Which Resolution do You Support?
We see that there are two resolutions saying some of the same thing. First, I have signed onto this resolution of regenerate church membership. I signed onto it for two reasons. Reason #1 is the fact of trying to accomplish what the resolution calls for. It seems that it will be hard to implement these changes in a large scale within the local church. Reason #2 the SBCT convention passed this resolution at their convention this past November and had a large contingent of supporters.
Over at the Founders Blog you will find another resolution that seems to say the same thing. Only difference it seems that the Founders resolution seems to focus more on the need for repentance than on anything else. Do not get me wrong I do believe there needs to be repentence and you will never hear me say there is no need for repentance. However, when it comes to cleaning up the church roles, I am not so sure that I had anything to do with it being in the shape it is in. Also, it has been so long since churches took seriously their church roles, that it will take some time of teaching on regenerate church membership before one’s heart will be tender toward the Holy Spirit’s conviction.
Either resolution will be well received. Tell me which one you would like or could you support both? Also, I encourage you to click to the links and give your voice of support for either or both.
I must say I am praying the Barber resolution is adopted as is with no amendment to its content.
I say this not because of anything poorly done on Tom’s behalf, but because I truly believe the Barber resolution has a greater likelihood of passing without conflict. It would be good for the press to report we were in harmony as a convention on this subject.
This is a very important resolution. It needs to pass without great debate as to differences between various positions. All Southern Baptist (if they are such) knows and understands the need, value and prominence of repentance. The Barber resolution adheres to a far greater understanding of historic Baptist ecclesiology which is certainly the biblical representation of ecclesiology. It is in the area of the doctrine of ecclesiology that much debate is afoot relating to our Baptist Identity of late in may arenas.
The Barber resolution is clear on our Baptist distinctiveness of ecclesiology. Therefore, it should be presented by the resolutions committee intact.
cb
Comment by cb scott — April 30, 2008 @ 2;47 pm
Ditto to what CB said!
This step will move us down the right road toward regaining the goals of the Fifth Century Initiative. We need to take that stand and NOW!
Sola Gratia!
Comment by Scott A Gordon — April 30, 2008 @ 3;04 pm
i, too, believe that bart’s will stand a better chance of passing. tim, like you, i have tried my best to have a regenerate membership in my church…for all the ones joining our church during my watch. so, what should i repent of?
also, i believe that many, many people in the sbc look at tom ascol as too extreme, and they will vote against his resolution for that reason for that reason alone. so, someone else’s would stand a better chance of passing.
david
Comment by volfan007 — April 30, 2008 @ 3;09 pm
I would support Bart’s as well.
Tim you look like Greg Barefoot. HA HA
Comment by jamie steele — April 30, 2008 @ 5;17 pm
I’m for Tom Ascol’s motion. I think the repentance thing needs to be addressed.
Also, I’m all for cleaning up the church roles, as well as the church rolls.
Yup, we need to do both.
Comment by Bob Cleveland — April 30, 2008 @ 6;59 pm
I would vote for either one.
But is wish there was only one. They are so similar it grieves me that they cannot be melded into one.
Comment by Dave Miller — May 1, 2008 @ 12;51 am
I’ve posted a side-by-side A Harmony Of The Resolutions on my blog and there are some real differences between the two.
Like you guys have been saying, Barber’s may get through without much discussion. But is that really a good thing?
I like Ascol’s call for repentance, specific information about our lack of regenerate membership, and his calls to denominational servants.
In terms the press (and all Southern Baptists) can understand, since they only really read the headline, I prefer “integrty” over “regenerate” in the title of the resolution as well.
Comment by Tony Kummer — May 1, 2008 @ 8;46 am
Both are strong. However, why should we support one or the other? In the vein, I have combined the two and I have it available for review here:
http://throughtheveil.wordpress.com/2008/05/01/sbc-membership-harmonized-resolution/
In His Word,
Scott
Comment by Scott — May 1, 2008 @ 9;11 am
Brother Tony,
Thanks for the link. Certainly does help when you view things side by side. One other thing is the original resolution that Brother Tom used in the Palm Association this past October. Compare that with the one Brother Tom is presenting to the SBC. I think you will find a stronger call for repentance in the SBC one than in the one he presented on the association level.
One reason I support Brother Bart’s resolution over Brother Tom’s is the proven track record of the resolutions. Brother Bart’s has been approved by a convention of SB in Texas. Brother Tom’s, without the repentance and statistical numbers, has been approved by an association of SB. If he would have included the same wording and statistics for the association as he does in the SBC, I believe he would not have found the success that he did.
You say; Like you guys have been saying, Barber’s may get through without much discussion. But is that really a good thing? One thing I am coming to learn about resolutions is there are two battles that need to be fought. One battle is getting it out of the committee. That is the first obstacle and the greatest to overcome. Why place something out there that you know has no chance to get out of committee? If one can re-word and craft various words differently in order to get it through the committee without compromising any bedrock doctrines, why such a spat?
Blessings,
Tim
Comment by Tim Rogers — May 1, 2008 @ 9;18 am
I am a little wary of “group repentance” resolutions. I thought the racism repentance thing was pretty obvious and needed. But I am not sure I really have anything to repent over. I have always tried to report numbers accurately.
If someone hasn’t, they need to repent. I am not sure the whole denomination needs to repent. Maybe we do. But I am not sure.
I still wish we would put both together, but if I had to choose, I would probably vote for Bart’s.
Comment by Dave Miller — May 1, 2008 @ 8;13 pm
Brother Dave,
You said; I have always tried to report numbers accurately. I have always questioned all of the numbers on the ACP. As a matter of fact, I tried to remove the names from the role of people that we could not find. It nearly came to the point that the next name to be removed from the role was going to be mine. :>
I have tried in every church I have been pastor to make certain the numbers on the ACP that were reported under my tenure were accurate.
I agree that the Barber/Yarnell resolution will be better for the SBC.
Blessings,
Tim
Comment by Tim Rogers — May 1, 2008 @ 8;20 pm
Hey Tim;
So nice to see you recently at the Small Church Conference and catch up if only briefly. I signed off on Bart’s resolution and think it is excellent. I agree with C.B. that it would likely be less divisive and deal with the topic at hand well. It also happened to be the first one I saw :-). Regenerate church membership is one of those issues we cannot, or maybe I should say we should not have, allowed to erode.
Blessings.
Comment by Alvin Reid — May 10, 2008 @ 6;27 am