“What authority, if any, does the SBC have and what purpose does it serve if not to exercise some sort of control over “like-minded” congregations?”
No authority. It doesn’t exist to supervise. Once in a great while, a church will publicly state it believes XYZ, and X will be something like homosexuality. The only discipline that exists is that the other churches can vote to refuse to seat their delegates to the national convention (a one/year event, I think - never gone myself and don’t know anyone who has).
I don’t know if any church has tried to continue to call themselves “SBC” if the SBC refuses to seat their delegates.
The SBC doesn’t exist to supervise doctrine or churches. It exists to pool money for missions and seminaries. The big split between the Northern and Southern Baptists, for example, occurred when the Northern Baptists won a vote to refuse to support any missionary who owned slaves.
“In 1844, Georgia Baptists asked the Home Mission Society to appoint a slaveholder to be a missionary in Georgia. After much discussion, the appointment was declined. A few months later, the Alabama Baptist Convention asked the Foreign Mission Society if they would appoint a slaveholder as a missionary. When the society said no, Virginia Baptists called for Baptists of the South to meet at Augusta, Georgia, in early May, 1845, for the purpose of consulting “on the best means of promoting the Foreign Mission cause, and other interests of the Baptist denomination in the South.”
http://www.baptisthistory.org/sbaptistbeginnings.htm
Not a very noble beginning! The SBC formally apologized and repented of its actions some years ago.
“Except that the NT churches were subject to apostolic authority. Most of Paul’s epistles are basically “meddling” in other churches’ business, telling them what to do, what not to do, and even giving them commandments of his own.”
Emphasis on “apostolic authority”. Since there are no apostles now, baptists figure following what they wrote is obeying the apostles.
“I think the Bible is very clear that not everyone can interpret, or prophesy, or teach, etc.”
Yes...but how to determine that? It doesn’t say someone needs to be approved by a central authority to preach. I think the Apostles knew - as Jesus taught them - that there would be weeds among the wheat in the visible church, and that many would go astray by following false teachers.
I can think of two models for preventing heresy. One is a hierarchical structure, with someone (or someones - bishops) who knows ‘the truth’ and prevents others from falling into heresy. The other is a written standard, if you will - to use scripture as the rule. Of course, scripture can be interpreted in many false ways - but if 100 churches try to follow scripture, then only a few will be overridden with weeds and fall under the control of false teachers. In this model, individual believers following the Holy Spirit are the guard against heresy.
From what I’ve seen, EVERY organization of man can and will go astray from what it was founded to do. Think of it as the laws of thermodynamics applied to civilization - everything in time tends to go to lower energy and greater randomness! Think of Harvard University, or the many fine conservative political organizations that drift liberal...or the Lutherans admitting homosexuals as ministers.
I think this reflects what John wrote in chapter 3: “8 The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”
Baptists look at denominations such as some Lutherans - or the Catholic Church - and conclude that a top-down hierarchy cannot be trusted. That is why a congregation can always fire it’s minister...in the end, it is the individual congregation that is responsible for following the truth.
I think this is closer to the early church than first glance appears. The great church councils determined doctrine by voting. They determined the canon by voting. And I think - MD can correct me - that the Catholic Church even now believes that sacred tradition must be tested and accepted by the laity. Those concepts that win wide approval and acceptance become part of the sacred traditions, while the pet theories of theologians may not.
At the personal level, kosta50 determines what kosta50 believes or follows. I can tell you my experience and why I follow XYZ, and you may or may not agree. If we are in substantial agreement, we can continue to work together. If not, then we would part ways. But only kosta50 can decide for himself what God is leading him to do, and on judgment day, kosta50 and I will both face God and give account for how we decided as individuals. In the New Testament, individuals are born again - not groups of people.
In January, the SBC church that I was a member of endorsed Calvinism. I pointed out to the pastor that when our disagreement is about the statement “Jesus loves you”, then we could no longer work together. So I left.
I recently joined another small SBC church. The pastor went to a Presbyterian seminary, but he agrees that God loves all of us and is grieved when we reject God. At our last business meeting, we voted to offer help to a non-SBC church that is struggling to stay afloat due to high rent. We have offered to let them use our building on Saturdays and pay just the increase in utilities and cleaning.
In a baptist ‘business model’, that makes sense. I don’t know how other approaches would view it, but I suspect a LOT of denominations/churches are realizing the enemy is Satan, not each other!
Great post.
In the end, we will each face our Maker and be judged. I hope and pray for Divine Mercy, we will all need it.
While we debate over Church History, Doctrine, Theology and Scripture, we shouldnt forget that we are Brothers and Sisters in Christ.
In this model, individual believers following the Holy Spirit are the guard against heresy
You know that is a catch-all phrase everyone uses to justify their position. Other than that, honestly it really says nothing of consequence.
and on judgment day, kosta50 and I will both face God and give account for how we decided as individuals
No doubt we will face something on the day we leave this life. The rest is an enigma.
At the personal level, kosta50 determines what kosta50 believes or follows
Yes, he does.
At our last business meeting, we voted to offer help to a non-SBC church that is struggling to stay afloat due to high rent. We have offered to let them use our building on Saturdays and pay just the increase in utilities and cleaning
That is the beauty of the Church I remember and certainly miss. My theological and other disagreements aside, I still think that we could create paradise on earth by imitating Christ. Christianity is the only religion I can think of, where a believer actually relates to his God on a personal, human level. Of course, much of that is the result of intense hellenization that took place in the formative stages of an apocalyptic Jewish sect.
Despite potential and actual anthropomorphism creeping into one's perception of God, it also makes God a lot closer, warmer, loving, comforting, understanding, and real to our senses.
Thanks, again, on your superb post.