The title Baptist is no more a reproach than the title Christian. Lets drop that as well.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Apples and oranges. To be a Christian has a common denominator. A denomination is not it.The title Baptist is no more a reproach than the title Christian. Lets drop that as well.
The title Baptist is no more a reproach than the title Christian. Lets drop that as well.
You paint with too broad a brush, and besides, what is wrong with those phrases?Some emerging church people have - they use "Christ follower" or "follower of Jesus."
You paint with too broad a brush, and besides, what is wrong with those phrases?
I don't think deeming yourself a Christ Follower means you are part of the emergent movement, so I do feel that is stereotyping and painting with too broad a brush. I've said this numerous times...it makes no difference what is on the door of a church, but what is contained inside. There was no name on the first church, and God had no issue adding to that church daily.Stating what some are doing is not painting anybody - it is just a simple fact. The problem I see with the phrases is that some seem to define them in such a way as to exclude someone who does believe exactly like they do. I have also seen that with the more traditional terms as well.
I do not see Baptist churches dropping Baptist out of their names much here, but I do see the Assemblies of God dropping the name. They want to distance themselves from the negative baggage attached to the name. The AOG has a reputation for falling for every wind of doctrine that comes along. So they think that changing the name from AOG to _______ Fellowship will attract more people that would not knowingly step into an AOG church.
I don't think deeming yourself a Christ Follower means you are part of the emergent movement, so I do feel that is stereotyping and painting with too broad a brush.
As for our local church, there would be no support for changing the name for any of the purposes stated in this thread. Neither would there be much support for the antics stated above.I hear this periodically at my church. "We need to do something to attract (fill in the blank)."
For some its more yuppie couples, others young couples with children, others more teens.
So my question is usually, "okay, what are you willing for this church to do to attract those folks? And while you're at it, what's off limits as an outreach tool?"
So far, they've ruled out having the pastor bungee jump into a swimming pool; they've ruled out communion conducted by deacons in clown outfits. They don't much like the idea of a comtemporary rock concert, but seem to lean toward a Southern Gospel quartet. And they're definitely against the preacher and a six-part series on how to have better sex.
So far, nobody has suggested getting rid of our Baptist name. Whew! Am I relieved. Some of our folks may be pragmatic about doing gimmick stuff to pull in people, but not that pragmatic.
As for our local church, there would be no support for changing the name for any of the purposes stated in this thread. Neither would there be much support for the antics stated above.
However, in our case, it is not going to do our future much good to cement things as they are to preserve the over 80 crowd. While I do not advocate gimmicks to attract younger people, it is also a fact that there has to be people in their 20s, 30s, 40s, and more than a scattering in their 50s and 60s for a church to continue.
There's no question that you are right. Ours is a graying church. The question is not whether we should reach out (or "market"), but what form that outreach should take. In this case, the question before the house is about taking Baptist out of the church's name, as a marketing ( or "outreach) strategy.
And if the question is "what can we do to attract more people to our church," then the question will drive the answers. If the question is how can we take the gospel to where the people are, that will produce a different set of answers. That's all I'm saying.
The title Baptist is no more a reproach than the title Christian. Lets drop that as well.
I do not know what the answer is. I know what it is not. It is not taking away the word Baptist or attracting people with some kind of entertainment gimmick that has nothing to do with the Gospel. The visitation we do is a good start. This is a tough one. It will take the power of the Holy Spirit to transplant entire age brackets.There's no question that you are right. Ours is a graying church. The question is not whether we should reach out (or "market"), but what form that outreach should take. In this case, the question before the house is about taking Baptist out of the church's name, as a marketing ( or "outreach) strategy.
And if the question is "what can we do to attract more people to our church," then the question will drive the answers. If the question is how can we take the gospel to where the people are, that will produce a different set of answers. That's all I'm saying.
I do not know what the answer is. I know what it is not. It is not taking away the word Baptist or attracting people with some kind of entertainment gimmick that has nothing to do with the Gospel.
I don't drop the name Christian because the world abuses the term. I don't drop Baptist because others misuse the name. I do what I can to make clear what the terms Christian and Baptist ought to be.
In all my years in ministry, I never had difficulty getting people to church because I was a Baptist, and I sure don't intend to start now.
Even when I preach in the Anglican Church, it is clear that I am a Baptist preacher. I have been authorized by the local Bishop to preach in Anglican Churches as a Baptist minister. I would forego preaching if I had to deny my Baptist history.
Cheers,
Jim
It's not only to preach the Word, it's also how you do it. We should model ourselves after Paul's attitude. I'm sure if the name "Baptist" hindered his work, he would have no problem removing it. He essentially said just that when he scolded those who said they followed him or Appolos in 1 Corinthians 1.I always thought it was Jesus who said, If I be lifted up I will draw all men unto me...
It is not my job to draw men, but it is my job to preach His word.
I am not in love with the name Baptist, but the name is very dear to me for what it once stood for. It is the principle behind dropping the name and not just dropping the name.
Cheers,
Jim
You paint with too broad a brush, and besides, what is wrong with those phrases?