Article: Why I Have Not Left The Independent Baptist Movement.

[Binaca Chugger]

[quote author=Binaca Chugger]I have no problem with asserting that Paul sought human council or advice.  I do have a problem with asserting that the council had the power to dictate what an evangelist / church planter / church is allowed to do.

I'll use my normal argument for people who stress "independent" entirely too much.

How many books are in your New Testament? Why?
[/quote]

The independent churches were receiving edification and admonition.  I fail to see your point.

 

[christundivided]

[quote author=christundivided]The vast majority of American churches have always been "congregational" assemblies.

No.

Yes.

http://undergod.procon.org/view.background-resource.php?resourceID=87

Catholic churches alone have nearly twice the membership of all flavors of Baptist (the largest congregational group). Methodist, Lutheran, and Presbyterian flavors come in at ranks 3-5 (with a total that is nearly that of all Baptists). This doesn't even account for the Anglican/Episcopalian churches, variety of Orthodox churches, or other varieties such as SDAs, Nazarenes, or the SA.
[/quote]

I wasn't going by #'s of "membership".

 

[christundivided]

[quote author=Binaca Chugger]From whence does Congregationalism hail?

Likely the separatists within the Puritan movement in 17th-ish century England. It came over to America on the Mayflower.

Exactly.  Which means they are not Baptist.  There is some difference in doctrine and practice.  While governance and many teachings may be similar, I am a Baptist. 

I was confounded for quite a while when I learned that Billy Sunday was a congregationalist.  This was one of those moments when I realized that just because you are not exactly like me does not mean you are bad (Eye opening for a FBCH kid).

I didn't say they were Baptist. I said they were congregationalists.

Right.  The congregationalists were a split of the Puritan movement, seeking to return to a pure religion they abandoned the church of England to start over rather than reform.  The Pilgrims were not Baptist.  I was using your response to answer the previous post about how I sounded congregationalist.  I am not congregationalist.  While governance and many teaching may appear similar, I am a Baptist.
[/quote]

What is distinctive about being "Baptist"?

Contrary to popular belief "Baptist" haven't been around for thousands of years and post date Protestants.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Binaca Chugger]I have no problem with asserting that Paul sought human council or advice.  I do have a problem with asserting that the council had the power to dictate what an evangelist / church planter / church is allowed to do.

I'll use my normal argument for people who stress "independent" entirely too much.

How many books are in your New Testament? Why?

The independent churches were receiving edification and admonition.  I fail to see your point.
[/quote]

What?

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=christundivided]The vast majority of American churches have always been "congregational" assemblies.

No.

Yes.

http://undergod.procon.org/view.background-resource.php?resourceID=87

Catholic churches alone have nearly twice the membership of all flavors of Baptist (the largest congregational group). Methodist, Lutheran, and Presbyterian flavors come in at ranks 3-5 (with a total that is nearly that of all Baptists). This doesn't even account for the Anglican/Episcopalian churches, variety of Orthodox churches, or other varieties such as SDAs, Nazarenes, or the SA.

I wasn't going by #'s of "membership".[/quote]

Did you have some other way of counting the size of a group of people other than counting the people in the group?

 

[Mathew Ward]

...and yet rejected the notion that the Jerusalem conference had control over the growth of the Gospel.

I do not believe a church or outside body should never admonish or encourage another church.  I believe a church or outside body should never mandate or manipulate another church.

This portion of Acts would go against the bolded part above.

Acts 15:19-29  Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren: And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia: Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment: It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth. For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

 

[christundivided]

[quote author=christundivided]The vast majority of American churches have always been "congregational" assemblies.

No.

Yes.

http://undergod.procon.org/view.background-resource.php?resourceID=87

Catholic churches alone have nearly twice the membership of all flavors of Baptist (the largest congregational group). Methodist, Lutheran, and Presbyterian flavors come in at ranks 3-5 (with a total that is nearly that of all Baptists). This doesn't even account for the Anglican/Episcopalian churches, variety of Orthodox churches, or other varieties such as SDAs, Nazarenes, or the SA.

I wasn't going by #'s of "membership".

Did you have some other way of counting the size of a group of people other than counting the people in the group?
[/quote]

How about # of churches? This exactly what I meant by saying "congregations" or assembles". Not the total # of members. Get it? You really have a hard time reading don't you? If I had meant total # of members, I would have said... Total # of members. You're still a dishonest hack that tries his best to distort what anyone says. Crawl back into your little deep dark hole.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=christundivided]The vast majority of American churches have always been "congregational" assemblies.

No.

Yes.

http://undergod.procon.org/view.background-resource.php?resourceID=87

Catholic churches alone have nearly twice the membership of all flavors of Baptist (the largest congregational group). Methodist, Lutheran, and Presbyterian flavors come in at ranks 3-5 (with a total that is nearly that of all Baptists). This doesn't even account for the Anglican/Episcopalian churches, variety of Orthodox churches, or other varieties such as SDAs, Nazarenes, or the SA.

I wasn't going by #'s of "membership".

Did you have some other way of counting the size of a group of people other than counting the people in the group?

How about # of churches? This exactly what I meant by saying "congregations" or assembles". Not the total # of members. Get it? You really have a hard time reading don't you? If I had meant total # of members, I would have said... Total # of members. You're still a dishonest hack that tries his best to distort what anyone says. Crawl back into your little deep dark hole.[/quote]

Still no.

http://www.rcms2010.org/index.php

The UMC and Catholic church totals equal the SBC. Lutherans, Presbyterians, and Episcopalians/Anglicans are still ranked very high.

 

[bgwilkinson]

In the New Testament, Jesus' church didn't have a pastor other than Christ Himself. Jesus' church met pretty much daily. Jesus' church members "had all things common". Jesus' church didn't pull in tithes to support the organizational structure. Jesus' church did not meet regularly in a sanctuary. Jesus' church used the function of deacons to serve the elderly, poor and orphans and not to make organizational decisions concerning the congregation.

Yep. The Baptist church in America today is right up there with the church Jesus built in the New Testament.

:

I would also contend that the Baptist church of today uses a different canon than did those of the New Testament church.

I believe they used the LXX OT scriptures.

 

[Binaca Chugger]

...and yet rejected the notion that the Jerusalem conference had control over the growth of the Gospel.

I do not believe a church or outside body should never admonish or encourage another church.  I believe a church or outside body should never mandate or manipulate another church.

This portion of Acts would go against the bolded part above.

Acts 15:19-29  Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren: And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia: Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment: It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth. For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

Read the earlier post - this was already addressed.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

[quote author=christundivided]The vast majority of American churches have always been "congregational" assemblies.

No.

Yes.

http://undergod.procon.org/view.background-resource.php?resourceID=87

Catholic churches alone have nearly twice the membership of all flavors of Baptist (the largest congregational group). Methodist, Lutheran, and Presbyterian flavors come in at ranks 3-5 (with a total that is nearly that of all Baptists). This doesn't even account for the Anglican/Episcopalian churches, variety of Orthodox churches, or other varieties such as SDAs, Nazarenes, or the SA.

I wasn't going by #'s of "membership".

Did you have some other way of counting the size of a group of people other than counting the people in the group?

How about # of churches? This exactly what I meant by saying "congregations" or assembles". Not the total # of members. Get it? You really have a hard time reading don't you? If I had meant total # of members, I would have said... Total # of members. You're still a dishonest hack that tries his best to distort what anyone says. Crawl back into your little deep dark hole.

Still no.

http://www.rcms2010.org/index.php

The UMC and Catholic church totals equal the SBC. Lutherans, Presbyterians, and Episcopalians/Anglicans are still ranked very high.
[/quote]

One of us is misreading the numbers.
The UMC has nowhere near the number of congregation or membership of the SBC.....

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

[quote author=Binaca Chugger]Yes.  Independent local church governance has been around since the church began. 

No...Paul (and John) pretty clearly stuck his nose in a variety of churches where he was not a member
[/quote]

They were apostles....and had unique position and authority.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Being an SBC is the best of both worlds....we joined in the fall and had some dissension and discord over it. But since the vote to join, even those who voted no have admitted that if there has been any change, it has been for the better.

We still operate our church without any outside influence or interference.
We help support 50000 plus foreign missionaries, the third largest disaster relief organization in North America and have access to help, expertise, instruction and information that we had no idea even existed when we were IFB.

And, we still maintain our missions program exactly as we did when we were IFB....the IFB missionaries still accept our money. 

We should have joined much sooner.....

 

[rsc2a]

How about # of churches? This exactly what I meant by saying "congregations" or assembles". Not the total # of members. Get it? You really have a hard time reading don't you? If I had meant total # of members, I would have said... Total # of members. You're still a dishonest hack that tries his best to distort what anyone says. Crawl back into your little deep dark hole.

Still no.

http://www.rcms2010.org/index.php

The UMC and Catholic church totals equal the SBC. Lutherans, Presbyterians, and Episcopalians/Anglicans are still ranked very high.

One of us is misreading the numbers.
The UMC has nowhere near the number of congregation or membership of the SBC.....

RCC + UMC ~ SBC

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Binaca Chugger]Yes.  Independent local church governance has been around since the church began. 

No...Paul (and John) pretty clearly stuck his nose in a variety of churches where he was not a member

They were apostles....and had unique position and authority.[/quote]

True, but they were also "since the church began" and clearly didn't believe that all congregations should be autonomous.

 

[Fresh Air]

Sure they were Baptist. Don't get confused by the "Congregational Church". The idea of "independent" local "governance" has been around a long time. In America, it began or was greatly influenced by Puritans. Yet, don't consider them the source of the ideals of "independence".

No, they weren't. If they were they wouldn't have exiled Roger Williams, et al, for preaching re-baptism, amongst other things. I do agree that Congregationalists were, by and large, independents, but that doesn't make them Baptists.

 

[Fresh Air]

[quote author=christundivided]The vast majority of American churches have always been "congregational" assemblies.

No.
[/quote]

Why CU would contend this is seriously puzzling. Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, and Catholics that made up the vast majority of American churches were not in any way autonomous. Aren't now either.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

[quote author=Binaca Chugger]Yes.  Independent local church governance has been around since the church began. 

No...Paul (and John) pretty clearly stuck his nose in a variety of churches where he was not a member

They were apostles....and had unique position and authority.

True, but they were also "since the church began" and clearly didn't believe that all congregations should be autonomous.
[/quote]

I don't think you can prove that position in scripture.
The Apostolic Period was unique and church polity cannot operate today the way it did in that period. There was a power void left when the last apostle died....and I see NO Biblical proof or foundation for apostolic succession.

Now, unlike some here, that's not a mountain on which I wish to die, but I believe in autonomous local churches.

 

[Fresh Air]

No...Paul (and John) pretty clearly stuck his nose in a variety of churches where he was not a member

...and they had an apostolic authority that died with them that nobody has had since. Well, unless you count a whole bunch of churches on Cicero Ave on the west side of Chicago pastored by apostle so-and-so.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Binaca Chugger]Yes.  Independent local church governance has been around since the church began. 

No...Paul (and John) pretty clearly stuck his nose in a variety of churches where he was not a member

They were apostles....and had unique position and authority.

True, but they were also "since the church began" and clearly didn't believe that all congregations should be autonomous.

I don't think you can prove that position in scripture.[/quote]

I can't prove that the Apostles were there "since the church began" or I can't prove that the Apostles stuck their noses in various congregations' business?

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]The Apostolic Period was unique and church polity cannot operate today the way it did in that period. There was a power void left when the last apostle died....and I see NO Biblical proof or foundation for apostolic succession.[/quote]

This may be the case, but it's clearly evident that, for at least a time, there was no "autonomous church".

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]Now, unlike some here, that's not a mountain on which I wish to die, but I believe in autonomous local churches.[/quote]

I don't think it's that black and white. Churches should be self-governing, but they also have a responsibility to other churches. Furthermore, this is a certain amount of unity in doctrine and practice that must be held to if "Christian" is to mean anything at all. As I stated, it's fundamentally impossible to be completely "independent" and be a Christian congregation.

(This doesn't even touch on the screwed up (i.e. unScriptural) worldview that elevates individualism to this level. (See other thread.))