Posts: 15,025
Joined: April 2001
|
|
|
|
Forums31
Topics8,348
Posts56,543
Members992
| |
Most Online2,383 Jan 12th, 2026
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,856
Needs to get a Life
|
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,856 |
doulos said:
Let me add this little note about SBC polity, you don't MAKE a Southern Baptist Church do anything. The Convention isn't like a Catholic diocese or whatever that has direct authority over the churches, they are all pretty well autonomous and everything is done by majority rule. No official elders as a general rule except in those churches with at least a reformed history of some kind.
The churches in the convention are connected by 'cooperation', more than anything. What that means is that they will have a heck of a time convincing anyone to disfellowship a church even for doctrinal reasons which is why we have churches all through the spectrum from Saddleback to Dever's church in Washington, D.C.
As for a new denomination, I don't know if it will fall out like that or not Pete. These reformed types are pretty hard headed. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> Josh, It's good to hear from you again. Being brought up in a Reformed church I don't know a lot about Baptist polity. In my formative years I always looked at Baptist churches as Christian churches that don't have a lot of doctrine. Some of my Baptist friends would tell me "don't give me doctine, just give me Jesus." Sounds simple doesn't it? From the description you've made it appears that SB churches are loosely associated with each other and governed by democracy rather that theology. That can mean one holds to one doctrine and another to a different one depending on majority vote in that congregation. It's interesting to me that some embrace Calvinism and others call it heretical. I think the lines are drawn between Arminianism and Calvinism within those churches. However, these views are so much in opposition that they should be seperate denominations. Perhaps the main teaching that brings Baptists together is credobaptism. OBTW I don't think reformed types have a monopoly of hard headedness. In discussions I've had with fellow Christians from Baptists and Reformed backgrounds there seems to be a lot of that going around. Maybe it has to do with the fact that by nature we are a stiff necked and stubborn people who rebel against God and want our own way. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bash.gif" alt="" /> Wes
When I survey the wondrous cross on which the Prince of Glory died, my richest gain I count but loss and pour contempt on all my pride. - Isaac Watts
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 360
Old Hand
|
OP
Old Hand
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 360 |
Josh,
Thanks so much for the information about the 9 Marks church map. That is really helpful. I guess that is indeed one thing that bothered me about the SBC--that they have such a wide range of churches; however, I must say that such seems to be the case in nearly EVERY denomination these days. I suppose we must be discerning in every decision we make concerning church affiliation; we cannot simply let denominational loyalty make the decision for us. You can probably tell I wish it were not so!
Thanks for your input, brother!
Theo
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,079 Likes: 16
ExCharisma
|
ExCharisma
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,079 Likes: 16 |
I was a member of two different SBC churches that were fully Charismatic in their theology and practice. One stayed put, but the other (in the same local asociation) felt pressured to leave the denomination for whatever reason. The Gulfstream Baptist Association (kinda sorta like a local SBC body) had no problem with either church practicing "Charismania." That may not be true of all SBC asociations, but it was (and probably still is) the case with ours.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 360
Old Hand
|
OP
Old Hand
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 360 |
Robin, That is interesting...I would not have quite expected the Association to be quite that "easygoing" about that issue. I guess that fits in with what Josh wrote: The churches in the convention are connected by 'cooperation', more than anything. What that means is that they will have a heck of a time convincing anyone to disfellowship a church even for doctrinal reasons which is why we have churches all through the spectrum from Saddleback to Dever's church in Washington, D.C. I guess the SBC is certainly NOT "monolithic"! Theo
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277
Enthusiast
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277 |
Thanks Wes
Big maybe, uniform in worship, for the most part--I've been to several SBC churches in several states and they're about the same--but certainly not monolithic.
I had some other comments down here but when I re-read them they were pretty awful so I erased them.
Josh "...the word of God is not bound."--2 Timothy 2:9
|
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
178
guests, and
41
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
|