IFB vs SBC...The Issue of Biblical "Separation"and why they differ!

I have been a pastor of both SBC and IFB churches (as well as one non denominational 'Bible' Church) and I can guarantee you that there is a lot of misunderstanding between these two. Sammy sounds like a typical IFB who has been told about the 'evils' of those liberal southern Baptists but never realized that he was being lied to. I have personally been attacked from both sides on this issue at different times in my life and one of the things that I love about this board is that it can serve as means of communication between these two groups. Others have already addressed Sammy's misconceptions.

 

Thanks NCT, your an insider from both churches then.

 

I for one love the fact that more and more SBC churches are taking on the support of individual missionaries. One of the things that I think we have done poorly over the years within SBC churches is our inability to put a face on our missionary giving. Active communication and reports from the mission field do wonders for increasing giving and making church members feel a part of the missionary efforts. Missions trips can also accomplish this but many do not deliver the impact that they should for the cost involved.

I must address what Pastor Bill said

Well, this is true Bill, but only because IFB churches have so many different mission boards. If you add them all up (BIMI [1000 missionaries in 90 countries], Baptist Mid-Missions [1000 missionaries in 50 countries], BBFI [800 missionaries in 95 countries], Baptist World Mission, [300 missionaries in 45 countries], Macedonia World Baptist Missions, Baptist Missions to Forgotten Peoples, and many, many others), there are actually more IFB missionaries total than SBC.

Now as far as them being able to stay on the field instead of returning home 6 months out of the year to keep the support rolling in you are right. SBC missionaries can spend a lot more time of the field. That however leads into the IFB argument for a lack of accountability from these missionaries. IFB missionaries have to show more results or the money dries up. This can be both good and bad.

 

donnA:

It's usually more like an outsider from both actually.

 

Baptist Pastor/Theologian,

Thanks for clearing up the misconceptions from Sammy's post. I was getting ready to do that myself. It is amazing what many outside of the SBC actually believe regarding our practices.

 

It may have a lot to do with the area I live in, because I do attend an SBC church when I visit family in North Carolina, but I will give you MY reason for leaving the SBC and going to an IFB church. It got to the point where I could not really tell the difference between attending church on Sunday morning or going to the mall on Saturday night. The dress was the same, the music sounded the same, the working (or lack thereof) of the Holy Spirit felt the same, etc., etc. Of course, some may call me "legalistic", but this is the way I saw it. I believe that God has blessed my decision, which seems to be most evident in my family's life. Again, I reiterate that I do attend an SBC church when I visit North Carolina, but I refuse to even step inside of one in my area.

 

I am sure you are right williemakeit, there are many differences between regions of the country. Your reasons for leaving a SBC church and joining an IFB church are excellent. The fact that the Lord seems to have blessed your decision seems to indicate that you are in the right church. The problem comes from those who would lump all SBC or IFB or any other type of church together when they are independent churches. Many outside the SBC think that the convention has some type of control over local churches when they don't (as Baptist Pastor/Theologian has already proven).

When you make statements like

It adds to that. I am certain that if I were to come to Maryland I could find some modernistic liberal SBC churches that I would be uncomfortable in. I am also certain I could find some old fashioned conservative SBC churches that preach the word of God and win souls to Christ. The same goes for IFB churches. Some are preaching the truth, some are not. You need to judge these churches for themselves and not lump them together under some initials. You know what, there are probably other churches in your area doing God's work that don't even call themselves Baptist. (oh my!)

The fact is that I am member of an IFB church right now, because that is where God has called me. Now just two weeks ago I filled in and preached at a SBC church, and that is where God wanted me that week.

 

Let me make a few corrections since this is obviously biased towards IFB.

The churches can get reports from the SBC as to where all of the money is spent. As far as the money an individual church puts in, yes it goes into the general fund, but every church has a right to see where every dollar brought in goes; whether it be operating expenses and salaries or otherwise.

The SBC churches can also send their money to individual missionaries and bypass the SBC entirely. It is also up to the church exactly how much money they give to the SBC. Some give very little, some a lot. We just cut ours back, by a simple vote of the church. The SBC has NO say in it whatsoever.

There is ZERO control from the SBC over any church. Many churches even defy the SBC and we have some with women pastors and other things the SBC does not go along with.

As far as the Bible goes, I don't imagine ANY of the IFB churches use the 1611 King James Version. My guess is that they use the KJV 1769 Oxford version.

Just thought I would straighten out these errors.

 

Let me clarify my answer above. I do not mean to say that SBC churches are liberal because one or two may have women pastors. These are rare cases and most Southern Baptist Churches today are more conservative than people want to admit. Especially, in our part of the country.

 

It adds to that.</font>[/QUOTE]North Carolina Tentmaker,

It was rather course on my part to make such a statement; however, I was not exaggerating my stance. Of course, I am not speaking for the whole of Maryland, but as an Associaton officer, I was very familiar with those churches in my immediate area. After leaving the SBC church, I attended a Lutheran Church (LCMS) that I believed the Spirit was more alive in. Unfortunately, I could never reconcile my beliefs to their doctrinal differences, but I did enjoy the fellowship immensely, and they were definately preaching the gospel. They were even going out and conducting evangelizing events (i.e., handing out tracts). An IFB started in my area and I attended the first service. I have been there ever since. Yes, thankfully, there are a few churches (baptist and non-) still proclaiming the gospel, and reaching the lost for Christ.

 

I'm glad you found a good church willie. We have moved several times and it can be very difficult.

 

When was the last time you read the annual report? When was the last time you investigated about how SBC missionaries are selected? When was the last time you read a SBC borochure or paper telling about the missionaries recently appointed?

Sounds like the answer is never.

 

gb, I would say that is a pretty good bet.

 

For clarification on IFB missions.
It has been my experience that our missionaries do not return every 6 months or so to drum up support. Typically, they will accumulate their support for a couple years after schooling and before going to the field. They then will stay on the field for a period of 4-5 years without ever coming home. After that period, they will return for "furlough" and tour their supporting churches to give a report of the work done, what needs to be done in the future and their plans for accomplishing that. Then after about 6-9 months they will again return to the fields for another extended stay.
This is the pattern I have seen with the specific missionaries that my home church sponsors.
Someone mentioned accountability. I think the above scheme of things lends itself to a good bit of accountability. Yes, the missionary does leave his work for a short period every few years, but not until he has trained an indigenous (sp) pastor to take over that local church the missionary has built. Ususally, the missionary will return on his furlough with plans for establishing another church body in a neighboring community. He will only help to supervise the growth of the indigenous church and its pastor while working in the next community to build a church there.
OTOH, I have not seen missionaries face to face in the SBC churches I have atteneded. I don't even remember seeing "news letters" from the missionaries that local SBC churches support.
It may have indeed happened at other SBC churches, it's just that I have not seen it in those I have attended. I have been in SBC in both Idaho, and Montana so I don't think my experience is isolated, though it is limited.

As for seperation, it is my experience that IFB is much more ridgid (not legalistic) in their definitions of seperation than SBC. And that is why IFB is a good fit for me. I like seeing my missionaries and meeting them personally and talking with them at our fellwoship dinners we have when they come through our area. I also like the clear definitions of seperation that our IFB churches hold to. I do not see IFB's definitions of seperation as the same as legalistic. Legalism, biblically, is defined as works leading to salvation or in order to keep salvation, and that is NOT what seperation is all about.

Just my take on things.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

Does a missionary have to live on the mission field in order to be considered a missionary? i don't think so. We have several missionaries at our church who regulary travel to foreign countries to minister and spread the gospel.
We frequently have SBC missionaries come to our church and tell about their work. And we've ahd nonSBC missionaries come to tell about their work. And we've heard from some why they were currently in the US(lived on the mission field, forogt what country) telling people he had to come home each year to try and get support for his ministry.
Now it just seems to me a missionary should not have to do that at all, when there are so many christians in this country, we should just be giving the money for missionary support, they should not have to come begging for it. Thats why my church regularly gives for mission support as well as send out our own missionaries.

 

We have a furloughing missionary to speak in our church twice a year. (SBC) And we are active in missions involvement as well, so we have good regular contact with folks "on the field."

 

As an IFB'er, I am grateful for the return toward conservatism in the SBC in recent years, and have been blessed by some great SBC preaching (heard Al Mohler at the BCP in Minneapolis a couple of years ago, e.g.) That being said, I think I would find it very difficult to be a part of an SBC church until I checked out the financial support very carefully. I think this is one of the major issues of separation that Greg is referring to. Could not in good conscience give to a church that gave to the cooperative effort or anything that would go to just about any of the colleges, most of which have become totally apostate (although I think SBTS in Louisville is headed back in the right direction thanks largely to Mohler and other conservative leaders like him.)If a church were truly independent and did not support ANY denomination, I wouldn't care if it said IFB, SBC, or XYZ over the door.
Also, many of us IFB are uncomfortable with some of the evangelistic efforts, like good ol' Billy G. He has clearly compromised Biblical Ecclesiastical separation in the name of numbers.

 

Sammy: I hate to burst your bubble but there is no IFB missionary that receives 100% that is given by their supporting churches! If they are on the feild through a mission board,because all the boards take a percentage for their operations, and it comes out of the support that the missionaries raise.