better to stay together and spend energy fighting each other or to move on serving God as we feel lead by the Spirit?

There are lots of reasons that the pastor tenure is short. Not all of them are for negative reasons. Short stays don't mean ineffective ministry. I also think that overall we are seeing the tenure becoming longer and not shorter.