churches eliminating "Baptist" from name...

[Alive in Christ]

Gilfredrick...

I notice you are in Louisville.

I dont live there anymore, but I was born and raised (and born again) in Louisville.

You linked to Valley View. I remember back in the 80's and 90's listening to the Valley View radio broadcast over either WXLN FM or WFIA AM...cant remember wich one.


Glad to see the church still doing well.

God bless.

And go Cardinals!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Amen!!!!!!

How do I do this..... Outstanding Amen!!!! :thumbsup:

 

[J.D.]

1. Spurgeon's church crumbled? Has anyone mentioned this to Peter Masters?

2. Has anyone thought about the possibility of keeping the word Baptist in the church name in order to rehabilitate the reputation of Baptists?

3. If you cannot say, "We are not Baptists", or, "we are not a church", then why do you deny it in your name?

 

[Baptist Believer]

2. Has anyone thought about the possibility of keeping the word Baptist in the church name in order to rehabilitate the reputation of Baptists?

Thought about it? Yes.

There's a point where you have to make a decision one way or another. We need to trust that God will lead churches to do the right thing in each circumstance.

In a similar sense, I stayed with the SBC for years longer than I wanted to stay so I could work to guide the SBC to a more biblical position (from my perspective), but there came a point where the momentum was so strong in one direction, that I was only sending the wrong message to those who had been hurt by folks in SBC churches (and I've met a lot of those people over the years).

3. If you cannot say, "We are not Baptists", or, "we are not a church", then why do you deny it in your name?

We don't have to say everything on the sign of the church. Frankly, I think I'll always been a Baptist in faith and practice, but I may not always be a member of a church that has Baptist on the sign out front.

 

[J.D.]

but I may not always be a member of a church that has Baptist on the sign out front.

Me too, but I will never be ashamed of holding the name Baptist, in spite of the knuckleheads that have disfamed the name.

By the way, would anyone avoid the name of Christ just because some have shamed the name above every name through their own sin and stupidity?

 

[glfredrick]

Gilfredrick...

I notice you are in Louisville.

I dont live there anymore, but I was born and raised (and born again) in Louisville.

You linked to Valley View. I remember back in the 80's and 90's listening to the Valley View radio broadcast over either WXLN FM or WFIA AM...cant remember wich one.


Glad to see the church still doing well.

God bless.

And go Cardinals!

Cardinals are doing very well in basketball this year (is there any other sport in Louisville?). They even whooped Pitt, who were ranked #4 last week.

Valley View has been on a pace of 200-300 baptisms a year for the past decade or so. I see some decline with the newest pastor, and I'm concerned, but the church is doing very well with 3 services each Sunday.

We still have a lot of friends there...

Our current church, Sojourn (another pesky church that doesn't have Baptist in their name) is also doing very well. We're at 100 baptisms per year, and are actually more solid in the Word and gospel preaching than Valley View, even though we're culturally far different. Sojourn is a very young church, both in number of years (10) and average age (under 30). We're "hipster" as far as common church culture -- it is all about coffee, jeans, tats, un-tucked shirts, and indie music -- but those same culturally-strange kids are holding each other accountable for every aspect of Bible-based Christian living, including their giving, their parenting, their ministry, their fellowship, their evangelism and missions, and on keeping Christ first in their life. Sojourn is at the same time the most strident and the most loose church I've ever been a part of. While not Pharisaical at all, if a covenant member is not living the Bible's expectations (the gospel...) they are counseled and even disciplined if it comes to that. It is a blast to see God working in a neighborhood and in a people demographic that no one else though He could reach!

 

[glfredrick]

1. Spurgeon's church crumbled? Has anyone mentioned this to Peter Masters?

2. Has anyone thought about the possibility of keeping the word Baptist in the church name in order to rehabilitate the reputation of Baptists?

3. If you cannot say, "We are not Baptists", or, "we are not a church", then why do you deny it in your name?

I recall ALL of the churches listed in the New Testament... They were the Church at Ephesus. The Church at Phillipi. The Church at Rome... etc. None had "Baptist" in their name, yet all we Baptists learn from them via the Word of God.

We just need to get over OURSELVES and get on with Christ and His work.

 

[J.D.]

I recall ALL of the churches listed in the New Testament... They were the Church at Ephesus. The Church at Phillipi. The Church at Rome... etc. None had "Baptist" in their name, yet all we Baptists learn from them via the Word of God.

We just need to get over OURSELVES and get on with Christ and His work.

GL my friend, you just cut two thousand years of church history out of the equation. Baptist is a name with great historical significance.

Don't get me wrong here; I'm not being absolute about this. I'm just saying that a church should not cast aside its identity too flippantly. I think some have been caught up in a fad.

 

[annsni]

Me too, but I will never be ashamed of holding the name Baptist, in spite of the knuckleheads that have disfamed the name.

I don't know of anyone who's ashamed of the name. I know that was certainly not our motivation in choosing to name the church something without "Baptist" in it.

 

[annsni]

Cardinals are doing very well in basketball this year (is there any other sport in Louisville?). They even whooped Pitt, who were ranked #4 last week.

Valley View has been on a pace of 200-300 baptisms a year for the past decade or so. I see some decline with the newest pastor, and I'm concerned, but the church is doing very well with 3 services each Sunday.

We still have a lot of friends there...

Our current church, Sojourn (another pesky church that doesn't have Baptist in their name) is also doing very well. We're at 100 baptisms per year, and are actually more solid in the Word and gospel preaching than Valley View, even though we're culturally far different. Sojourn is a very young church, both in number of years (10) and average age (under 30). We're "hipster" as far as common church culture -- it is all about coffee, jeans, tats, un-tucked shirts, and indie music -- but those same culturally-strange kids are holding each other accountable for every aspect of Bible-based Christian living, including their giving, their parenting, their ministry, their fellowship, their evangelism and missions, and on keeping Christ first in their life. Sojourn is at the same time the most strident and the most loose church I've ever been a part of. While not Pharisaical at all, if a covenant member is not living the Bible's expectations (the gospel...) they are counseled and even disciplined if it comes to that. It is a blast to see God working in a neighborhood and in a people demographic that no one else though He could reach!

That is so awesome. My hubby is familiar with your church and agrees that it's a great church. :wavey:

 

[glfredrick]

GL my friend, you just cut two thousand years of church history out of the equation. Baptist is a name with great historical significance.

Don't get me wrong here; I'm not being absolute about this. I'm just saying that a church should not cast aside its identity too flippantly. I think some have been caught up in a fad.

I'm very aware of church history. I've had to pass way too many tests on that subject to prove that I get it...

I also know why "Baptist" is a really important word, and I know that the term was originally one of derision, just like "Christian" was originally a word of derision -- both incurred by those apart from the theology and doctrines that set us in line with God's Word, and gratefully accepted by those who put God and God's Word first in their lives.

But, my greater point is that we do not have anything more than the pride of humankind to go on when we INSIST that Baptist be a part of our name. No Scriptural mandate to use the term. No church precedent (until roughly 1500 years after the fact) to dictate a commonality. And, if for good culturally and contextually-driven reasons we don't include it, so be it. There are more important things than the word "Baptist" -- like actually BEING Baptists, i.e., God's people who follow God's Word by the power of the Holy Spirit, doing God's work in a lost and dying world.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

And, if for good culturally and contextually-driven reasons we don't include it, so be it. There are more important things than the word "Baptist" -- like actually BEING Baptists, i.e., God's people who follow God's Word by the power of the Holy Spirit, doing God's work in a lost and dying world.

I assumed Guy that was the definition of a Christian? :jesus::thumbs:

By Grace, By Faith, Through Christ Alone!

 

[J.D.]

I'm very aware of church history. I've had to pass way too many tests on that subject to prove that I get it...

I also know why "Baptist" is a really important word, and I know that the term was originally one of derision, just like "Christian" was originally a word of derision -- both incurred by those apart from the theology and doctrines that set us in line with God's Word, and gratefully accepted by those who put God and God's Word first in their lives.

But, my greater point is that we do not have anything more than the pride of humankind to go on when we INSIST that Baptist be a part of our name. No Scriptural mandate to use the term. No church precedent (until roughly 1500 years after the fact) to dictate a commonality. And, if for good culturally and contextually-driven reasons we don't include it, so be it. There are more important things than the word "Baptist" -- like actually BEING Baptists, i.e., God's people who follow God's Word by the power of the Holy Spirit, doing God's work in a lost and dying world.

Well, if you feel you have good reason to do it, then do it. I was involved in a name change one time myself. We didn't drop Baptist from the name, but we did change it to coincide with a physical move across town in order to give us a fresh start.

So I'm not against it per se, I'm just concerned that sometimes we're too eager to cast off our heritage. If the shoe doesn't fit you, then don't wear it. But if it bothers your conscience, maybe you should settle it before the Lord. I raying: the Lord will bless you and yours.

 

[glfredrick]

I assumed Guy that was the definition of a Christian? :jesus::thumbs:

By Grace, By Faith, Through Christ Alone!

It is... :jesus:

 

[glfredrick]

Well, if you feel you have good reason to do it, then do it. I was involved in a name change one time myself. We didn't drop Baptist from the name, but we did change it to coincide with a physical move across town in order to give us a fresh start.

So I'm not against it per se, I'm just concerned that sometimes we're too eager to cast off our heritage. If the shoe doesn't fit you, then don't wear it. But if it bothers your conscience, maybe you should settle it before the Lord. I raying: the Lord will bless you and yours.

Same... And I think that we may have come to a meeting of minds with your statement. We do not have to set aside our heritage and our beliefs merely because the name is outwardly missing. In fact, a great many congregations and even denominations are "baptistic" because of our heritage, God-driven, and given to the world, that do not carry our name. So be it. God gets the glory, not the name Baptist. But, by all means include the name if that is what it takes in the area where one's ministry happens.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

Wasn't there a young man named Minnesota Slim posting on these boards that was told he could no longer do so because his church was not baptist? He rebutted that his church was baptist in everything but name but was told he could only post in the non baptist forums because he was a non-denom.

Anyone know of that situation. It was a part of a thread I was posting in but I don't know which one.

 

[J.D.]

Wasn't there a young man named Minnesota Slim posting on these boards that was told he could no longer do so because his church was not baptist? He rebutted that his church was baptist in everything but name but was told he could only post in the non baptist forums because he was a non-denom.

Anyone know of that situation. It was a part of a thread I was posting in but I don't know which one.

He didn't say his church was "Baptist", but "credo-baptist" - a different meaning altogether. All Baptists are credo-baptists, but not all credo-baptist are Baptist. I know you know that.

It was a shame though - the guy had some good ideas and communicated well.