Southern Baptist Convention

[happyinhisgrace]

I have been reading the "statement of faith" on the Southern Baptist Convention website and so far, I agree with the things I am reading. I was wondering if any of you belonged to churches that are a part of the SBC and if you could tell me how they differ from other baptist churches. I like to become as informed on different Christian churches as I can.

This is the website I have been reading on http://www.sbc.net/bfm/bfm2000.asp#ii

God Bless,
Grace

 

[happyinhisgrace]

OK, I just read something on the SBC that I don't agree with. It says that you have to be a water baptized believer to take communion. Where does the Bible say this is how it should be?


Grace

 

[eutychus]

Theologically:
The SBC is more conservative socially and theologically than other Baptist denominations.

Evangelically:
The SBC has an extensive goal to reach the world for Christ, which it does through the offerings given at churches, to fund the North American Mission Board and the International Mission Board. It's very missions-minded, which is a plus.

Church-wise:
There are a lot of dead churches that belong to the SBC.
Sadly, many SBC churches haven't embraced the concept of elders.

Structurally:
All SBC churches are set up as a network so that together they can more powerfully reach the world for Christ. Churches fall under districts, which fall under states, which fall under regions, etc.

I've gone to a Southern Baptist church for the past six years (with actual study of the SBC over the past three years), and I am in agreement for the most part. The only thing I would trade the SBC for would be the PCA or Reformed Churches, and the only reason I'd switchover would be for their reliable theology.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

Theologically:
The SBC is more conservative socially and theologically than other Baptist denominations.

Evangelically:
The SBC has an extensive goal to reach the world for Christ, which it does through the offerings given at churches, to fund the North American Mission Board and the International Mission Board. It's very missions-minded, which is a plus.

Church-wise:
There are a lot of dead churches that belong to the SBC.
Sadly, many SBC churches haven't embraced the concept of elders.

Structurally:
All SBC churches are set up as a network so that together they can more powerfully reach the world for Christ. Churches fall under districts, which fall under states, which fall under regions, etc.

I've gone to a Southern Baptist church for the past six years (with actual study of the SBC over the past three years), and I am in agreement for the most part. The only thing I would trade the SBC for would be the PCA or Reformed Churches, and the only reason I'd switchover would be for their reliable theology.

Thank you so much for responding to my questions. I hope you don't mind me asking a few more. By reformed churches, do you mean reformed baptist churches and if so, do you know where I could read some information about them?

God Bless,
Grace

 

[ZeroTX]

The reason SBC churches require baptism by immersion for membership is simple: The only way anyone in the Bible was ever baptized was by immersion.... Jesus himself was baptized by immersion... There's no record of a single non-immersion baptism in the Bible... the word "baptize" itself means "to immerse"...

Personally, I find it to be no big deal. I think as long as it was a CONSENTUAL, confessing and willing baptism (i.e. not infant baptism, old enough to make the choice), it should be valid... but this is a minor point, as there is nothing considered wrong with being baptized again, but you do not have to be....

My church, a Bible-based church with very similar values to the SBC (http://www.fotw.org) also requires baptism by immersion for any member who has not received this at some point in their life.... We have an awesome baptism pool that is modeled after one on the River Jordan, near where Jesus was baptized.... Baptism ceremonies are held frequently and it's an awesome experience.

Hopefully that helps some. Oh, BTW, I was raised Southern Baptist. Most of the Baptist churches in the U.S. are affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention, if not multiple affiliations....

-Michael

 

[happyinhisgrace]

The reason SBC churches require baptism by immersion for membership is simple: The only way anyone in the Bible was ever baptized was by immersion.... Jesus himself was baptized by immersion... There's no record of a single non-immersion baptism in the Bible... the word "baptize" itself means "to immerse"...

Personally, I find it to be no big deal. I think as long as it was a CONSENTUAL, confessing and willing baptism (i.e. not infant baptism, old enough to make the choice), it should be valid... but this is a minor point, as there is nothing considered wrong with being baptized again, but you do not have to be....

My church, a Bible-based church with very similar values to the SBC (http://www.fotw.org) also requires baptism by immersion for any member who has not received this at some point in their life.... We have an awesome baptism pool that is modeled after one on the River Jordan, near where Jesus was baptized.... Baptism ceremonies are held frequently and it's an awesome experience.

Hopefully that helps some. Oh, BTW, I was raised Southern Baptist. Most of the Baptist churches in the U.S. are affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention, if not multiple affiliations....

-Michael

I have no problem with water baptism as an outward show of our inward faith to follow Jesus. My concern was that I noticed that they said on the SBC website that one must be water baptized to take the Lord's supper on Sunday. Since it is being born again of the Holy spirit that makes us a child of God through adoption and saves us to Christ, I am just wondering why the SBC insist that one must be water baptized to take communion, the Lord's supper.

I agree that full immersion is the way to go if you are getting water baptized, my question is the whole having to be water baptized and be a member of the baptist faith to take communion. Can you give me a heads up on that one?

Thanks
Grace

 

[theseed]

OK, I just read something on the SBC that I don't agree with. It says that you have to be a water baptized believer to take communion. Where does the Bible say this is how it should be?


Grace

They pratice believers baptism, and it would be unworthy and real bad for lost people to take communion. Boldface mine.

1 Corinthians 11
The Lord's Supper

17In the following directives I have no praise for you, for your meetings do more harm than good. 18In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it. 19No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God's approval. 20When you come together, it is not the Lord's Supper you eat, 21for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else. One remains hungry, another gets drunk. 22Don't you have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you for this? Certainly not!
23For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me." 25In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me." 26For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
27Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. 29For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. 31But if we judged ourselves, we would not come under judgment. 32When we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world.
33So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for each other. 34If anyone is hungry, he should eat at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment.
And when I come I will give further directions.

 

[theseed]

I am just wondering why the SBC insist that one must be water baptized to take communion, the Lord's supper.

Baptism dramatically pictures our entering into covenant relationship with God through Jesus Christ by faith, and the Lord's Supper portrays our continuing in this relationship.

Christian baptism is the immersion of a believer in water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is an act of obedience symbolizing the believer's faith in a crucified, buried, and risen Saviour, the believer's death to sin, the burial of the old life, and the resurrection to walk in newness of life in Christ Jesus. It is a testimony to his faith in the final resurrection of the dead. Being a church ordinance, it is prerequisite to the privileges of church membership and to the Lord's Supper.

http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=14088

Why would you want to keep one ordinance (Lord's supper) and not baptism? Should someone who is a profess believer not get baptized? Should a church allow membership from someon who has refused and does refuse water baptism?

 

[jenptcfan]

I have no problem with water baptism as an outward show of our inward faith to follow Jesus. My concern was that I noticed that they said on the SBC website that one must be water baptized to take the Lord's supper on Sunday. Since it is being born again of the Holy spirit that makes us a child of God through adoption and saves us to Christ, I am just wondering why the SBC insist that one must be water baptized to take communion, the Lord's supper.

I agree that full immersion is the way to go if you are getting water baptized, my question is the whole having to be water baptized and be a member of the baptist faith to take communion. Can you give me a heads up on that one?

Thanks
Grace

Hi!

I'm SB and we (at least the particular churches I've attended) don't insist that someone be baptized to take the Lord's supper. We do insist that people who take the Lord's supper are saved and understand the meaning of the ordinance. Visitors from other churches are welcomed to take communion as long as they're saved (open communion). That may be because we make an assumption that if someone has been saved, they have also followed up with believer's baptism. I'm not sure. Typically after someone has been saved at our church, the baptism happens the next week, so they happen so closesly together that it would not be an issue (I think we only do Lord's Supper once a quarter in our church).

Those are just my thoughts.

 

[12volt_man]

I am just wondering why the SBC insist that one must be water baptized to take communion, the Lord's supper.

Because the Lord's Supper is only open to believers and baptism is a public testimony that you have chosen to follow Christ.

I agree that full immersion is the way to go if you are getting water baptized, my question is the whole having to be water baptized and be a member of the baptist faith to take communion.

I missed the part where it said that you have to be baptist to take communion.

 

[Sinai]

I have no problem with water baptism as an outward show of our inward faith to follow Jesus. My concern was that I noticed that they said on the SBC website that one must be water baptized to take the Lord's supper on Sunday. Since it is being born again of the Holy spirit that makes us a child of God through adoption and saves us to Christ, I am just wondering why the SBC insist that one must be water baptized to take communion, the Lord's supper.

I agree that full immersion is the way to go if you are getting water baptized, my question is the whole having to be water baptized and be a member of the baptist faith to take communion. Can you give me a heads up on that one?

Thanks
Grace

According to Southern Baptist theology and doctrine, who may partake of the Lord's supper (or communion) is an issue for the individual local church. Since the local churches are autonomous, each is free to adopt its own rules on this matter. Thus, although Baptist churches restrict the Lord's supper to those persons who have accepted Christ as their personal savior, you will find a variety among the SBC churches regarding whether persons of other faiths (or who have not had believer's baptism) may partake of the Lord's supper. I suggest you check with the local church you are attending (or are visiting or considering attending) to determine its policies.