Questions Regarding the SBC ‘Name Change’
The Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention recently approved a proposal from the name-change task force formed regarding changing the name of the convention. The recommendation was to keep the legal name the same, but to add a tag line of “Great Convention Baptists”. This unofficial name could be used in those areas where this might be better received. You can read more about it here.
So why the name change? There is of course the fact that the SBC is no longer a southern organization. It’s geographical reach extends globally. There certainly could be a case to change the name to reflect this. However, that was not the primary motivation. The main reason for the change was, as Jimmy Draper, chairman of the task-force says, “The name ‘Southern’ is a barrier to the Gospel in some regions of the country.”
Why you ask? Well, as we all know, us Southerners are perceived as backward, country red-necks, so there is that. The real reason has to do with the SBC’s historical ties to slavery and racism.
While I understand the logic of changing the name, I still have some lingering questions about this proposal.
- Is the offense at the name ‘Southern’ really about regrettable history, or is it really that we are Christian, Baptist, or some other factors? In other words, will this new name really open new doors of ministry or is it just to make us feel better about it?
- If the purpose of the name change is to reduce offense to unbelievers, why only add a not-legal tag name? That is, even if church chooses to use GCB naming, at the end of the day, they will still have to acknowledge that they are Southern Baptist.
- Along that same line, are we creating a “bait-and-switch” situation? Are we calling ourselves one thing, “Great Commission Baptists”, only to really reveal later that we are Southern Baptists? What are the implications of that?
- If the purpose of the is, again, to reach people who are turned off by the ‘Southern’, why now use a second name that has very little meaning to an unbeliever?
- What are the possible negative connotations of “Great Commission Baptists”? For example, will some government leaders in certain countries perceive it as a direct implication of proselytizing, which may be shunned or illegal there, and thus hinder ministry in those regions?
- Who will experience the great impact from the name change? Unbelievers who now think GCBs are terrific or Southern Baptists who feel better about themselves for adding this new name?
- Is it worth it? Will adding this tag-line be worth the cost, time, and educating necessary to make it effective?
At the end of the day, I agree with Ed Stetzer thoughts. Changing the name, or rather, adding to the name *may* be good, but changing actions is better.
Scripture: All or Nothing
In reading commentaries for lessons, preaching, or classes, it is not uncommon to find someone who doubts the originality, authority, or accuracy of some portion of Scripture. In New Testament studies it is all the rage to argue why this or that book wasn’t written by Paul. All sorts of arguments are made, “This piece of teaching doesn’t agree with what Paul says elsewhere,” “The words here are not like the words he uses elsewhere,” and for those who are most honest with themselves, “If this is true then it means radical things for me that I don’t like.” On these and other grounds they dismiss the portion of Scripture they don’t like.
In Old Testament studies, books are carved out based on countless reasons to be by different authors, written at later dates, and so on and so on… The gist of it all is that we don’t have to hold this or that piece of Scripture as authoritatively God’s word, but just a reflection of later redaction.
One example will suffice. A common argument is that the story of Genesis about creation is nothing more than a parable or idealized story, and not a true reflection of how the world really began.
Those who argue these points often make powerful, long-winded, and fancy arguments. But one problem exists with all of them. That problem is that no matter the final reason, determining that some portion of God’s word is somehow less authoritative, inaccurate, or flat out wrong undermines all of it. The one who argues in this way sets himself over the Word as its judge able to determine what thousands of believers before him were not and able to negate the very Scriptures themselves. And once in this position, what is to stop this person from declaring other parts of Scripture un-authoritative. Or for that matter, why not negate the whole thing? After all, isn’t that what they want in the end, to have their word taken as authoritative while discrediting God’s?
Iraneaus
Start the new year with a short reading I wrote some time ago on one of the early church fathers – Iraneaus.
Nineveh: The Rest of the Story
For this Advent season, I have been reading through the Minor Prophets. The book of Nahum tells the rest of the story of Jonah. Jonah was called by God to preach to the pagan, Gentile city of Nineveh. After his disobedience, he does, and the city repents, turning to God. Jonah sinfully is upset with God that he would show mercy on this pagan city when they repent. Ironically, at the end of Jonah, Nineveh has repented, and Jonah in rebellion to God. However, it did not stay this way. The city of Nineveh soon turned back to their sinful ways. Nahum prophecies Nineveh’s judgment and destruction. The Assyrian Empire will fall.
There are two powerful contrasts that Nahum makes:
- God is avenging, wrathful, powerful, and creation itself trembles before Him (1:2-6), YET He is good and a refuge for those who seek Him (v. 7). When all the world seems to be coming apart, God is a shelter to those who seek refuge in Him.
- The bad news of destruction and the end of the Assyrian Empire is foretold (1:12-14), YET it is Good News that will come that God is faithful in judging sin and restoring His people (1:15, 2:2). Judgement of sin is the worst of news for those who stand in sin, but for those who have come to Christ for their righteousness, judgment of sin is the Good News that God will set all things right and one day do away with sin entirely.
Discussion Questions: Matthew 2:1-16
Introduction
What is one of the best gifts you have received?
Come to Worship – Matthew 2:1-2
What drew the Wise men to come and visit Jesus? What difficulties do you think they may have encountered on the way?
What draws people to Jesus today? What difficulties do people face as they are drawn to Him?
Seeking to Destroy – Matthew 2:3-8; 16
Why do you think the Wise men, who were not Jews, were seeking Jesus, yet Herod, who claimed to be “king of the Jews” himself, did not even know where He would be born?
What motives did Herod have in seeking Jesus? What are some different motives people have for seeking Jesus?
What does verse 16 reveal about Herod’s statement about wanting to worship Jesus? Do people today put on a front of “religion” or “devotion to Christ” in order to make themselves seem better to others?
What is Herod’s fear? How does his fear compare to the fear some people have today that cause them to reject Jesus?
Worshipping and Giving – Matthew 2:9-12
What is worship? What is the impact of worship on the worshipper?
How are acts of service and giving of one’s resources acts of worship?
Special Application
What dangers are there in having an attitude that says “I found Jesus years ago, what more is there?”
What implications does Jesus’ lordship have on your life? The life of your unbelieving friend or neighbor?
Can giving of your time to care for another be an act of worship?
