Why I'm Not Southern Baptist

Dwayne---show me any motion presented on the floor of any convention that we as Southern Baptists voted on that says we will from henseforth and here on out support the Promise Keepers!!! Show me one receipt from the general coffers---show me one line item on the ledger sheet where the SBC has given even a penny toward the PK's----as an entity----individuals within the entity of the SBC don't count---show me a motion from the floor and a receipt from the ledger---and I'll stop and listen to your link----

Blackbird

 

So your solution would be to be smaller? Have less people in the churches?

 

Promise Keepes is ecumenical? Prove it from their own statement of faith: http://www.promisekeepers.org/faqscore23

This statement of faith was put together with the help of a Conservative Baptist scholar.

I have issues with PK myself, but "ecumenicism" isn't one of them. I think the author of the article has no use for them because PK is not IFB. Well, good for them I say.

 

It's the same old, tired rehashed dog's breakfast that comes out of people's mouths from time to time. Honestly, some folks need to get busy doing something constructive with their time and stop fabricating nonsense.

 

It's the same old, tired rehashed dog's breakfast that comes out of people's mouths from time to time. Honestly, some folks need to get busy doing something constructive with their time and stop fabricating nonsense. </font>[/QUOTE]Amen

 

Some reasons why the SBC is no good from the place cited
in the OP = opening post:

//(1) THE DENOMINATIONAL SYSTEM ITSELF IS UNSCRIPTURAL.//

...

//(2) THE SBC IS ECUMENICAL.//

[sarcasm]By the same logic, the SBC is also:

1) too left and too right

2) too conservative and too liberal

3) too evangelistic and too inbread

4) too rich and too poor

5) too good and too bad

6) too tall and too short

7) too black and too white

8) too this and too that[/sarcasm]

It is really hard for the SBC to be too denominational
and too ecumenical. The two concepts are opposites.

For this reason alone the page referenced
is totally useless and can be savely ignored.

BTW, I am NOT a member of the Southern
Baptist Convention.

I am a member of a church which is a member
of a local association which is a member of
a State Convention that is a member of
the Southern Baptist Convention.

I am a member of a church which is a member
of a State Convention that is a member of
the Southern Baptist Convention.

I am a member of a church which is a member
of a local association that is a member of
the Southern Baptist Convention.

I am a member of a church that is a member of
the Southern Baptist Convention.

But I personally am not a member of the Southern
Baptist Convention (SBC)

 

Not necessarily. While I do favor smaller size churches, say less than 100 members, that is simply because I believe people get to know their brethren better when there are fewer of them to "memorize".

My solution is to have less churches in the association.

Fewer churches means a less likely chance for doctrinal errors to creep in unseen.

I believe that we have a duty to watch out for our sister churches if we see something coming in amongst them that is unsound. While we have no authority in their churches, we can make suggestions to them. That, I feel, is less likely to occur between churches of the SBC because it practically takes an act of the "SBC Congress" to get anything done. There just isn't time in the year to deal with every possible doctrinal error of every church in the SBC. It is just too large an organization.

My church is not and never has been in an association, though we do fellowship with many other churches fequently.

If we were to join one, I would like it to consist of no more than 10 churches.

I hope that better explains my position.

Bro. James

 

Brother Cloud's mouth has once again gotten ahead of his brain. When he is long gone and forgotten about, the SBC will still be winning souls,still be supporting missionaries home and abroad, still be standing on the fundamentals of the the faith, and we will still be producing the greatest Pastor/Preacher/Theologians in the world.

Is the SBC perfect? Of course not. Are there areas that we need to improve upon and shore up? Of course there are. But our leadership in the convention are working diligently to lead us in the Right direction- THEOLOGICALLY, MORALLY, AND PRACTICALLY. We as Southern Baptist Churches have the autonomous freedom do as we wish as a local body of believers. This can be good and this can be a negative when some choose to go against the Word of God. However, upon a close examination, the SBC as a whole is getting it right.

Cloud's misguided criticism often is motivated by personal preference and not permanent truth. While there may be some issues in the article that we as Southern Baptist's need to address,most of it is nothing more than the proverbial "axe to grind."

 

I used to go to a SBC, BGCT church. I once asked the preacher to get a list of every place the money went that we sent in to the Assoc. The (very long) list came back once and the final enty was "and XX more" (I don't recal the number). I asked him if he could find out where this money was going. We asked for another list. This time some of the places listed on the first list were not there and again "and XX (a different number) more". He inquired a 3rd time and finally told me he could not find out. I had a problem with this and finally left for this and other reasons. Does this concern anyone else?

 

I can't believe David Cloud is being given any credence.I thought everybody here was familiar with him.
I do believe in Biblical separation for Scriptural reasons. What I don't believe in is gospel gossip and name calling of fellow Christians.I hear some preachers complaining about those dirty rotten stinkin liberals who compromise everything.If you don't see eye to eye with them on every single subject and for the reason they think you should then you also fall into that group.It seems to me that by complaining and putting down others they feel it lifts them up.
Anything David Cloud writes or says should be looked at with a jaundiced eye.

 

You're . . . you're . . . you're . . . not???

Why, Eddie Edwards----this just blows me away!!! Its just way too much for my finite mind to grasp!!!


Heard of a preacher visiting one of his church members--an elderly man---

Preacher says, "Grandpa! What would you be if you weren't Southern Baptist?"

Grandpa: "Preacher! If I weren't a Southern Baptist---I'd just be plumb ashamed!!!"

 

If you're looking for a perfect church...leave when you find it, or you'll mess everything up.

 

Items 5 and 8 in the article are true.

 

It could be said that 5 and 8 are true of all IFBs, and all denominations. 5 is more of a threat than 8.

Remember: this is a subjective statement based totally on personal experience, which I believe is a poor substitute for truth.

 

Cloud is wrong about so many things that it is easy to dismiss anything he says.

But I do share a few of his reasons for not being SBC.

First, I think it compromises doctrine for the sake of unity. While the Convention may not endorse female pastors/leadership, they don't and in reality can't condemn or discipline member churches for having them. An IFB church could have a female pastor but they wouldn't have fellowship with many other IFB churches. Most if not all missions boards would avoid them. In the SBC, the fellowship, financial cooperation, or at the very least the name association links sound local churches with those that practice error.

Female pastors are only one example. Some churches have differing views on homosexuality, doctrinal separation, abortion, politics, etc. While I support each Church's right to believe as it wants, I do not want to associate with them under a common banner.

Second, the cooperative programs for missions and education have the local churches contributing money without exercising control over its use. Undoubtedly, all of the conservative SBC'ers here have contributed money to one or more program that has promoted liberalism within the SBC.

I see the IFB answer to both cooperation (voluntary and situational) and missions (to the individual w/ complete local control) as the most biblical.

Third, many SBC churches are ecumenically minded. I prefer to not belong to such a church or operate under a shared label.

Basically, I think the SBC has sacrificed biblical standards and separation to achieve unity.

 

Scott, while I disagree with you, I want to thank you for a post that was not argumentative, well reasoned, and to the point. It is nice to see around here.

 

The article is mixed with inaccuracies and silly accusations. Additionally, some of his references and accusations are dated and would not apply to today's SBC. I recognize that Mr. Cloud is writing from an "independent" perspective, however, I would have to agree with him on these points:

(4) SBC CHURCHES ARE NOT GOVERNED SCRIPTURALLY.

In my area, this is a true statement. Too many SBC churches are governed by deacons.

(8) THE CHARISMATIC MOVEMENT IS GROWING WITHIN THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION.

In my area, I see this growth and influence.

(10) THE SBC IS FILLED WITH MEN AND WOMEN WHO ARE YOKED WITH PAGAN ANTI-CHRIST ORGANIZATIONS SUCH AS THE MASONIC LODGE AND THE EASTERN STAR.

This is a true statement. The Masonic Lodge is not compatible with Christian belief. I believe it has a stifling effect on the SBC. .

11) THE VAST MAJORITY OF SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONGREGATIONS REFUSE TO EXERCISE CHURCH DISCIPLINE.

In my area, this is true.

(12) SOUTHERN BAPTISTS ARE AT THE FOREFRONT OF THE CHURCH GROWTH PHILOSOPHIES...

I don't know if we're at the forefront, but we're riding along pretty well.

I'm an SBC guy, but the IFB folks are not completely wrong about us.

 

blackbird, you'll find he doesn't write much about IFB churches in particular. He did have long rants about Jack Hyles, Greg Dixon, and a couple of others. But, other than that, he's not so quick to call out the errors in his own "sect" of Baptists. He's a pompous, self absorbed windbag. He and I have had several go arounds via email, and I have to say, he very seldom admits his mistakes, or that he has held a wrong position even when it is clearly pointed out to him.

I'm VERY GLAD he's not a Southern Baptist. I see more and more SBC pastors becoming the way he is though, and this surprises me. Is LEGALISM sneaking it's head into the SBC? I believe it's starting.