Baptist churches that supports the LGBTQ movement

[1Timothy115]

41 minutes ago, BrotherTony said:

Yet, in EVERY IFB church I've been a member of, they are members of a state association of Baptist churches, or an association/fellowship that controls a college/institution of higher learning, or mission board. Not all followed the "recommendations"  of the fellowship or association. Why?? Because they were autonomous, not having a hierarchical nature or structure.  Your experience is just that, your experience, not necessarily right, but, then again, not necessarily wrong.

 

A fellowship is something entirely different than a convention. I''ve never been in an SBC church that wasn't required to support the missions of the SBC, they may have their own but they have to kick in for the SBC missions.

[TheGloryLand]

2 minutes ago, 1Timothy115 said:

A fellowship is something entirely different than a convention. I''ve never been in an SBC church that wasn't required to support the missions of the SBC, they may have their own but they have to kick in for the SBC missions.

McGuire, Lottie moon, and Annie Armstrong brings in Over 200 million combined yearly. They must be doing something right. SBC 

[HappyChristian]

Well, it would depend on the fellowship and what goes on. For instance, there is a group here in WA called the Washington Independent Baptist Fellowship.  Any independent Baptist church can become part of the fellowship, just by the pastor attending a meeting. However, there are no dues, nor any central place where tithe from the church is sent, nor missions money gathering, etc.  It is simply a fellowship of like-minded believers who get together to, well, fellowship and help each other if needed.  There is no way that anyone would be accurate to say that the churches involved are not independent, because they simply are.  

The church that started ours has hosted the monthly meeting of the WIBF, and that is how we came to know of them. And I guarantee that church is not part of any association/fellowship/whatever that would in any way supersede pastoral or congregational authority. Nor would my husband.

But there is an SBC church in the town where our church is...they were in need of a pastor. But the membership had nothing to do with it...they were waiting on the pastor the convention sent them. And, yes, I do know that's what happened.

Oh, and the WIBF has no college that "it" supports (it cannot, as there are no "central" funds), nor even one that "it" recommends. There is no mission board, and the only connection to missions is that when there is a missionary on deputation, sometimes the churches are made aware of the missionary if the church would like to have them in. But even that is spotty...and "the fellowship" makes no recommendations of any kind. Again, the biggest thing the fellowship does is make us aware of prayer requests. Not very controlling. LOL

 

[BrotherTony]

2 hours ago, Salyan said:

Wow… I’ve never been to an IFB that’s a member of an association. In my opinion, that means they are not truly independent. 

Wrong. A loose knit fellowship or association of churches are totally independent. It's just a group of like minded churches that fellowship together. None has authority over the other. 

[BrotherTony]

1 hour ago, HappyChristian said:

Well, it would depend on the fellowship and what goes on. For instance, there is a group here in WA called the Washington Independent Baptist Fellowship.  Any independent Baptist church can become part of the fellowship, just by the pastor attending a meeting. However, there are no dues, nor any central place where tithe from the church is sent, nor missions money gathering, etc.  It is simply a fellowship of like-minded believers who get together to, well, fellowship and help each other if needed.  There is no way that anyone would be accurate to say that the churches involved are not independent, because they simply are.  

The church that started ours has hosted the monthly meeting of the WIBF, and that is how we came to know of them. And I guarantee that church is not part of any association/fellowship/whatever that would in any way supersede pastoral or congregational authority. Nor would my husband.

But there is an SBC church in the town where our church is...they were in need of a pastor. But the membership had nothing to do with it...they were waiting on the pastor the convention sent them. And, yes, I do know that's what happened.

Oh, and the WIBF has no college that "it" supports (it cannot, as there are no "central" funds), nor even one that "it" recommends. There is no mission board, and the only connection to missions is that when there is a missionary on deputation, sometimes the churches are made aware of the missionary if the church would like to have them in. But even that is spotty...and "the fellowship" makes no recommendations of any kind. Again, the biggest thing the fellowship does is make us aware of prayer requests. Not very controlling. LOL

 

Yes, there are some churches that fellowship with the SBC that allow the local or state association to recommend and send a pastor in view of a call. Then, regrettably, there are some that still call themselves Southern Baptist that allow the pastor to name his successor, as is the case with Pastor Rick Warrn of the Purpose Drive Life fame. He just named his successor/s and they are a husband and wife team, which the churches of the SBC don't approve of. It's possible that the churches of the SBC will disfellowship this church as they've done many others for unbiblical stances. Still, it's up to each church to decide on whether or not they fellowship with these kinds of churches.

In the part of missions, having been raised IFB, I would rather those wishing to go to the missionfield come to the churches on deputation.  Using the cooperative, though, the SBC (not necessarily all of us who go to SBC churches) agree to pool resources to get the missionaries to the missionfield more quickly. The reasons I would rather have them come the churches is because of the intrusion of "reformed" theology into the SBC's institutions of higher learning. Calvinism is destroying many of them and turning some away from Christ. Secondly is that we don't really get a chance to examine these candidates forthe missionfield personally by "cooperating" in getting them to the missionfield  earlier. Then, they don't come to the churches when they're home for their sabbatical from the field. I've pointed out that this is a really questionable way to my pastor and the deacons of our church, and it'snot made me very a very popular person. So be it. I'm used to not being "popular."  

2 hours ago, Jerry said:

Exactly! They are not independent (by very definition of the word itself) if they are part of a convention, an association, or anything like that.

Of course, you're always welcome to your opinion.  Independent doesn't mean they can't fellowship in a fellowship or association. Do you fellowship with anyone that has similar ideas of your family? Same thing. They hold no sway over each other and aren't accountable to each other. 

[BrotherTony]

2 hours ago, 1Timothy115 said:

A fellowship is something entirely different than a convention. I''ve never been in an SBC church that wasn't required to support the missions of the SBC, they may have their own but they have to kick in for the SBC missions.

No, they don't. There are several in our local association who don't, and many churches that don't support the missions or cooperative at the present. 

[Salyan]

4 hours ago, BrotherTony said:

Wrong. A loose knit fellowship or association of churches are totally independent. It's just a group of like minded churches that fellowship together. None has authority over the other. 

I like how the guy who isn't actually independent has such a strong opinion on it. Maybe look to your own church before telling me how mine works. Associations do not equal independence.

[BrotherTony]

7 hours ago, Salyan said:

I like how the guy who isn't actually independent has such a strong opinion on it. Maybe look to your own church before telling me how mine works. Associations do not equal independence.

Yet, we see a lot of the same thing in the IFB churches...Sorry, your argument just doesn't cut it. And your contiued dogging me as you've done since I came to these forums shows your bias. You don't want to accept that each SBC church is autonomous, that's on you, not on me. I am independent, and so is our church. I've not said anything about your church. So, why the prevarication on your part?