Changes Within the Independent Baptist Movement

[Annie]

I don't or won't consider an adherence to Biblical authority and autonomy of the local church a movement. Ind. Baptist is a title for those who hold to Biblical authority and autonomy...it is a title for those who hold those tenants. He titled this "Changes W/I the Independent Baptist Movement." This school, et. al. are moving, I'll grant him that but Independent Baptists aren't going anywhere. So, people are moving away from being Independent Baptist and into emergent church/seeker sensitive church CCM outlets. Again, IBs or IFBs aren't moving. We can disagree nicely...right?

I almost forgot...where did denomination come from?

Oh, and....it is a war for him...he keeps coming back to battle it. It may be a good war for him but its war no less.

Seems a bit nitpicky...but I found a few definitions:
movement 3a. a group of people with a common ideology, esp a political or religious one 3b. the organized action of such a group (World English Dictionary online)
denomination: a religious group, usually including many local churches, often larger than a sect

It seems to me that either term could apply to Independent Baptists, despite the name "independent." As some have already noted, IB's are not completely independent; there is a "fellowship" between likeminded IB churches. IB's "depend" on others to fill their pulpits, educate and edify them at IB conferences, educate their kids (IB camps, colleges and universities), etc. People can trumpet, "We're independent!" all they want to, but it's not like they are on an island.

To those who are not IB, Independent Baptists do indeed look like a denomination...but they stop short of being an "official" denomination, since there is, as someone else noted, no headquarters and no organized hierarchy. And, yes, because this is true, local congregations are (in matters of church business) autonomous. Local church autonomy is a defining characteristic of the "group" or "movement" or "sect" of Independent Baptists. Maybe "network" would be the best way to describe the IB group. (?)

In sum, I would say that IB's have some of the qualities of a denomination, in that they share defining beliefs such as local church autonomy and separation, and could indeed be called "a religious group, usually including many local churches, often larger than a sect." These beliefs themselves (in autonomy and separation) are the only thing which prevents IB's from being a full-blown denomination. IB's have characteristics of a movement as well, in that they share a common ideology, and that they do have "organized action."
Are we straining at gnats? Edited April 29, 2011 by Annie

[Brother Rick]

Are we straining at gnats?

What?

Us?

Strain at gnats?

Never! Edited April 29, 2011 by Rick Schworer

[JerryNumbers]

Seems a bit nitpicky...but I found a few definitions:
movement 3a. a group of people with a common ideology, esp a political or religious one 3b. the organized action of such a group (World English Dictionary online)
denomination: a religious group, usually including many local churches, often larger than a sect

It seems to me that either term could apply to Independent Baptists, despite the name "independent." As some have already noted, IB's are not completely independent; there is a "fellowship" between likeminded IB churches. IB's "depend" on others to fill their pulpits, educate and edify them at IB conferences, educate their kids (IB camps, colleges and universities), etc. People can trumpet, "We're independent!" all they want to, but it's not like they are on an island.

To those who are not IB, Independent Baptists do indeed look like a denomination...but they stop short of being an "official" denomination, since there is, as someone else noted, no headquarters and no organized hierarchy. And, yes, because this is true, local congregations are (in matters of church business) autonomous. Local church autonomy is a defining characteristic of the "group" or "movement" or "sect" of Independent Baptists. Maybe "network" would be the best way to describe the IB group. (?)

In sum, I would say that IB's have some of the qualities of a denomination, in that they share defining beliefs such as local church autonomy and separation, and could indeed be called "a religious group, usually including many local churches, often larger than a sect." These beliefs themselves (in autonomy and separation) are the only thing which prevents IB's from being a full-blown denomination. IB's have characteristics of a movement as well, in that they share a common ideology, and that they do have "organized action."
Are we straining at gnats?

Annie, And there would be other groups of churches that would be set up in the same manner. Seems some, even some in these other church groups that claims they are the only group of churches that are autonomous, that are not a denomination, that have no earthy headquarter to answer to.

One that I can think of quickly is the churches of Christ.

Seems many there be that tries to give the definition of denomination a complete different definition just for them.

How good the words sound from the pulpit saying, "We are the only group of churches that are not a denominations." In most churches that phrase would get a big amen from many.

With what the meaning of denomination is, I would think one would do better not trying to prove they're a denomination but rather the original denomination.

[speerjp1]

Bro. Cloud is right.

As some have pointed out, there have always been weak churches that like to retain the label of IFB. The most irksome thing is that they refuse to simply leave the "movement" they so obviously despise.

I was in an IFB church for a short time where the pastor seemed to bash independent baptists at every turn. He used all the famous one liners: "We IFB's are the only ones that shoot our wounded", "We IFB's are the only ones that can't get along", "We IFB are the only ones that don't love the brethren", "We IFB's are the only ones that are late for church all the time", "We IFB's are the only ones that don't pray" and so on and so on. (Lies and misrepresentations, all.)

All the while, the preaching was lacking severely, the music was going downhill fast, sin was pouring into the church, and those trying to maintain some semblance of biblical separation were not welcome in that church.

From all he said, you would have to come to the conclusion that the worst people in the world were those who claimed to be a part of the IFB movement. I entreated him on the matter expressing my concern with the misrepresentations he was perpetuating for the sake of trying to motivate his flock, to which he responded that it was all true. If he had such a problem with IFB's then why did he insist on staying within the movement? Why not take it off the sign? Why not change the church name to Community Fellowship or some other ambiguous name type?

The same goes for the larger, more influential churches and schools: why not just move on? Why insist on trying to drag all of fundamentalism along with themselves away from, primarily, biblical separation?

It seems that most know that the day they leave fundamentalism, their religious influence will disappear or at least be so reduced that the current leadership would do anything than reduce their own sphere of influence. It seems to be a primary motivator in these situations. How much influence do they have? That equals power. It is power and influence described nowhere in the NT.

Edited May 1, 2011 by speerjp1

[John81]

I agree that's a major problem. Earlier on, many IFB churches that moved away from traditional IFB tenents would drop the IFB name; sometimes even the Baptist name. Today fewer seem to be doing that. Instead they want to remold the IFB into their new image.

A few years ago when looking into area IFB churches one seemed to stand out as being a good prospect. Upon checking on them I soon discovered that while they held to the name of IFB, they were not truly what I would call IFB. They had dropped the "outdated" KJB in favor of the NASB; had dropped most hymns in favor of "contemporary worship" music; had dropped their dress standards, and had dropped their standards of separation to the point where they were holding joint activities with virtually every church in that small city they could, including the local Catholic church!

[JerryNumbers]

Right on, because they think they're right by traveling down the new paths they're carving out.