How do Southern Baptist churches differ from other Baptist churches?

[alexander284]

How do Southern Baptist churches differ from other Baptist churches?

Are there differences in theology, doctrine, worship practices, for example?

Thank you for your help!

 

[JonC]

Baptist churches that choose to affiliate with other Baptist churches through the SBC typically affirm the BF&M in a general sense as descriptive of what they believe.

The BF&M is here:

Southern Baptist Convention > The Baptist Faith and Message

And they contribute to the mission of the SBC cooperstive program.

Information about the cooperstive program is here:

Southern Baptist Convention > The Cooperative Program

As far as doctrine goes, there are a common bond but a ot of differences as well. For a glimpse of the diversity (and commonality) Charles Stanley is a SBC member. So is Paul Washer.

 

[rlvaughn]

How do Southern Baptist churches differ from other Baptist churches?

Are there differences in theology, doctrine, worship practices, for example?

Thank you for your help!

This is a very broad subject since, for example, in cases one Southern Baptist church might differ more widely from another Southern Baptist church than it does from some not-Southern Baptist church. Jon's post above is a great start, emphasizing the shared emphasis of the Baptist Faith and Message and the Cooperative Program. Even there, of course, there is room for disagreement.

Two groups that will contrast easily with Southern Baptists are Primitive Baptists and Free Will Baptists. Primitive Baptists hold a strong predestianarian stance, advocate simplicity in worship (e.g. a cappella singing), and seldom organize beyond the local association level. Free Will Baptists represent the Arminian viewpoint, including the possibility of falling from grace. They are consistent open communionists -- i.e., all of them and clearly stated in their articles of faith.

 

[Jerome]

They have a consolidated funding scheme (The 'Cooperative Program', CP for short) for their many ministry units, it's sort of like the United Way (you just send the $$$, we'll divvy it up for you), not sure which came first.

 

[alexander284]

This is a very broad subject since, for example, in cases one Southern Baptist church might differ more widely from another Southern Baptist church than it does from some not-Southern Baptist church. Jon's post above is a great start, emphasizing the shared emphasis of the Baptist Faith and Message and the Cooperative Program. Even there, of course, there is room for disagreement.

Two groups that will contrast easily with Southern Baptists are Primitive Baptists and Free Will Baptists. Primitive Baptists hold a strong predestianarian stance, advocate simplicity in worship (e.g. a cappella singing), and seldom organize beyond the local association level. Free Will Baptists represent the Arminian viewpoint, including the possibility of falling from grace. They are consistent open communionists -- i.e., all of them and clearly stated in their articles of faith.

As always, your input is greatly appreciated. And I especially appreciate the way you provided me with the additional information regarding Primitive Baptists and Free Will Baptists (both of which I knew nothing about, until just now)!

 

[alexander284]

They have a consolidated funding scheme (The 'Cooperative Program', CP for short) for their many ministry units, it's sort of like the United Way (you just send the $$$, we'll divvy it up for you), not sure which came first.

Thank you for this information. That sounds like an apt analogy to me!

 

[church mouse guy]

We have a nasty man heading up our political lobby & a president who thinks that Allah & Jesus are the same guy. And then we have a big number of folks who think that there is a homosexual orientation.

 

[Salty]

As stated before - the SBC has the Coperative program for missions.
Very simply - when a missionary is accepted by the Home mission or the Foreign Mission board- they are able to go right to the field.

Independent Baptists - will go thur a mission board - ( and there are dozens and dozens of them) upon approval - the misionary will then
go on deputation to raise funds. This deputation could last at least one year - some could be out for 3-4 years - and then some, finally
give up and never get to the field. When they do get to the field - they may find some churches will drop their support - or even stop sending
support. Other churches close or merge - so the missionary has to to come back to the States and go back on deputation. Of course- when
they do come back - the do want to visit their supporting churches as well.

Some will say that Southern Baptists never get to meet thier missionaries - as local churches do not directly support them. Well, I have been SBC, and I
have met many our our missionaries -.

Thats just for starters.

 

[Salty]

and contray to some common belief -
1) SBC churches are NOT required to support the Co-op program.
in fact, many SBC churches do support non - SBC missionaries.

2) The SBC has no authority over local churches.
The most they can do is to withdraw fellowship

3) As stated before - most churches do subscripe to the 2000 Bap Faith & Msg -
but some still use the 1963 BF&M.
in addition - their constituiton may add other things - such as closed communion, multiple Elder rule,
Baptism (in regards to minium age, amount of time between salvation and baptism,) which version
to use, traditional hymns, ccm, ect.

There is no typical Southern Baptist church.

 

[Jerome]

Salty, apparently you are not aware that the SBC Constitution was recently amended on this?

The former definition of an SBC church said:

"church which....Has been a bona fide contributor to the Convention’s work"

But now, the amended SBC Constitution very pointedly requires that the contribution must be financial, and that those financial contributions must be undesignated:

"church which...Has made undesignated, financial contribution(s) through the Cooperative Program, and/or through the Convention’s Executive Committee for Convention causes, and/or to any Convention entity"

To be considered Southern Baptist now, a church has to make undesignated financial contributions to SBC work. Since the Cooperative Program funds the state convention as well (only about half of the $$$ at most ends up being forwarded by the states to the SBC), the national Convention does not mind if you bypass the CP and send all your $$$ directly.

But whether your qualifying financial contribution is made directly, or routed through the Cooperative Program, it is important to SBC executive committee and entity bureaucrats that your giving be undesignated. They do not want an individual church directing them how to spend the $$$ it sends them.

 

[rlvaughn]

Independent Baptists - will go thur a mission board - ( and there are dozens and dozens of them) upon approval - the misionary will then go on deputation to raise funds.

As with Southern Baptists, it is hard to generalize with Independent Baptists. Unfortunately, this does seem to be the way that has become most popular. The way I was raised and taught, this rise of Independent Baptist Mission Boards is antithetical to the concept of independent missions.

As always, your input is greatly appreciated. And I especially appreciate the way you provided me with the additional information regarding Primitive Baptists and Free Will Baptists (both of which I knew nothing about, until just now)!

You're welcome. Here are a couple of links you might find helpful in regard to various Baptists in the US.
Baptist Groups in the USA

Denominational Sites

 

[Salty]

Salty, apparently you are not aware that the SBC Constitution was recently amended on this?

The former definition of an SBC church said:

But now, the amended SBC Constitution very pointedly requires that the contribution must be financial, and that those financial contributions must be undesignated:

To be considered Southern Baptist now, a church has to make undesignated financial contributions to SBC work. Since the Cooperative Program funds the state convention as well (only about half of the $$$ at most ends up being forwarded by the states to the SBC), the national Convention does not mind if you bypass the CP and send all your $$$ directly.

But whether your qualifying financial contribution is made directly, or routed through the Cooperative Program, it is important to SBC executive committee and entity bureaucrats that your giving be undesignated. They do not want an individual church directing them how to spend the $$$ it sends them.

Here in the BCNY at least 30 - 40% of our churches have contributed zero dollars to the co-op - and I doubt that over 100 churches would be dropped from the roll. Will do more research later.

 

[Jerome]

Salty, did you even read what I wrote?

Again:

Since only about half of the $$$ at most ends up being forwarded by the states to the SBC, the national Convention does not mind if you bypass the CP and send all your $$$ directly.

They do not consider a church to be in friendly cooperation unless it's giving financially. And whether it's through the Cooperative Program, or sent directly to the SBC itself or to SBC entities, that qualifying giving must be undesignated.

 

[Salty]

Salty, did you even read what I wrote?

They do not consider a church to be in friendly cooperation unless it's giving financially. And whether it's through the Cooperative Program, or sent directly to the SBC itself or to SBC entities, that qualifying giving must be undesignated.

Did you read what I wrote?

UNless there is a difference betweeen cooperation and friendly cooperation?

 

[Just_Ahead]

One difference is the funding of missionaries.

SBC funnels the funds through the Cooperative Program.

More independent Baptist churches and groups require the missionaries to visit individual churches, usually on Sunday evenings, present their mission work through slides, pamphlets, music, and a short talk--then it is time to pass the plate. I have heard it said that the missionary family usually receives $1.00 per person in the pew. The money raised does not go directly to the missionary family. They do this while they are on furlough, usually visiting several churches to build support. The money raised does not go directly to the missionary family. Instead the funds raised through the churches are usually sent to some independent missionary society, such as Navigators, that holds the support raised until the missionary has enough in their support account for two or three years on the mission field. Usually in these churches and groups there is more turnover in missionaries, which is not really a bad thing.

On the other hand, the SBC might lead to more career missionaries.

Just my two cents worth on the difference.