Whats wrong with the SBC churches in my area?

Who caused the division?

 

To the OP: the IFB churches in my neck of the woods are dying on the vine. So I see the reverse of what you see. Just my observation.

 

Good question, and exactly the question I would propose for each situation. Even though it is usually the case, keep in mind, it's not only the pharasees that create division, demanding that their preference be honored, that traditions of man be strictly kept all to the exclusion of those who don't share their dogmatism.

 

75% over 50?? Those in their 50 and early 60's were a part of the rock and roll music generation while teenagers, so it is not surprising that they may not object to it. Those over 65 were teenagers before the rock and roll music became popular and generally do not like it.

Concerning it being just me, I purposely have not tried to find out how many others don't like the harsh growling sound, and the loud drum beat music. However after our Bible study and prayer meeting this morning, I saw a group of men talking about the problem. Upon joining them, I found out that one fellow counted 38 People that stayed in the foyer for the 11AM service until the music part was over. No one counted those that stayed in the foyer for the 9:30 service which is about the same size as the 11AM service.

We come in the middle of the 8AM service. Although I have not counted those avoiding the song service at the 8AM service, I know there are others that come in late besides us. I usually avoid discussing it with people. It appears that up to 100 people out of about 1700, avoid the songs part of the service; with a number of those who sit through it, complaining about the harsh growling sound and the loud drum beat music.

I assure you it is not just me who is unbappy with the harsh growling sound and the loud drum beat music.

 

I think the easy thing is to point fingers at the music and leave it there. I'm with the previous poster, 6 SBC churches within 20 minutes?!?!?! But then again I'm pastoring in a town of 3000 with 3 SBC churches, one was a legitimate church plant started by the church I'm at when that was still the "country" and the other decided to split the wrong way 30 years ago. And when I get really stressed people have asked me, "Why not start a new church" and my response is "aren't we church saturated enough?!?!"
I think the problem is in what the church isn't doing to reach the community and is way to egocentric for God's good.

 

I recently recently heard statistics indicating that increasing the amount of churches in a metropolitan area increased the ratio of believers to non-believers. Wouldn't that be the effect of obeying the great commission?

This makes sense, doesn't it?

 

Maybe in a metropolitan area, yes. But he was talking about his town of 3,000 with 3 SBC churches.

 

Is it the case that there could not be a sizeable congregation out of those remaining 2000 unchurched people, which might be able to reach even more of the unchurched?

 

I understand what you are saying, but 1 SBC church per 1,000 people is a far cry from the 1 SBC church per 250,000 or so in NYC or probably 1 per 10 million or so in missionary areas.

Everyone needs Jesus, but if we are starting churches, I'd rather spend money, time, tears and effort in an unreached area rather than an area where you can't swing a dead cat without hitting an evangelical church.

 

I am sympathetic to what you are saying. The reason I first replied was because I didn't think that 1:1000 was to be considered as 'saturated'. I also agree with you that 1:10mil is even further from the idea of being saturated.

 

I agree that I would not want to be part of the loud and unruly music that you have described. Each person who is dissatisfied needs to speak to the pastor privately. Now that would get his attention if 100 people asked to see him privately about the same issue. If he will not listen then graciously leave without causing any confusion and find another church or start one and have the kind of music you like. 100 people starting a church is a very good start-up.

 

Yes, and when they leave, the dialectical change-management-by-consensus will have worked to perfection. No need to rise up before the hoary head where there ain't one. Thank you RW.

"Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head, and honour the face of the old man, and fear thy God: I am the LORD." (Lev 19:32)

 

I purposely dont set foot in the church till maybe 11:30 AM........I give them time to play that stuff they call praise music & I'm 54.

 

While in search of a new church to attend this year we've been to more than a few contemporary churches and I am surprised at the number of 'gray headed' people that are participating and expressing much approval for the contemporary worship music. No hymnbooks, piano, organ. A band (electric and acoustic guitars, keyboards, drums, etc.) instead.

I've been to churches that were started 10 years ago and that has been their worship style from day one. If there is an older person who objects to the worship then who is causing the division?

It is the nature of systems and organizations to increasingly resist change.
It is the nature of systems and organizations to increasingly turn inward.

 

We are totally acapella.

 

Euuuuucccckkkkk!

 

And thats more like it! :love2:

 

You don't see these people talking about how they can't participate in the church's worship because of the music? Is "leave if you don't like it" the only thing you can offer them?

And don't tell me about having a tradition service for them. As has been stated by others, and as I have myself experienced, most of the traditional services don't come close. One verse of one hymn followed by three christian campfire songs and a choir/solo special does not make a service traditional.

 

I was looking at the thread in the history forum about instruments in the church. I thought it was very interesting. Learned some things I didn't know.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=71748&highlight=instruments