“for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.”
1 Corinthians 14:33 (NASB)
As a Southern Baptist, I am confused by what is occurring in my denomination. Another gathering of SBC leaders and messengers has come and gone, and I am even more confused about the Southern Baptist Convention’s trajectory. Why? Here are three issues that deeply concern me as a Southern Baptist – or is that Great Commission Baptist?
GREAT COMMISSION BAPTISTS
In case you are wondering how the secular world views the SBC’s new moniker (nickname) Great Commission Baptists, here is how The Washington Post broke the news:
Southern Baptists approve alternate name, but barely
“Members of the Southern Baptist Convention narrowly accepted the alternate unofficial descriptor of “Great Commission Baptists” as the denomination attempts to make inroads beyond its base in the Bible Belt. Delegates meeting here heatedly debated whether to affirm a recommendation from church leaders that congregations and other Southern Baptist organizations voluntarily could use the “Great Commission” moniker, which is based on Jesus’ command that his followers spread his message worldwide…the unofficial name was approved with 53 percent in favor and 46 percent against.”
The Post article includes a remark from Jimmy Draper, who stated: “It would have been terrible if we elect Fred (Luter) with enthusiasm and then reject one of the biggest needs that African-Americans expressed to us. It would have been inconsistent.” Luter believes the name change is a “WIN-WIN” while the majority of Southern Baptist pastors don’t plan to use the moniker “Great Commission Baptists”.
The majority of SBC pastors don’t see “Great Commission Baptists” as a win-win because The Washington Post article states:
“Southern Baptist researchers recently found that more than 70 percent of Southern Baptist pastors think the official name should continue, and more than half had no plans to use ‘Great Commission Baptists’.”
Clearly, there is confusion in the SBC camp over the identity of the denomination, and as this humorous video demonstrates, the public-at-large has no clue what Great Commission even means. Kudos to Wade Burleson and his son Logan for their man on the street interviews on Bourbon Street to demonstrate this fact.
CALVINISTS vs. TRADITIONALISTS
Bryant Wright, the outgoing SBC president (who served for the past two years), had some harsh words for pastors caught up in the infighting over soteriology, specifically Calvinism versus a more traditional view of Scripture. I listened to Wright’s address live on Tuesday, and he was extremely blunt with those on both sides. It’s important to point out that his stern remarks came just a couple of weeks after a statement was released by a group of traditional Southern Baptists who reject Neo-Calvinists who appear to be forcing their views on the SBC as a whole.
Wright first addressed those whom we call Calvinistas by denouncing their pride and arrogance. After hammering them for a few minutes, he turned to those who label themselves as traditionalists and scolded them for being legalistic. Both sides were equally lambasted by this SBC president. Bryant Wright remarked:
“If we pride ourselves more on being a traditional Southern Baptist or more on being a Calvinist or a Reformed theologian than we are thankful that we are Christ-centered and biblically-based, then it is time to repent of theological idolatry.”
Further, he chided Southern Baptists for becoming “so engaged in trying to correct one another’s view that they are getting off track from their primary mission.” Interestingly, the SBC has been in decline for five years which seems to coincide with the Young, Restless, and Reformed movement that became well-known in 2006 (remember Collin Hansen’s Christianity Today article by the same name?) Hmmm….. We will have much more on this topic in upcoming posts.
Once again, I am very confused about why soteriology has suddenly become such a confusing issue among Southern Baptists. Finally, it has not gone unnoticed that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood website has been “under construction” for the last several weeks. CBMW was mentioned several times during the SBC Annual Meeting, and we are left wondering why practically everything on the website has been taken down. What are they trying to hide?
A RACIALLY DIVERSE SBC/GCB
Just after the SBC Annual Meeting took place last year, we were asking Can the SBC Ever Recover From Its Downward Trajectory?
The Southern Baptist Convention has captured the attention of many Christians and non-Christians alike by electing its first black president. Now that ‘the world’ is watching, what do they see?
Last year when the Southern Baptist Convention met in Phoenix, there were strong indications that the denomination would attempt to rid itself of a racial divide that has plagued it for 167 years. Fred Luter was elected second in command of the SBC, and a HUGE push began to elevate him to the presidency of the convention. Now that the Southern Baptist Convention has made history by electing its first ever black president, will it usher in a new era or will Luter just maintain the status quo?
Once again, I am confused about the future of my denomination. Since we have acquired new readers here at TWW, we want to share a post from almost a year ago that we believe is especially relevant now that the SBC/GCB has its first ever black president. It will be the final word for today, but we will have much more on trends within the Southern Baptist Convention in future posts.
Is Racial Solidarity Possible in the SBC?
There can be no doubt that the Southern Baptist Convention plans to increase its membership roll in the coming years by adding more color, as in skin tones (and we applaud this long overdue strategy). Even before the SBC Annual Meeting took place, seminarians made public pronouncements that the next president of the convention should be African-American. Here is how it was reported in the Associated Baptist Press:
“A seminary professor says the next president of the Southern Baptist Convention should be an African-American. Russell Moore, dean of the school of theology and senior vice president for academic administration at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, said via Twitter that he thinks Southern Baptists should elect Fred Luter next year when the convention meets in New Orleans.”
The article later states:
“In his own Twitter feed, (Danny) Akin indicated that he agreed with Moore that Luter would be a good choice to make history as the first black president of the convention formed in 1845, a split with northern Baptists over slavery.”
And as previously reported, the SBC recently made history by electing Fred Luter, an African-American, as second in command (first vice president) of the convention. With such high-powered endorsements from Southern Baptist leaders, it certainly sounds like Luter is well on his way to becoming the next president of the SBC when it meets in New Orleans, where Luter grew up.
According to the ABP article:
“Last year Dwight McKissic, pastor of Cornerstone Baptist Church in Arlington, Texas, said electing a black president would make the denomination more effective in reaching the kind of people discussed in a “Great Commission Resurgence” proposed by SBC leaders. McKissic, who is African-American, called for Southern Baptist to “repent of systemic, institutionalized and historic negative attitudes toward women, race and dissenters.” Luter said McKissic was one of several people who suggested that he seek the office in 2010.”
While we appreciate the fact that Southern Baptists are finally taking tangible steps toward achieving solidarity with African American Christians as well as those of other ethnic backgrounds, we have to wonder whether predominantly black congregations will be inclined to affiliate with the SBC given their theological position regarding women. An insightful article entitled The Role of African American Women in the Black Church reveals the following:
“Faith is a strong guiding force in the lives of many African American women. And for all that they receive from their spiritual communities, they give back even more. In fact, black women have long been regarded as the backbone of the black church. But their extensive and significant contributions are made as lay leaders, not as religious heads of churches. The congregations of African American churches are predominantly women, and the pastors of African American churches are nearly all male.”
While African American women may be accustomed to male leadership in the pulpit, we wonder how well they will embrace the BF&M 2000 given their vital positions in both the church and the home. We highly doubt the ideologies being touted by patriarchs at Southern Seminary will be embraced by female African-Americans. It will be interesting to see whether Russell Moore, for example, will be able to demonstrate sensitivity to the matriarchal culture that has developed in the African-American church. Remember that it was Patriarch Moore who stated that the word “complementarian” was not a strong enough term for him.
The Bayly brothers, who hail from the Presbyterian Church of America denomination, took great pleasure in quoting Russell Moore as follows:
“Russell Moore: Gender identity and complementarianism… I hate ….the word ‘complementarian’, I prefer the word ‘patriarchy’…”
And it was Moore who wrote the paper “After Patriarchy, What? Why Egalitarians Are Winning the Evangelical Gender Debate”
A domineering attitude by Southern Baptist leaders could negate the entire approach of integrating African-American congregations into the Southern Baptist Convention. In fact, it could lead to civil discord in the denomination if SBC leaders oppress female African-Americans who selflessly serve their families, churches, and community.
And who can forget the highly publicized SBC scandal of 2008 involving LifeWay? This was how Fox News reported it — Magazine Featuring Female Pastors Pulled From Shelves, ‘Treated Like Pornography’. Here’s how the article begins:
“The five women on the cover are dressed in black and smiling — not an uncommon strategy for selling magazines. But these cover girls are women of the cloth, featured in Gospel Today magazine’s latest issue, which the Southern Baptist Convention has pulled from the shelves at its bookstores, though the magazine is available for sale upon request. The group says women pastors go against its beliefs, according to its interpretation of the New Testament. The magazine was taken off stands in more than 100 Lifeway Christian Bookstores across the country, including six in metro Atlanta. Published for nearly 20 years, Gospel Today is the largest and most widely distributed urban Christian publication in the country, with a circulation of 240,000. The magazine’s publisher, Teresa Hairston, said she was just reporting on a trend, not trying to promote women pastors. “They basically treated it like pornography and put it behind the counter,” she said. “Unless a person goes into the store and asks for it, they won’t see it displayed.”
As racial solidarity is promoted in the SBC, it will be fascinating to observe how African-American Baptists respond to the demands of submission by Southern Baptist leaders, including Fred Luter. Speaking of the SBC’s newly elected First Vice President, how many black churches like Luter’s are currently affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention? Well, here’s the answer, which we obtained from Urban Christian News. “Luter’s church is one of an estimated 3,400 black churches in the nation’s largest Protestant denomination, a small minority of more than 45,700 total SBC-affiliated churches with about 16 million members total.”
In the years to come, it will be fascinating to see whether a predominantly white Southern Baptist Convention headed by a black president can entice racially diverse congregations to join ranks with them. We’ll do our best to keep you posted!
Lydia’s Corner: Hosea 6:1-9:17 3 John 1:1-14 Psalm 126:1-6 Proverbs 29:12-14
Great commission?
Oh yeah!
Gimme summa dat great commission.
So does anyone know how women operate in Luter’s church? Or his stand on CBMW? Or if he is a Calvinist?
When you have Russ Moore promoting someone a year ahead….you can bet there is a long range strategy and Mohler is behind it. Moore does not sneeze unless Mohler tells him to.
As to the new nickname. You can tell that a bunch of people who do not spend much time in the real world but only in their ministry bubble came up with it. It is so obvious I am embarrassed for them even if they are not smart enough to be.
Get out of your ministry bubble!
Pingback: Post-convention reflections | Civil Commotion
My observations/wild conjectures:
The non-name change will be forgotten. It is clear that a great majority of SBCers like our historic name. That a non-mandatory compromise barely passed shows this clearly.
A sizable proportion of new SBC congregations are ethnic. The election of a black president was a good thing.
Perhaps the Calvinist/Traditionalist conflict in the SBC will not reach critical mass and blow up into a denominational fight. I’m thinking that most of us lack the stomach for another one of those.
The Complimentarian/Egalitarian matter is still lurking in the deep background. We will have to deal with that sooner or later.
Enjoy your stuff.
Anon
:)$$$ I believe it is an unfortunate name which will be the butt of jokes for years.
Anon1
Your comment at 12:56 is why I believe there will be no significant change on these issues.
William Thornton
Thanks for the comment. I might disagree with you a bit on the Traditionalist/Calvinist conflict.Calvinists are fine, it’s their wild evil twin that is a problem. And the twin is throwing around words like “heresy” etc. That is enough to spark a war.
Forget the past…Read the Bible.
Dee,
It’s a challenge to help everyone understand that it’s NOT the “Calvinist” Southern Baptists that are causing conflict – it’s the YRR crowd, whom we have assigned the name “CALVINISTA”.
Martin Potts
If you look at the bottom of every post that we write, you will see Bible verses that you can click on and read. If you keep up with them, you will read through the Bible in about 1 1/2 years. This blog is committed to reading the Bible.
Martin Potts
A wise man once said:
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
That holds true for the SBC as well.
Deb
Great Commission Baptists. This makes me laugh. Let’s see: Robert Jeffress, FBC Dallas and the $12 million “come to Jesus” fountain, Ed Young Jr., Mac Brunson, Steve Gaines (whose last name goes well with great commission) and many pastors who have used their pastorate to parlay themselves fancy homes, I Pads, I Phones, cars and grand vacations. Yep-they know what a great commission is all about.
That is why I respect David Platt although I disagree with some of his comp theology and his statement on the sinner’s prayer.
I voted for Luter with enthusiasm.
I voted against the GCB descriptor with equal enthusiasm.
I am a huge proponent of a name change or descriptor, but I would like a better one. “Great Commission Baptist” does not communicate with anyone. Our church will not use it.
The Traditional/Calvinist debate will continue into the future. This discussion is as much about style and culture as it is about theology, in my opinion. It’s not that the theological issue isn’t real. It’s just that it is so wrapped up in style and culture issues that you cannot separate the two. The Traditionalists look to men like Patterson, Vines, etc. not only for theological leadership, but also for cultural presentation.
I believe that some of the angst felt in this group is that the SBC’s public face and projection is changing. The young men coming out of seminary are much more reformed today, and they have a different cultural vibe in many respects. That is going to continue for at least the next 10 to 15 years. With Southern’s and Southeastern’s enrollments increasing and Southwestern’s decreasing over the years, that will enhance things, too.
It is clear that guys like Mohler and Dever are having an increasing influence on the direction of the SBC, as opposed to the folks that are in the traditionalist camp. That is what is causing concern. But there is nothing that can be done about it.
The publication of the Traditionalist statement did not help because it was poorly drafted and ill timed. Even Roger Olson, an articulate Arminian, criticized the statement. He said that it was semi-Pelagian. (sorry if I misspell any of this).
Again, these various types of Baptists and leaders will be with us until the Lord returns or we die. I have no desire to see either group driven out, controlled or contained.
As to the race issue, things are moving in the right direction. This is about the future, not the past. I don’t expect Jesse Jackson, Jeremiah Wright and other noted black Baptist leaders to see the SBC as an option for them.
But during one of the sessions, I met with my pastor, a co-elder and two black pastors, one from Philadelphia and one from Kansas City. These guys are discipling men in their respective cities. I felt a complete kinship with these brothers and they with me. I believe that Luter’s election will help increase more situations like this.
Anonymous,
Agreed! There is room in the SBC for different soteriologies (as long as they are not heretical) as well as different races. Anyone who works against this is not emulating Jesus Christ and is outside of God’s will.
They can buy new signs and print up new brochures and materials with the GCB moniker (which always makes me think of the show on ABC called GCB….ahem). But I think here in the deep south, they will always be referred to and thought of as the SBC.
Kind of like when Prince changed his name to that weird symbol and everyone had to refer to him as “the artist formerly known as Prince.”
Perhaps in 50-100 years when the old skool SBC’ers die out, it would stick. But not now, not here.
The name change is kind of silly. I don’t see the purpose at all.
Kudos for them attempting to come to terms on the race issue. I’m sure my bigoted grandfather will be rolling in his grave, and I couldn’t think of better reason…lol! I’m not sure this one action will have the effect they seem to be after, but it may attract some addition churches to join their organization. We will see later I suppose what the man stands for, and see if he is a leader or follower with the present guard. I hope they realize it will take more than this one action to mend the hurts of the past.
They need to be careful with the CALVINISTS vs. TRADITIONALISTS. Another church split is not what they need if they are indeed worried about the numbers. They should be ashamed of the themselves with the way they are acting over this. The ‘my way or the highway’ is what broke it up into pieces in the past – have they learned nothing? What happened to Christlike behavior? If ‘leadership’ acts like this why do they complain about others? They are to be held to a higher standard, and yet how unbecoming…bleck. Did it ever occur to them this behavior could be part of the reason for the decline?
Hannah Thomas wrote:
Agreed. I think it’s at least a step in the right direction and demonstrates effort to do so.
I’m saddened that Luter seems to have been elected BECAUSE of his race, not because he is the fine man he seems to be.
I’m saddened by that because it is planned in order to put backsides on the bench, not because it is the right thing to do.
I’m saddened by the continued to trend to divide up and find someone (Calvinists, Traditionalists, women, whoever) to be better than.
I’m saddened by the fact all this takes the focus off of Jesus Christ.
Which is why come July I should be a full fledge member of a highly liturgical, Christ centered church.
Don’t plan to look back.
Those who came up with the name “Great Commission Baptist” should go to Manhattan and ask a native how to get to The Avenue Of The Americas. The response will indicate to them the future of their new name.
Well, speaking as someone who is neither American nor Baptist, that name leaves me with the impression that this would be a one horse denomination — intensely interested in personal evangelism but not in anything else (eg the great commandment). Kinda like those who just want to collect scalps, but aren’t really interested in going on to full maturity in Christ. Well, that’s my take coming from a very different cultural milieu! maybe that name was designed by the same committee that ended up with a camel when they tried to design a horse?
Some have suggested that “Cooperative Baptist Fellowship” was a wish for the future of those booted from the SBC, rather than a descriptive name. But I have always been a cooperative Baptist, now considering churches of another denomination.
55 Years
When we started this blog, we wrote several posts on why I am no longer a Southern Baptist link. However, I would be happy to be a member of churches such as the one headed by Wade Burleson.
I feel like I’ve said this on blogs a thousand times, but here’s what I don’t get: SBC wants a new name because they are no longer either Southern by geography or by cultural orientation. Why the heck has nobody ever proposed the name “Evangelical Baptist Convention”? Isn’t it the most appropriate? Doesn’t it remove the misnomer of the south and replace it with an accurate label of theological orientation? Or is the name already taken? Seriously, GCB is a joke.
And regardless of statistics, older SBC churches are in decline and closing their doors. The church planting movement has usurped the church growth movement, and too many the young bucks outta seminary are going with Acts 29. It will take some time for the statistics to reflect this, because new plants can be tough to get off the ground. But if this movement has any continuity, I really believe we will be seeing a much more reformed SBC in the coming generations.
I have been in the SBC for almost 40 years and I am giving serious thoughts as to leaving it as it left me many years ago.
The Great Commission so-called, is based on a big misunderstanding in the church (and a fairly recent one, I believe). It assumes that all Christians are called to be missionaries. The Apostles were called that because they were sent out into the world by Christ. (That is what the term means, after all.) Not all Christians are called to be missionaries. If a man were all eye and said the feet had not use, where would that leave us? It would leave us with a church that thinks the only important thing in the church is winning new converts. Which is NOT what is written in the New Testament. Not all are called to the same mission. And not all should be. Those with one particular calling often think it is the most important one -be it studying the Bible (for those called to be teachers) to helping others to being missionaries. But those called to evangelize are often the loudest in this wrong-headed idea. And one of the things they often say is that the “great commission” is to all of us. It is NOT.
’nuff said.
Miguel
You may be correct unless they split. That is not beyond the realm of possibility but not at this point. “I really believe we will be seeing a much more reformed SBC in the coming generations.”
I frankly find the name Great Commission Baptists amusing. Imagine the jokes among those who do not understand our insiders lingo?
mot
Cue Montgomery gentry’s song “Gone.”
me
Yeah but you do believe in the free market so look at Great Commission that way.
@ me:
Me,
A part of that is our exposure to the bad translation of the verses called the Great Commission. It should read, “As you go into the world, make disciples . . ..”
That is not only evangelism, it includes living in Christian fellowship with new believers and teaching them. It includes living a Christian life in front of the world, so they can see that Christ makes a difference in us and how we respond to people. It can include everyone who shares any witness at all to the presence of Christ in the world.
All of us have some kind of calling. Some to be evangelists and missionaries, some to preach (prophesy in the NT), some to teach, and some to comfort and care. And many to support the ministries of the others by living an appropriate life that glorifies Christ, praying for people, and contributing in whatever other ways we can.
Southern Fried Baptist: An Extended Debate On Calvinism?”
*
As folks know, The Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) is the largest Protestant denomination in the United States, and it’s fairly reasonable to say that the current SBC theological discussions are ‘having a resounding rippling effect throughout the greater evangelical world.’
*
hmmm…
*
Remember, back in May, of this year, you may have seen it, a contingent of SBC leaders signed a statement intended to realign the denomination with “the traditional Southern Baptist view of salvation” and move away from a perceived trend towards “Calvinism”: “A Statement of the Traditional Southern Baptist Understanding of God’s Plan of Salvation”
*
hmmm…
*
While this statement has generated a lot of support, there has been some pointed criticism as well.
*
(Why am I not surprised?)
*
Seems, critiques have also included challenges against the proposed traditional Baptist view of salvation, suggesting poor exegesis, and faulty soteriology, such as some claims of semi-pelagianism.
*
A recent Google search for this document returned over some 30,000 plus hits. As you would expect, opinions exist from all over the theological spectrum.
*
Duh?
*
Thoughts anyone?
*
Al, seems like you’re gonna need a “bigger boat!”
*
hahahahahahaha
*
S㋡py!
I am really old so I didn’t read all the comments, but I’ll say this anyway. What we refer to the Great Commission is the command to make disciples. I suppose evangelism is necessary to do that, but “soul-winning” is NOT what the Great Commission is about .. it is about making disciples. In light of the fact that the most common characteristic of Southern Baptists is that they don’t go to church (attendance totals about 37% of membership, but I’m pretty sure that includes children and visitors, who are not included in the membership), the strong majority of members are NOT disciples.
We have failed at making disciples, and I fear that the nickname will smack of denominational pride in God’s nostrils.
I went to the convention this year just to tell them that. Someone had to.
Bob
I think there are other elements in play with the 43% that you claim do not attend church. Many people switch churches and many Baptist churches leave them on the rosters of their former churches. For example, in a previous church (Baptist) our Sunday school had a bunch of dead weight on our supposed membership in the class list. So, we started calling everyone, some of whom I had never seen. All of them had left the church and were attending other churches and found our calls somewhat amusing since it was obvious that no one had even noticed they were gone. We sent an updated list to the person in charge who was none too pleased that we had removed the people from our list.
There are a number of people who privately admit that the true membership in the SBC is somewhere in the 8 million range, not the 15 million range.
As for disciples, I absolutely agree with you. i think you will find this following exchange chilling. Ken Hemphill came to my former church to advocate for using Sunday schools primarily as a means of evangelism. After his talk, I asked him about the latest survey which indicates that many Christians dod not believe in an actual Satan and held other beliefs that were contrary to orthodox Baptist thinking. I asked him when and where discipleship should occur in not in the classes. His answer….”Do it on the fly.” And he took off, obviously not wanting to discuss the matter.
dee wrote:
This is a little chilling. Which half of the 15 million is the drop in membership coming from?
@ OldJohnJ:
It has happened over years and years. The first comments about the over-counting appeared years and years ago, at least by 1970. A lot of the over-count represent people who were members of SBC churches in the rural south who went to college, the military or elsewhere and never returned to live, but only to visit. Unless another church sent a request for a “letter”, or the person made a point of contacting the church and saying that they have moved on, they may stay on the membership roll for decades. I am familiar with one country church that had people on its roll who would have had to be over 110 years old, so that not even death had removed them from that membership list.
Most churches have some means of moving members off the roll (or at least from active to inactive) in their bylaws, buy seldom actually do it. BTW, regularly contacting the inactive who are not known to be shut-ins or nursing home residents, with a stamped return form is important for a number of reasons. When a potentially controversial action is to be taken, some of those never more attenders can show up, even from out of town, and change the decision (like booting a bad actor from the pastorate or selling property) from what the active, paying membership would do.
Having passed the anniversary of my accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior and being baptized, my moniker has changed.
@ 56 years a Baptist, SBC mostly:
Hi “56”. Congrats on the new moniker! Given the propensity of churches to keep people on the rolls forever, I could likely go by “57 years a congregationalist”, although I haven’t darkened their doors in 35 of those. 🙂 They baptized me as a baby, and then left it to the good ol’ baptists to actually help me learn to follow Christ (As in “make disciples”) after I became a believer….
I never joined a baptist church, though I was baptized “again”. I guess that makes me, literally speaking, one of those fanatical anabaptists so despised back in the day by Pope and Reformer alike. 🙂
OldJohnJ
“Which half of the 15 million is the drop in membership coming from?”
My guess it is coming from the traditionalist side.
56 years!
I like it.
Dave AA
The way things are going, you were smart to attend and not “join.”
THOU SHALL NOT LIE ABOUT THE SIZE OF YOUR CHURCH
This guy’s church is just down the street from Driscoll’s Mars Hill:
http://eugenecho.com/2011/05/14/thou-shalt-not-lie-about-the-size-of-your-church
@ dee:
And that is post a confession and conversion and not from a baby baptism! And not terribly precocious either, compared to some others. Happened during a May revival meeting just after Mother’s Day, with baptism in early June in a lake fed with 54 degree springs, so my first Blue Boy experience as well. I just missed the need to update the moniker.
Was wondering…
Can’t seem to find that term “The Great Commission” in my antiquated KJV.
And – Are there any examples, in the Bible, of someone making a “Disciple of Christ?”
And how they did it?
And, don’t know if you ever noticed…
But – Paul, with all the instructions, in his epistles, to the ekklesia of God…
Paul never mentions disciples, discipleship, or discipleship training. Hmmm? 😉
Neither does James, John, Peter, or anyone, in the NT epistles,
mention disciples, discipleship, or discipleship training.
Seems Jesus is the only one recorded “making disciples.”
In my experience…
With all the books, seminars and conferences about making disciples…
All I’ve ever witnessed and been a part of is…
1 – Man making disciples of “Their Denomination,”
Baptists making disciples of Baptist beliefs.
Lutherans making disciples of Lutheran beliefs.
Assembly of God making disciples of Assembly of God beliefs. Etc. etc…
NOT making “Disciples of Christ.” – Learners and pupils of Jesus.
2 – Man making disciples of “Their Movement,”
Evangelicals making disciples of Evangelicalism.
Pentecostals making disciples of pentecostalism.
Fundamentalists making disciples of Fundamentalism.
NOT making “Disciples of Christ.” – Those who learn directly from Jesus.
3 – And Man making disciples after “Themselves.”
Acts 20:30
Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things,
to draw away disciples after them.
In my experience…
Jesus is the only one who can make a “Disciple of Christ.”
Never figured out – How do you get someone to “Deny Themself?”Mat 16:24-25. 🙁
Never figured out – How do you get someone to “Forsake All?” Luke 14:33. 🙁
These few verses alone convicts me that I can’t make a “Disciple of Christ.” 🙂
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
them also I must bring, and they shall **hear MY voice;**
and there shall be “ONE” fold, and “ONE” shepherd.
John 10:16
One Fold – One Shepherd – One Voice
{{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}
And to be a “Disciple of Christ” it will cost you;
A “Disciple of Christ” – Will…
Will… Forsake all…
Will… Hear “His” voice…
Will… Love not the world…
Will… Love not their own life…
Will… Just want to know Him…
Will… Count all things but dung…
Will… Always take the lower place…
Will… Do nothing apart from Jesus…
Will… Take on the form of a servant…
Will… Make themselves of no reputation…
Will… Count others better then themselves…
Will… Gives thanks for all things… All things? Yes.
Will… Deny themselves and pick up their cross daily…
Will… Count all the shame, “joy,” for what lies before them…
Will… Love the Lord their God, love their neighbors, love themselves…
Will… Forsake all power, profit, prestige, honor, glory, praise, recognition, reputation…
A “Disciple of Christ” – Will NOT…
Will NOT… Honor themselves…
Will NOT… Speak of themselves…
Will NOT… Seek their own glory…
Will NOT… Be called rabbi/teacher…
Will NOT… Be called Master/leader…
Will NOT… Receive honor from man…
Will NOT… Lord it over God’s heretige…
Will NOT… Exercise Authority like the gentiles…
Peace…
@ dee:
@ Dave A A:
Dee,
I only attended the SBC a few times. Most of my friends and disciplers were SBC but all real fellowship was through the Navigators, not church. Amos, you’ll like this. Even as a new Disciple I was put off by the SBC church pushing baptism as a MEANS to “joining” and becoming a baptist “church member”. I was already a confirmed
Presbyterian….. So I delayed baptism until I later was part of an “experimental” non-denominational church with good teaching on baptism (in a very cold swimming pool). In the meantime I settled on attending an Evangelical Free church pastored by the father, believe it or not, of the most prominent current patriarch northwest of Texas. He was a good pastor, who, although complementary, was also complimentary and not patriarchal like his son.
@ A. Amos Love:
Amos,
Amen. I’m thankful Jesus called me to be his disciple and not a (fill in the blank) member only. You could put a star above “will forsake all” and have a discipleship Christmas tree. 🙂 🙂
It’s Odd That, following the Stone/Campbell restoration a few years back,
“Disciples of Christ” became…
Just Another Denomination.
Amos… Take with large grain of salt when I say things like “disciplers” or “good pastor”.
Hi Dave
Good point about “Disciples of Christ” becoming just another “denomiation.”
And – The term – “Disciples of Christ” is NOT in the Bible either. Oy Vey!!! 🙁
Maybe I can use the term – “His Disciples” 🙂
Hey Dave – Sent this to you at another post – Don’t know if you saw it.
If you did you can ignore it.
——-
Dave A A
A lot of what I find myself doing these days is working with folks
who have broken hearts. (Does anyone escape a broken heart?)
And sickness and dis-ease – caused by a broken heart.
I hang out at a large Barnes and Nobles that has as eating section with eight very soft easy chairs, free wi-fi, and plenty of coffee. It’s not to long before someone asks what I’m doing on the computer. Or they’re reading a book about the dis-ease they’re challenged with. And a conversation begins.
If the person is challenged with a dis-ease I often ask… And this is a total stranger…
“If the cause of this dis-ease is spiritual – What do you think it would be?”
And – often – they know. 😉
Here’s a simple rule of thumb for me when diagnosing spiritual causes of dis-ease…
In my experience – The person challenged with the dis-ease is often…
1 – Angry with God – Angry with another person – Angry with themselves.
2 – NOT Forgiving God – NOT forgiving another – NOT forgiving themselves.
3 – NOT loving God – NOT loving another person – NOT loving themselves.
Now, most “good” christians would never admit to being angry with God.
But – often it is all three – with all three. 😉
If you would like to talk off line my email is…
lovefaith101@gmail.com
A. Amos Love
@ A. Amos Love:
No, I missed it before, so thanks for repeating. Will email a question on specific case and am reminded of a generality I’ll put on Bent Meyer post when time is found.
A Amos Love-
I love your posts!!
Thanks a bunch. 🙂 🙂 🙂
I am opposed to the SBC name chgane and the optional unofficial name . We are what we are and we have good reason to be proud of the SBC name we presently carry. Does anyone really believe that we can chgane our name and the unchurched will suddenly see us in a different light than before, flock to the church buildings and reverse the decline in membership? The Lifeway study that revealed a significant enough level of negativity toward the Southern Baptist churches by the unchurched implies that our work fulfilling the Great Commission is made more complicated. It may be. However, painting our denomination with a different color (i.e., name) does not chgane the composition of our Biblically-based doctrine.With over 50 associations, fellowships and conventions using the name Baptist in the U.S. I can see where the unchurched are confused, as this list goes from the Alliance of Baptists to the World Baptist Fellowship. The Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas is also in this list. We (SBC Baptists) have pregnancy crisis centers, childrens homes, relief shelters, disaster relief teams, foreign and home missionaries and numerous other outreach programs that carry comfort, goodwill and the message of the Cross to those who need it. How many of the unchurched know about these programs of our denomination? I imagine very few.I believe the answer to our negative numbers from the Lifeway study is not window dressing like a new name, but advertising in the national media showing what the Southern Baptists are doing in our communities to serve those in need. Additionally, each of us needs to redouble our time in God’s Word daily and spend copious amounts of time in prayer to God, seeking wisdom, forgiveness of our sins and His assistance to us in living our life as He wants us to do. We need to live our faith each day and be the salt of the earth and that the light on the hill, essentially walking the talk. Any effort less than that is aid and comfort to those who seek to criticize our church.