churches dropping the word "Baptist" from their names

[Jim1999]

I am not in love with the name Baptist, but I am in love with what it once stood for. I would rather have the name Baptist clearly in the name than some nebulous coward's castle and deceptive moniker.

The name Christian is the most devious title in the world to-day, but frankly, I refuse to allow the world to rob me of that precious title.

Yes, modernistic Baptist Churches have been around as long as I can remember, but that doesn't deter me from standing strong for the Lord and standing up for what a true Baptist should be. Since when did we allow the world to decide for us where we stand?

I am a Baptist and will remain so to my dying day. It is my responsiblity to let the world know what Baptist really stands for and not for them to define it for me.

Cheers,

Jim

By the way, Spurgeon's name was mentioned:

"There was a Baptist preacher named Spurgy,
Who didn't like our liturgy.
His sermons were fine, and sometimes were mine,
And many more of the clergy."

He never denied publicly who he was.

 

[Johnv]

My church has a website, but we don't have a phone or a church office yet. If you call the "official" church number, you get our pastor's cell phone.

We're still a relatively new church (about 4 years old) and we're renting space. We hope to have a real church office when we buy our own property.

 

[annsni]

My church has a website, but we don't have a phone or a church office yet. If you call the "official" church number, you get our pastor's cell phone.

We're still a relatively new church (about 4 years old) and we're renting space. We hope to have a real church office when we buy our own property.

That's what we're most likely going to be doing when we get our church plant started. We have a blog started and when we get closer to starting, we'll have a website. The phone will come later but we'll either use our church's phone number for now (the "mother" church of the church plant) or else a cell number. We'll cross that road when we get there next year.

 

[Marcia]

If you remove the name "Baptist," you lose the reason for Baptist distinctives, and your church might later take on speaking in tongues, baptizing infants, or other stuff that is not Baptist.

Some people are okay with these things and that's fine, but they are not Baptist.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Are we moving into an age of the "generic" Christian?

 

[Johnv]

If you remove the name "Baptist," you lose the reason for Baptist distinctives

It's really funny that you said that. There are a lot of Baptists who don't even know what the Distinctives are. There are even more than don't adhere to them (most often the discinctives of local autonomy and individual soul liberty).

 

[preachinjesus]

Often choosing to drop the denominational moniker is a decision made after much prayer, discussion, and thought. For situations where I have served that dropped the denominational term from their name it is usually out of a missiological decision to connect better with unchurched and dechurched people.

Is it a form of marketting? Yes, but all our churches market in some form or fashion. That isn't a bad thing imho.

Baptist is a theological and denominational moniker. It is meaningless without the proper observance of the distinctives of a Baptist church. I've been to Baptist churches with and without the word in their name. Often the ones without outstripe the ones with in terms of true Baptist polity and theology.

 

[Marcia]

It's really funny that you said that. There are a lot of Baptists who don't even know what the Distinctives are. There are even more than don't adhere to them (most often the discinctives of local autonomy and individual soul liberty).

Very true on both counts.

 

[annsni]

If you remove the name "Baptist," you lose the reason for Baptist distinctives, and your church might later take on speaking in tongues, baptizing infants, or other stuff that is not Baptist.

Some people are okay with these things and that's fine, but they are not Baptist.

I don't think "Baptist" in a name will stop these things but Scripture will. If a church stands on the Scriptures, it doesn't matter whether they have "Baptist" in their name or not.

 

[Marcia]

I don't think "Baptist" in a name will stop these things but Scripture will. If a church stands on the Scriptures, it doesn't matter whether they have "Baptist" in their name or not.

Well, it would be nice to think this, but it's not what I've seen. Many use scripture to support infant baptism and speaking in tongues. Many non-denominational churches I know of are charismatic.

 

[annsni]

Well, it would be nice to think this, but it's not what I've seen. Many use scripture to support infant baptism and speaking in tongues. Many non-denominational churches I know of are charismatic.

Around here, the vast majority of our "sister" churches are not Baptist in name. Most are "community" church (Grace Community Church, Shelter Rock Community Church, etc.) and they are solid. NO way will they go to charasmatic stuff or infant baptism.

 

[Johnv]

Well, it would be nice to think this, but it's not what I've seen. Many use scripture to support infant baptism and speaking in tongues. Many non-denominational churches I know of are charismatic.

Those things aren't scriptural essentials (yes, I know we Baptists think they are, but they aren't). But to the point, a Baptist church isn't going to start doing infant baptisms or sprinklings just because it drops the denomination off the shingle. Speaking in tongues or not speaking in tongues isn't a definition of beign Baptist, so whether a church has the word "baptist" on the outside isn't in and of itself an indicator of their position on the subject.

 

[annsni]

My guess is that it's also location dependent. We went to a number of Baptist churches while on vacation and it certainly didn't mean that they were a "good" church. So again, I don't fully go by the name of the church but by what they believe. Of course there are some I most likely wouldn't go to at all but others I'd have to see the church itself in order to decide as to whether or not I'd go.

 

[Jim1999]

I get annoyed at false advertising!

Maybe, just maybe, it is high time we started re-teaching Baptist distinctives and stopped playing games.

If you start off on a weak knee, you just might end up a cripple.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[annsni]

Jim - Unfortunately, because of circumstances beyond our control, names change meaning in our culture. When I was a new believer in the 70s, "Fundamentalist" was a pretty accurate description of us but now it's more of a meaning of an extremest. "Born-again" has taken on a very negative connotation in the world and quite honestly, thanks to "churches" and people like Westboro Baptist Church, Steve Anderson and others, "Baptist" is now often a place to avoid rather than being a church to go to. Absolutely not all churches are like that but I know many are surprised to find out that our church is not one of those "nuts" like they hear about on the news. We would not drop the name from our church because that's been it's identity for over 50 years, but I do not see us using "Baptist" in the name of the new church. It's just the way it seems to be around here.

 

[Trotter]

I wouldn't have a problem if "Baptist" was dropped from our church name. It currently says "Baptist", and we are (SBC, actually), but the name acts as more of a deterant to the unchurched. I, too, live is east Tennessee and have the same problems mentioned by others (Tater77 and TomVols) as far as assumptions and predisposition against Baptists.

A few other churches here have dropped the name of the denomination, but no Baptist churches. One is a large COG church. It now has "A ministry of the Church of God" along the bottom of their sign, but are now known as a "Community" church.

Denominations are extra-biblical. While I am a Baptist/SBC and adhere to the distinctives and doctrines, the name "Baptist" has a much different meaning to those outside of the Baptist denomination. If dropping the "Baptist" from the church sign would help the lost come in I am all for it.

 

[Marcia]

Those things aren't scriptural essentials (yes, I know we Baptists think they are, but they aren't). But to the point, a Baptist church isn't going to start doing infant baptisms or sprinklings just because it drops the denomination off the shingle. Speaking in tongues or not speaking in tongues isn't a definition of beign Baptist, so whether a church has the word "baptist" on the outside isn't in and of itself an indicator of their position on the subject.

Yes, I know they are not essentials, but I would not belong to a church that practiced them.

If you have a Baptist church that already has people who are charismatic and some who believe other things non-Baptist, there is a good chance that if the Baptist name is removed, down the road those other things may become part of the church.

 

[Marcia]

....If dropping the "Baptist" from the church sign would help the lost come in I am all for it.

I hear this argument quite a bit. I have thought about it a lot and at one point, actually leaned toward this view.

However, now I think that it's not worth changing the name to "attract the lost." If the lost won't come because the name is "Baptist," they'll find another reason not to come. Saying the word "Baptist" keeps people away just shows that people will be kept away by anything if they don't want to attend. Besides, I think the church is mainly for believers and to equip believers to witness to the lost.

If someone is being drawn by the Lord, the name "Baptist" won't stop them.

 

[JMSR]

And it also serves as a deterrent to those with much different beliefs. I don't think that's a bad thing.

 

[annsni]

Yes, I know they are not essentials, but I would not belong to a church that practiced them.

I've belonged to a church that did infant baptism - but it was not a baptism of regeneration or a believer's baptism. It was more like a dedication, so we were OK with that. They of course also did believer's baptism for adults.

If you have a Baptist church that already has people who are charismatic and some who believe other things non-Baptist, there is a good chance that if the Baptist name is removed, down the road those other things may become part of the church.

We have a few charismatic people in our church and a few who believe some unbiblical things but they are not allowed to take over, not because of our name but because of our stance. Our name isn't our statement of beliefs and changing the name would not change our beliefs. I don't tie the two so closely together.