Where in the world do we get the idea that associations need to be “exciting?” What a dumb question.
A better question would be usefulness to the local church, not just in one area (although most felt it useful to the church to fulfill the Great Commission). Interstingly:
73.8 percent of church leaders think that their local Baptist association is a good kingdom investment of their church’s financial resources
That is the real statistic.
I have the same disappointment with Barna and Pew surveys. I wish they would slow down and take some time to formulate the RIGHT QUESTIONS.
I was reached through an IFCA Non-denom. Bible church and served as pastor of Non-IFCA Non-denom Bible churches (to this day). although I personally was in the IFCA for a while. If we don’t want associations meddling in our local churches, then obviously their influence is going to be indirect. Why would we expect otherwise? Associations provide opportunities for ministers to meet and encourage one another, and for joint efforts for those who wish to commit to them.
But those of us who are not part of denominations are anxious to be blessed by the work done by denominations! We like some Lifeway Books or Regular Baptist Press materials. We benefit from their seminaries and often learn from their successes and failures. So I am far from anti-denomination, but the local church is always where the action is at.
Really, a local association, or a national one, ought to function a lot like ISO certification; it informs those who might visit/patronize an institution what they are likely to find within. GARBC means that the five fundamentals and Baptist distinctives are protected, at least in theory. SBC means that basic conservative evangelical theology is protected, but not necessarily to the extent of the GARBC. ABC? Take another step past the SBC and make it fairly variable in its result. If we value our theology, we can value our brands.
Discussion
NewFrom the looks of the Article
it seems to be about SBC related associations. Nothing wrong with that, just sying.
Hoping to shed more light than heat..
NewWrong Question
Where in the world do we get the idea that associations need to be “exciting?” What a dumb question.
A better question would be usefulness to the local church, not just in one area (although most felt it useful to the church to fulfill the Great Commission). Interstingly:
That is the real statistic.
I have the same disappointment with Barna and Pew surveys. I wish they would slow down and take some time to formulate the RIGHT QUESTIONS.
I was reached through an IFCA Non-denom. Bible church and served as pastor of Non-IFCA Non-denom Bible churches (to this day). although I personally was in the IFCA for a while. If we don’t want associations meddling in our local churches, then obviously their influence is going to be indirect. Why would we expect otherwise? Associations provide opportunities for ministers to meet and encourage one another, and for joint efforts for those who wish to commit to them.
But those of us who are not part of denominations are anxious to be blessed by the work done by denominations! We like some Lifeway Books or Regular Baptist Press materials. We benefit from their seminaries and often learn from their successes and failures. So I am far from anti-denomination, but the local church is always where the action is at.
"The Midrash Detective"
NewISO
Really, a local association, or a national one, ought to function a lot like ISO certification; it informs those who might visit/patronize an institution what they are likely to find within. GARBC means that the five fundamentals and Baptist distinctives are protected, at least in theory. SBC means that basic conservative evangelical theology is protected, but not necessarily to the extent of the GARBC. ABC? Take another step past the SBC and make it fairly variable in its result. If we value our theology, we can value our brands.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.