Uh excuse me sir, no one has advocated this however there is no evidence of it either. What you have posted can be true but understood in a different light rather than your negative connotation. When one is ignorant it is easy to come to the wrong conclusions. If you do not know the inner workings, purposes, and goals of the SBC actions can be interpreted wrong.
-
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!
Is the SBC getting liberal?
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
- Status
Uh excuse me sir, no one has advocated this however there is no evidence of it either. What you have posted can be true but understood in a different light rather than your negative connotation. When one is ignorant it is easy to come to the wrong conclusions. If you do not know the inner workings, purposes, and goals of the SBC actions can be interpreted wrong.
Several years ago in San Diego there was a group of people who were some sort of Pentecostals who would join churches until the outnumbered the members who attended business meetings and, at a business meeting, vote to remove the leadership, put the property on the market, then give the proceeds to their own churches.
Our lead deacon was a very savvy business man who set up a religious trust which owned all of the property and leased it back to the church for $1 per year. The trust was made up of 3 church members as trustees.
Some of the people from the group started attending and asked for our organizational documents. When they saw the property was not owned by the congregation, but by a separate non-profit trust, they quit attending.
Several years ago in San Diego there was a group of people who were some sort of Pentecostals who would join churches until the outnumbered the members who attended business meetings and, at a business meeting, vote to remove the leadership, put the property on the market, then give the proceeds to their own churches.
Our lead deacon was a very savvy business man who set up a religious trust which owned all of the property and leased it back to the church for $1 per year. The trust was made up of 3 church members as trustees.
Some of the people from the group started attending and asked for our organizational documents. When they saw the property was not owned by the congregation, but by a separate non-profit trust, they quit attending.
One of the mistakes churches make is to put the reversion clause in the by-laws but not in the deed. By-laws can be easily changed but deeds are far more difficult.
I don't think anyone has claimed that.
But the SBC is organized as a "rope of sand." Influence can be exerted along that "rope" but no control is possible.
And that organizational structure, or lack thereof, protects the local churches from control by the national or even state conventions.
Correct. We could cleanly break from SBC at our next business meeting, if we so chose.
It is amazing how some of the posters on this thread missed what BOTH Cassidy and I pointed out.
Basically, ALL SBC affiliated churches should get legal assurance that the original deeds are truly unincumbered, and not binding to the convention.
Also, the church archives need to have on file letters from all loans sowing payment in full - typically called "release of loan" signed and notarized by the grantor of the loan.
Btw, what I previously posted was not an exaggeration, or some fundy rumor. That my integrity was called into question was totally unwarranted. Because of this, I will not comment on this thread, again. It would not be wise nor peaceable to continue participation.
Basically, ALL SBC affiliated churches should get legal assurance that the original deeds are truly unincumbered, and not binding to the convention.
Also, the church archives need to have on file letters from all loans sowing payment in full - typically called "release of loan" signed and notarized by the grantor of the loan.
Btw, what I previously posted was not an exaggeration, or some fundy rumor. That my integrity was called into question was totally unwarranted. Because of this, I will not comment on this thread, again. It would not be wise nor peaceable to continue participation.
and that is a good reason why a church should have a lawyer to review all legal documents.
Our church is 150+ years older than the convention. We are definitely not encumbered to the convention. Several of the churches in this county are. That's because the association planted them and gave them a lot of financial support at start up.
Do you know if the agreements include a sunset clause that causes the agreement to expire at an agreed upon time, or after all encumbrances have been satisfied?
The one I have actually read does not.It is with the local association and not the SBC directly. It is pretty unincumbering. Basically it states that if the church dissolves, the property reverts to the association. It does not even state the church has to remain a member of the association.
One church actually did dissolve. The association ran it for a while as a youth home. The association later closed the youth home and sold the property.
Last edited:
Is the local association not SBC?
Yes, but I am not sure as to the exact details of how the affiliation operates. It is a separate entity that owns its own property etc. I have never really thought much about it.
The SBC works on 4 levels. The first level is the local churches, the second level is the local associations, the third level is the state conventions, and the fourth level is the national convention. They are all autonomous organizations. The national convention has no authority over anyone and there is no hierarchy. The same goes for all the rest. Decisions are made from the bottom up. We cooperate for the purpose of missions and support but the day to day activities of churches is a separate issue. When the state or local associations provide funding for property and buildings there remains for a time control of those properties or buildings by the state or local associations. That does not impose a hierarchy on the church itself. Those who provide funds simply want to make sure the monies go to exactly what it was intended for and nothing else. There is an accountability in that aspect but it does not effect any other part.
Thanks. That is how I had always assumed it worked, but did not know for sure.
The CBF is not liberal in its theology. Many left the SBC because they refused to sign Mueller's statement of faith. There were things in there that were not part of traditional Baptist core beliefs. Besides that, BaptistS have never believed in hard and fast confessions but rather in Soul Freedom and the Priesthood of believers. The SBS lost some outstanding professors and the SBC lost a large number of excellent missionaries in what was really a political fight for control to align the SBC with the Republican party.
Does the CBF have a theological statement?
That's a good question. I belong to a dual aligned Baptist Church but most members are not aware of its status. I know there's a set of core values but am not aware of a formal statement of faith. Personally, I tend to stand with the 1883 NH Confession.
"Because of the opprobrious epithet "liberal," today they call themselves "moderates." A skunk by any other name still stinks!" W.A. Criswell
The schism in the SBC had nothing to do with liberal theology. It was all about the fundamentalists seizing political power to support the Republican Party.
- Status