Two Rivers Drops "Baptist" from name!!

[Gene Scarborough]

[Big Daddy Weaver]

Adrian Rogers was in Memphis. Two Rivers is in Nashville. This is Jerry Sutton's old church not Rogers.

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: Yep! Two Rivers Baptist or now The Fellowship at Two Rivers. is just across the interstate from Opry land.

The church where Adrian was pastor for 32 years until his death is still Bellview. See: http://www.bellevue.org/pages/page.asp?page_id=67095

[Sandy]

Belleview in Memphis, formerly pastored by Adrian Rogers, hasn't been without its own turmoil in the wake of his retirement, death, and the selection of a successor. Things seem to have calmed down there, though the membership losses were significant. I expect this to be the pattern that many mega churches will see as many of this first generation of pastors is dying off, and a lot of those who are still around are past 70. Most of the big SBC megas haven't had smooth, successful pastoral transitions, including Belleview, Two Rivers, FBC Jacksonville, and the original SBC mega, FBC Dallas.

Most of these churches are built around the personality, oratorical skills, presentation and leadership of their pastor, and groups of people who flock to him become a sort of inner circle of prominent, privileged members who get used to calling the shots. When the crown falls off the king's head, there's a scramble to catch it in order to place it on one's own head, or snatch up as many pieces of it as you can when it breaks. These large churches need to suck up monstrous amounts of cash to pay their salaries and provide lavish lifestyles for the top dawgs, so any interruption or interference with that is seen as a threat to be smashed, regardless of the cost. I'll probably be taken to task for saying this, but I think these disturbances and difficulties are God's way of shaking Christians loose from churches where their whole involvement involves "sitting and listening" and moves them to places where they have a chance to see that the Christian faith is more than just "attending" a theatrically coreographed performance on Sunday mornings.

[johnfariss]

I know I am hopelessly out of date, but this is what used to be referred to as the "charismatic pastor-centered church." (Note that "charismatic" is defined in terms of personal appeal, not theologically, BTW.) In such churches--which may have attendance of anywhere from a few hundred up to mega-church status--the personal appeal and attractiveness of the pastor are the "glue" that holds people in, just as they do in churches of from 100 to 200 in attendance. The difference is that these charismatic pastors have qualities which bond them to greater numbers of people. The problem is that everything is centered around the pastor. And when he leaves--whether to write books, get on a lucrative speaking circuit, go to an even bigger church/field with greater potential, or is called home to heaven--the "church" falls apart, since there was little or no infrastructure to begin with, other than the pastor and his personal charisma. We see churches and ministries of many sizes crippled (or at least reduced in effectiveness) when the charismatic pastor/leader leaves. I dare say even the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association began to suffer after Billy ceased to have the primary leadership role there, although cultural changes also played a significant part there and Billy's legacy and organizational skills kept it from being worse. I suspect that this way of understanding churches such as Bellview and Two Rivers is more productive than the mega-church label.

John

[William Thornton]

Both Bellevue and Two Rivers had, and Bellevue still has, anti-pastor blogs. In Bellevue's case, the succession didn't go well. TR seems to have a completely different type of pastor. The photo of the blue-jeaned, shirt-tailed brother was a surprise to me, though I don't know the church or their needs. I'm for anyone who preaches Jesus.

My friend Sandy would do well to discriminate between megapastors like AR and his successor, same for Jerry Vines and his. Is it the newer generation of megas who expect the high dollar salaries etc? The financial and other complaints against the successors to these men were not known to the two former SBC presidents.

[Dave Roberts]

Regardless of the underlying theology of extremely large churches, they grow centered around personalities of pastoral leaders, and they don't transition well to new leadership. That reaches all the way back to Spurgeon.

[Gene Scarborough]

Well, shut my mouth---I got the names mixed up, but it seems the mistake matters little!!! It was an easy confusion with the record of both churches. Outside of SC / NC / GA I have seen the characters at the Conventions and read about their great conferences on "how to be bigger." The bottom line is the wise observation above that all of them seem to have trouble finding a new king when the old one fades away.

Is this God's way of getting rid of Pharisees and ressurecting His Son after 3 days in the grave because He, too, called it "making the Temple into a den of thieves!"

What is even more strange for those of us who grew up being proud to be a Southern Baptist---those who stole it don't want to have the name attached now to that which was stolen.

Seems kind of like filing the seriel number off a beautiful gun stolen in the country and re-sold in the big city where average high rollers don't know a legitimate gun always has a clearly stamped seriel number!!! A fool will buy a fake most any day!!!!

[HowellS]

This is not surprising. I do not know much, if anything, about Two Rivers. But, their name change is part of a trend throughout the Southern Baptist Convention for some to distance themselves from the SBC. Now, some reading this might think that a good thing, but I do not. There was a discussion recently on SBCVoices regarding changing the name of the SBC. The argument goes that churches outside of the south are not "southern" and that there has to be a name in the 21st Century that better communicates who we are as Southern Baptists.

There are many problems with that, not least of which is most churches in the SBC do not have "Southern" in their name. There are a few notable exceptions (First Southern Baptist Church of Dell City, OK -- Tom Eliff's old church), but that is not common. The church I pastor in New Mexico, most certainly not Bible belt, is named "Bethel Baptist Church." No southern in the name. I think that many of this younger generation don't have a problem with the "Southern" part as much as they have a problem with the "Baptist" part. If the current leadership fully implements the GCR, then I fully expect that there will be a push within the next few years to officially change the name of the Convention. After all, the chairman of the GCR Task Force has already set the pace by changing the name of FBC Springdale to "Cross Church." And that smack in the middle of the Bible belt!

[Gene Scarborough]

Conservative Resurgence has worked so hard since the 60's to embarass us with public statements and rediculous and stupid claims about most everything. They have made "Southern Baptist" into a laughing stock to the point many moderate churchs took Southern Baptist off their sign and affiliated with CBF.

Now, even the CR leadership hates the name they so besmurched.

While we are at it, why don't we take "Christ" out of the description and in it's place do "Pharisee" or "Legalist" or "Hard Headed" or you name it!!!!!

Be sure to include something which clearly deletes "Autonomous" from the scene! Maybe it should be renamed "The Lockstep Conservative Republican Contention (no, it's not a mispelled word)." "We are united in making America into the religious state our Forefathers left in England and Europe" should be the first faith statement.

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: I have no problem with the ideal of making the U.S. into and other nations into Christian nations if it is done with honest preaching. After all my bible still has Jesus saying “Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.” The key is "teaching them"!

[Chris]

[Sandy]

[Chris]

[Tim Bonney]

[Gene Scarborough]

Gentlemen---

It seems to me that too many churches today are only after crowds. It is like politicians who do their best to say NOTHING so that there is nothing to blast them from any opposition. The result is a confused populice who really have no clue as to what the guy is about.

On the other hand, Jesus was pretty clear he was not a Pharisee nor other sect pretending to be God's chosen. He was just the Son of God. To accept that meant a step of faith on the part of the believer.

Step of faith---believer---what the heck is that these days when you must have a faith so full of facts there is NO ROOM for FAITH!!!

Forgive me for being a little critical of the current crowd of young adults looking for simple answers without questions when there is really none such!!!! Also forgive me for not looking for fancy cars in the parking lot indicating "success" is going to this church!!!!

[Sandy]

Well, Timothy, these days, having the brand name on the sign doesn't always tell you what you're going to find inside.

If you want to know what a church believes, and what it stands for, these days you visit their website. Most non-denominational churches put their statement of faith, worship style, and even their way of doing things right out there for you to see before you ever visit the church. And the fact that a church doesn't identify with a denomination, or doesn't indicate its denominational identity in the name of the church doesn't mean that it does not stand for anything. They're not going after people like you and I, who are more likely to look for a denominational church, they are going after the people who do visit around, and go from church to church to make their decision to join based on their experience and their observation, not on their prior knowledge. Actually, they are going after the unchurched, most of whom denomination means nothing, or it brings back bad memories.

Evangelical non-denominational churches have rapidly grown over the past twenty years, largely by attracting the younger families from mainline denominational congregations. Church leaders haven't failed to notice this, and have figured out that people are looking for a simple church experience, without all the tradition and baggage. They are looking for substance and spirituality, and they'll go where they find that. So the denominational churches are finding ways to get back into the market, so to speak.

[Gene Scarborough]

Folks---

Why don't we just call it what it is: "The church of the belly-button." A place where you hear what you want because you shopped for it!

Is it Louis Vitton or a knock off / Pierre Cherdon or a knock off / Crystal Cathedral or a knock off / Saddleback or a knock off???

Everyone is looking for the cheering crowds as Jesus rides in on a donkey. When the going gets tough, they suddenly disappear!! It has nothing to do with a great Easter Drama. It has everything to do with faithfulness even unto death!

Whatever happened to AUTHENTIC and simple servants to the needy and lost????

[Tim Bonney]

Sandy sometimes I think people are looking for substance and sometimes I think they are looking for fluff, just the oppositve of substance. I am a bit fearful of the consequences of us glibbly tossing out our denominational labels. I am afraid of short term gains and long term loss of substance, depth, and meaning for a feel good religion.

As part of my move to the UMC I am required to learn about UMC history, doctrine, and polity. IMHO that is a good thing. Each of our denominations have a history of a person or persons who caught a vision from God that shouldn't be forgotten just because some are too lazy are indifferent to learn about it.

[Sandy]

This is not necessarily the domain of the mega church. Two Rivers, I guess, qualifies as a mega, though it has apparently dwindled down pretty close to just being your typical large Baptist church. But not all of those who are dropping their denomination from their name are mega churches, nor do they function that way. And not all non-denominational churches are megachurches, either, far from it.

On the one hand, you have the mega churches that appeal to the church hoppers and shoppers, the "sit and listen" culture where the up front people do everything because the leaders don't trust anyone else to do it right. They go after the already churched, those who are looking to be served rather than serve, and who are looking for entertainment rather than ministry. But a lot of non-denominational churches, and some among those who are not identifying their denominational affiliation, have realized that the lost people they are going after are not likely to just get up on a Sunday morning and walk into a church, regardless of what kind it is. They aren't targeting those who are just looking to make a move from one church to another. To characterize them all in one category is unfair and inaccurate.

But regardless of the reason, if hordes of people, especially younger people, have left denominational churches, then at least part of the blame for that falls on the churches they left. Apparently, nothing much is going on there to keep their interest, and whatever they might be preaching and teaching, it isn't effective. The losses of mainline denominations is almost directly proportionate to the growth of non-denominational, evangelical churches, and very few of them are megachurches. Many of them are dedicated, spirit-filled churches that offer those who come their way a chance to be part of a vital and active body of Christ. Rather than submit to some nebulous denominational tradition or practice that has no basis in scripture, they hold a high view of the Bible and offer something more than the dead neo-orthodoxy of liberal mainlines. There are a few of these churches, not many, that are actually reaching lost people, preferring that way of growth to simply going after other church's membership because of what they are able to offer.

[Gene Scarborough]

Sandy---

Prior to 1979---or let's just say "the 80's" most people looked for a brand name which stood for something: A "Ford-tough" truck / Texas Steak House steak / etc. That was the reason a person would pay such a price for a franchise = the name stood for something!

I think with religion, many name brands have so embarassed themselves with a staunch position---be it "liberal Episcopalian / fundy Baptist / charasmitic Church of God / etc." that churches wishing to seek the status of mega got rid of the denomination surface tie. Only in churches do people become so stilted and embarassed do they just drop it off.

When Ford had a truck problem, they fixed it. When Baptists had an Autonomy problem, they just dropped the name!

Also, for example, Charles Stanley was not a Southern Baptist so it meant nothing really to him. He has an AmWay franchise called "Stanley's Steamers" and that means more because it gets him much money. So does his TV broadcast which minimizes Atlanta First Baptist Church. For one thing, it certainly does not give to missions like it used to = top 10 in the whole SBC!!!

With the danger involved in following Jesus after Easter, they hid in caves to worship. With the killing about to happen, Peter denied any association. Isn't it interesting how when the going gets tough---we test the waters and feel the direction of the wind before being authentic!!!

[Sandy]

I have absolutely no problem with a church that wants to shed a divisive denominational identity, which is nothing but a man made barrier that allows humans to hold on to their prejudices and preferences, and strive to be a genuine body of Christ, with beliefs and practices rooted in scripture rather than in tradition. I think God grieves over all of the fussing and fighting that goes on in his church over sets of "distinctives" and over holding on to traditions and "standing for something" rather than standing on the Word of God, empowered by the Spirit.

Denominationalism in Christianity is a result of human tinkering with something God planned out to be entirely different. It results from weighing human wisdom and tradition over the scriptures. It is the result of taking Christian faith and turning it into religion, by watering it down with layers of academia, gutting it of its spiritual dynamic and boiling it down to an empty ceremonial ritual, or to an hour of religious entertainment, depending on your worship style preference. Southern Baptists are equally as guilty of this divisiveness as anyone else is, in their own way.

Here's my paraphrase of Colossians 3:11:
"Here there is not Catholic and Protestant, Methodist and Baptist, Pentecostal and Evangelical, Ordained or Layperson, Asian or American, slave, free, but Christ is all and is in all."

May God hasten the day when the foolishness we have brought to his church is abandoned, and Christians see other Christians as family.

[Tim Bonney]

[Jim]

[Gene Scarborough]

Jim--

"Baptist" has 2 distinctions:

(1) Belief in the Bible as God's Word
(2) Cooperation in the Missions enterprise

If either of these is missing, then something is wrong. If AUTONOMY is missing, then you are no longer Baptist. This is the major problem with current SBC thinking! They want more conformity than we have had in the past. The CBF is majoring on allowing any participating churches to retain their local freedom and Autonomy.

Because of AUTONOMY in the past, churches from snake handling holy rollers to robed clergy and split chancel could cooperate over missions. The current death of mission in Baptistland is simply a by-product of kissing AUTONOMY goodbye!!!