Why Take "Baptist" out of Church Names?

We are a Baptist church because we follow the Baptist distinctives.

There is a local Baptist church that became a community church....and we all know why...they wanted NUMBERS....they compromised on all kinds of matters, started approving of living together out of wedlock, approve of drinking alcohol, etc, etc....just to get NUMBERS.

Probably a good thing they don't use the Baptist name, because they don't follow scripture anymore anyway.

 

This is so pejorative that it doesn't deserve a response. If being this is what being a "Baptist" is- no Christ-follower will want to be called that, because true believers are taught of Him to love one another, not to argue and separate over what name is above the church door.

 

When I was living in Mexico, my wife and I went to the store to buy food and saw creamed corn- and man, I LOVE creamed corn. We bought a whole case of it because we didn't know if we would see it in the store again. I couldn't wait to get home and have a bowl of creamed corn. I ran home and grabbed the can opener and gave it a few spins, popped the top and... whole kernel corn! I looked at the label again- it hadn't changed. So I grabbed another can- followed proper procedure- and this time the label and the contents were in agreement. YUM!

The moral of the story- it's not the label on the can that is important- it's the contents of the can!

 

Yes but up here in Yankee land, a church changing their name or omitting the name "Baptist" generally means a loosening of Baptist Distinctive's that are cherished by the traditional Baptists. And with that comes liberal prospectives. The most common one I see today is baptisms done both as immersion & sprinkling & also infant baptisms cleverly disguised as dedications. Next comes a tolerance for homosexuality, Women as pastors & teachers, ecumenical services, Blah, Blah, Blah. Later, its not necessary to go to the church because they dont stand for anything anymore & they are now considered "all things to all people". I can get that from flipping on Joel Olsteen! Any wonder why only 2% of professing Christians in Northern NJ go to church anymore.....think about it.

 

God though has 1 CHURCH the Body/Bride of Christ, many branches within that such as Baptists/Reformed/Methodists/ etc
ALL saved by Grace, alive in Christ

Great to be a Baptist, but we are NOT only Christians, nor any more to God than any other "bible based" Church

And weren't MOST of reformer non Baptist?
Can't you be good in Theology and NOT be called a Baptist?

 

Tom, I might suggest that the name "Baptist" has always been a "marketing decision" from the inception of its use. First a term of derision, later adopted by the people who wished to be identified with the practice, always a choice.

There was an era where names made a bigger difference. In that era there were also wars fought were people died over a name, when in fact most of the core theology of the groups warring was similar enough as to make little real difference.

I am neutral as to whether to use the name Baptist or not. Use it if that works don't if that works -- in all cases, further the kingdom -- for that is what ultimately matters.

As for your other comment concerning Presbyterians who attend a Baptist church to hear biblical preaching, that, in large measure, depends on the home church for the Presbyterians. We have a Presbyterian USA (PCUSA) seminary just around the corner from SBTS. We all share a "metroversity" agreement with the U. of Louisville, so students can take coursework at any of the three institutions if they care. From time-to-time a PC student will find his or her way into an SBTS classroom. I recall one in particular who attended a theology course in my undergrad program. He did not hold to an inerrant Bible, did not see the entire Bible as God's Word, did not hold an orthodox doctrine of the Trinity, had no issues with women or gay pastors, and held a host of other "liberal" doctrines and theology. He was far and away the most liberal student in the classroom that semester, but according to him, he was the most conservative student at his seminary! It is no surprise that there is little biblical preaching if the Bible itself is not held as the Word of God in its complete form. What else is there? Oh, I know!!! The newspaper, psychology, sociology, and the agenda of the pastor/elders, all of which sounds somewhat biblical to people who don't know the difference and who "think" that they are coming to a "church" where God is worshiped.

 

Also, weren't those like J vernon Mcgee, Boice, and others who were ordain as Presbeterians, but were "not" reformed in all areas?

 

Have you checked out Boice's book, " Doctrines of Grace" LOL

 

Sure.... until it comes to Baptism. Then they are NOT all wet!:laugh:

 

Thank you, Ann. I tend to forget that the dynamics where you are can be quite different from where I am.

 

I thought at first that you were new to the BB, but then noticed that you joined in 2008. Perhaps you did not see the previous threads on this very issue. (That's not a criticism, of course!)

For example, there was the thread started in February this year, with the title "churches eliminating "Baptist" from name..."

In that thread, I wrote:

I haven't noticed it happening much here in the UK. But as I said in a BB Poll on this back in 2008 (here, if you are interested):

However, maybe the situation is different in the US, where it seems that not having the word "baptist" in the church name is looked upon as indicating disagreement with, or shame of, Baptist doctrines. Here, that is not necessarily the case. The church where Spurgeon was pastor is not called, "Elephant & Castle Baptist Church" (after the name of that part of London), but "The Metropolitan Tabernacle".
​

I could give other examples. A baptist church which has a church name that does not include the word "Baptist" may not have dropped it, or been ashamed of being known as baptist.
​

I totally agree with your ps.