The Benefits of
Cooperation between General and Particular Baptists
General and Particular Baptists
working together in a mutually beneficial relationship allows Baptists to
accomplish more together than they could apart. So then, Southern Baptists, dissimilar
in soteriology, can accomplish more united than they can divided. The reason
for this is at least twofold.
First, Baptists united have more
resources and more focus than they would if they were divided. The Southern
Baptist Convention (SBC) is the largest evangelical denomination in the United
States.[1]
The SBC is comprised of over 16 million members who worship in more than 42,000
churches in the United States.[2]
On the national level, Southern Baptists operate the largest publishing house
in the world, LifeWay Christian Resources, in Nashville.[3]
LifeWay Christian Resources owns and operates the largest chain of religious
bookstores in the nation.[4]
Southern Baptists also operate two mission boards, the International Mission
Board (IMB) for missions abroad and the North American Mission Board (NAMB) for
missions in North America.[5]
If this was not enough, the SBC operates six seminaries that are located across
the country serving over 13,400 students.[6] The
SBC funds these entities through its Cooperative Program (CP) that was
established in 1925. The Cooperative Program allows these more than 42,000
churches to partner together as a missions team for the purpose of fulfilling
the Great Commission.[7]
Second, Baptists working together in a
mutually beneficial relationship also have the benefit of giving a united
witness to the world that Baptists belong to Christ. This fulfills the words of Christ. He said, “A
new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved
you, that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are my
disciples, if you have love for one another.”[8]
Southern Baptists, dissimilar in
soteriology, also need each other to counteract unbiblical extremes into which
either group is capable of degenerating. The history of General and Particular
Baptists shows that they are both susceptible to doctrinal extremes that
compromise both their ability and enthusiasm for evangelism and missions. However,
with Baptists uniting in a mutual relationship for missions, the necessity for
theological dialogue has arisen. As Bush and Nettles stated, “Differences
between fellow Baptists call forth persuasive and logical arguments based on
careful exegesis, while at the same time the fact that one’s opponent is also a
Baptist serves to support if not demand Christian attitudes and Christian
brotherhood.”[9]
These discussions should help both sides maintain balance in their respective soteriological
frameworks as long as destructive competition and monopolism are eliminated for
the sake of symbiosis.
While not all discussions between
General and Particular Baptists in the Southern Baptist Convention are for the
sake of symbiosis, some are. There are attempts to learn from each other and to
encourage the good aspects of the other’s commitment to missions and service to
the Lord. A few noteworthy examples should be mentioned.
First, the discussion about Calvinism at
The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary between Frank Page, president of the
Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention, and Albert Mohler,
president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary should be mentioned.[10] Page and Mohler are on opposite ends of the
soteriological spectrum. Page formed an advisory team to craft a plan to bring
together parties on both sides of the Calvinism debate. He said, “My goal is to
develop a strategy whereby people of various theological persuasions can purposely
work together in missions and evangelism.”[11]
The discussion between the two was congenial and edifying.
Next, the Kentucky Baptist Convention’s
conference, “Calvinism: Concerned, Confused, or Curious” should be mentioned. On
August 4, 2012, a panel of four Southern Baptist leaders, Frank Page, president
of the Southern Baptist Convention's Executive Committee and Steve Lemke, director
of the Baptist Center for Theology and Ministry at New Orleans Baptist
Theological Seminary (General Baptists); David Dockery, president of Union
University and Hershael York, associate dean of the school of theology at
Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky (Particular
Baptists), “ talked honestly about the division within the convention over
the issue of Calvinism while offering suggestions and maintaining that Southern
Baptists should and can unite, despite differences.”[12]
These kinds of discussions are the kinds necessary in maintaining a symbiotic
relationship among Southern Baptists.
Conclusion
The history of Baptists in general,
and Southern Baptists in particular, shows that Baptists can accomplish more
united than they can divided and that they need each other to counteract
unbiblical extremes into which either group is capable of degenerating. The
harmful effects of either competition or monopolism should be avoided by
Southern Baptists. Instead, Southern Baptists should apply the principle of
symbiosis.
There is great value to Southern Baptists
in knowing their heritage especially in the face of current controversies in
the SBC. As Dockery said, "There is not just one theological stream from
one theological tradition in Baptist life. There are several. . . . Baptists,
as a whole, in the 21st century, don't know their heritage."[13] Included
in that heritage are two mechanisms that allow the two theological streams of
Southern Baptists to work together: (1) the Cooperative Program and (2) The
Baptist Faith and Message 2000. York said, “There is nothing in the Baptist
Faith & Message 2000 that makes me or other Calvinists unable to believe
what we believe.”[14]
Southern Baptists would do well to
remember that their history attests to the truth that they are a peculiar people made up of two groups dissimilar in soteriology but who united in a mutually beneficial
relationship for the sake of missions. After all, this just may be a match made in heaven.
[1] Dockery, Consensus and
Renewal, 2.
[2] Sbcnet, “About Us – Meet
Southern Baptists,” http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/default.asp (accessed April 13,
2011).
[3] Sbcnet, “About Us – LifeWay
Christian Resources,” http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/lifeway.asp (accessed April
13, 2011).
[4] Fisher Humphreys, The Way We
Were: How Southern Baptist Theology has Changed and What it Means to Us All,
(New York: McCracken Press, 1994), vii.
[5] Sbcnet, “About Us –
International Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention,”
http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/IMB.asp (accessed April 13, 2011); Sbcnet, “About Us
– North American Mission Board,” http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/namb.asp (accessed
April 13, 2011).
[6] Sbcnet, “About Us – Southern
Baptist Seminaries,” http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/sem.asp (accessed April 13,
2011).
[7] Sbcnet, “About Us – CP Missions
– The Cooperative Program of the Southern Baptist Convention,”
http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/cpmissions.asp
(accessed April 13, 2011).
[8] John 13:34-35, NASB.
[9] Bush and Nettles, Baptists and the Bible, 18.
[10] Joshua Breland, “Video: Albert
Mohler and Frank Page Discuss Current SBC Issues at SBTS Chapel,” in “Blog: The
Daily Bleat: A Southern Baptist Theological Perspective” (August 21, 2012)
http://thedailybleat.com/video-albert-mohler-and-frank-page-discuss-current-sbc-issues-at-sbts-chapel/#more-4223
(accessed August 21, 2012).
[11]
Michael Foust, “Page Names
Advisory Team on Calvinism,” in Baptist
Press, (August 15, 2012), http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=38507
(Accessed September 9, 2012).
[12] Foust,
http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=38429 (accessed September 18, 2012).
[13] Foust,
http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=38429 (accessed September 18, 2012).
[14] Foust,
http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=38429 (accessed September 18, 2012).
No comments:
Post a Comment