The purpose of The Gospel Project Experience is to walk participants through the entire gospel story: incarnation, life of Christ, his death, resurrection, and second coming. I’ll be joined by David Nasser, Ed Stetzer, Trevin Wax, and Ken Whitten. Each of us will speak on one of those five gospel themes. Matt Boswell will lead worship for the event.

For those who are currently using or considering LifeWay’s Gospel Project* Bible study, there will be breakout sessions that help train and inform participants on how to get the most out of the Bible study. But even if you are not using the Gospel Project, this conference will be one you do not want to miss. The Experience will inspire you and your congregation to live out the implications of the gospel in your community.

*The Gospel Project is designed to unify the entire church under a single Christ-centered curriculum. If you’re not sure what it is, I’d invite you to check it out when you have a moment. You can even sample four of the lessons for free. 

In recent years, the rubbing point for many younger pastors has been how much to give to the “Cooperative Program” (CP), the joint “”pot” of SBC churches. The CP finances the Southern Baptist seminaries, the North American Mission Board, the International Mission Board, and other Southern Baptist mission efforts. The CP has enabled the SBC to do unparalleled things–for example, Southern Baptists have put more missionaries on the field (5000+, currently) and provided a more affordable, higher quality theological education than any other denomination. That’s what happens when 42,000+ churches contribute to a collective pot.

The problem (famously now) is that so much of what is given to the CP stays right here in the states, particularly in those states where there are already a great number of churches. The Baptist State Convention of NC keeps something like 65 cents of every dollar given to the CP. That means of every dollar given, only 35 cents makes it out of the state! From there it is further divided between seminaries and national agencies. A disturbingly small fraction makes it to the actual “mission field.” Can it really be considered a wise investment of the money that God, and our church, has entrusted to us to get to the field?

A couple of thoughts.

First,I don’t mind paying for some “bureaucracy.” “Bureaucracy” is just a fancy word for “organization,” and organization is necessary for effective cooperative networks. So, I have no problem paying for an organizing, administrating group.

Second, I want to be a team player. I really like the current leadership of our SBC, both on the national and state levels. The leaders of the IMB, NAMB, our seminaries and our state have an aggressive, and in my view, properly prioritized view of mission. They are about as good as you could ask for. And most really want to turn the system around so that more money gets to the field.

It’s just that the institutions are so big, and have suffered from mission drift for so long, that even with the right leaders now in place, it will be a long journey to get our dollar allocations back to the right levels. It’s not fair to say to an organization, “Hey, re-organize 70% of your budget and give most of it away!” and expect that they can do that overnight. For example, Milton Holifield, the executive director of our state convention, is a very mission-minded man, and committed to increasing the amount they get to the field by half a percent a year–which, when you think about it, is quite significant. In order to do that, they’ve had to make some painful cutbacks. And for that I am very grateful. I want to support their efforts, and believe they are headed in the right direction.

So I feel caught in a dilemma: I believe in the SBC and I want to support it, particularly the good work I see happening in it. But I also have to be a wise steward of the money entrusted by our church to me for the sake of missions. There are a lot of good things the NC Baptist State Convention is doing, but there are also a lot of churches already here in NC. We (the local churches) can and should be leading in mission efforts in our own state. It’s not that there is no role for a state convention in that–there are certainly some things we could use a central office to help us with–but we want to see most of our money, all but a fraction, going to places where there is no church.

So what then do we do? Here’s where we, the Summit Church, currently are: We plan to increase our giving to the CP in the years to come, especially as we see the Convention going in such positive directions. Admittedly, we have let our direct giving to the CP get too low. It’s not that we quit giving to missions–in fact, that’s at an all time high for us. Last year, we gave nearly 20% of our income away to missions, and 900K of that went to specifically Southern Baptist mission efforts and institutions (for example, the IMB, Southern Baptist church plants, the seminaries, etc)–but the amount we gave to the CP itself was too low.

While we are doing that, however, we will continue to give directly to institutions we are particularly excited about, bypassing some of the unnecessary bureaucracy. As the system gets leaner, our giving will increase.

I don’t think there’s any question that some of the institutions must cease to function, at least at their current levels. The flatness of the world and cultural shifts in our country have made some of the institutions less necessary today than they once were. Don’t expect those institutions to go away quietly–institutions have a tendency to fight for their survival. This is understandable. Most see themselves as pursuing genuinely good works, and for the most part, they are. The question is not, however, whether their works are good, but whether they are the best investment of kingdom dollars.

I hope the process of change can be expedited. I pray God raises up leaders who act courageously. We need there to be a future for the SBC. We need our seminaries to continue to provide excellent and affordable theological education. Otherwise, how will we stem the rising tide of secularism? We need educated, biblically-grounded and philosophically-aware pulpits. We need organization and support for church planting, both domestic and international. We need organizations to help us serve the poor and the orphan around the world.

Bottom line: At the Summit Church, we plan to increase our CP giving, and pray that the institutions of the SBC increase the speed of their restructuring as well.

P.S. On a related note, I thought Jack Graham’s and Mark Driscoll’s recent discussion about the value of networks/denominations was intriguing and helpful.

I’d say it has been characterized by mostly positive developments, and I’m not quite ready to give up on the whole thing yet. There is a value to like-minded believers coming together to do ministry, and the agencies of the SBC (the International Mission Board and North American Mission Board, etc) have been able to really advance the Gospel in some ways that individual churches or small networks of churches could not. Here are 4 things (2 today, 2 tomorrow) I think constitute the ‘need of the hour’ for Southern Baptists. I won’t fill them out much here, just mention them with a brief explanation.

• Southern Baptists are most definitely Gospel people, but Southern Baptist preaching has not been characterized, in recent years, by Gospel-centrality. By that I don’t mean that we don’t always present the Gospel toward the end our sermons and ask people to respond (because Southern Baptists are pretty good about that), but that our preaching rarely leaves people with a sense of wonder and awe at the beauty, magnificence, and grace of God demonstrated in the Gospel. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones said that the goal of a lecture is that people leave with information; the goal of a motivational speech is that they leave with action steps; the goal of a sermon is that people leave worshipping. So much of a Southern Baptist preaching could be characterized, in my opinion, as either “Bible lecture” or “relevant application.” In fact, the controversy in Southern Baptist preaching is about which of those 2 it should be—more doctrine lecture or more application-oriented. In contrast to both of these, our sermons should leave people not with information or things to do, but worshipping at the greatness of God shown us in the Gospel. It should give us a picture of God that leaves our mouths gaping in wonder, and from that vision people will change. That will mean our preaching will be less about what we need to go and do for God, and more about what He has done for us.
• We need to really define what the mission of God is, and the difference in that and the Great Commission (if there is a difference), and what the mission of the church is in light of both of those. God’s restoration of the earth encompasses more than just the saving of souls… God put us on the earth to glorify him–for example, by how we take care of creation and how we develop it through community-blessing business. Ultimately, the plan of God God is not to just snatch a bunch of people up to heaven in the rapture, He is also going to restore the earth and human endeavors on earth according to His glorious design. This means we must teach people who know Jesus how to live according to Kingdom principles, and not simply that God’s purposes for them are to come to church, be involved in church-based ministry, and give lots of money.

That said, the “mission of the church,” as Jesus spelled it out, was that we “be His witnesses” and go and preach the Gospel to all nations. He has not commissioned us to go and restore the earth. For example, you don’t see the Apostles lobbying for better race relations in Antioch. You see them preaching the Gospel, and then teaching the various races of believers to give a picture of Kingdom unity in how they get along in the church.

The mission of the church is Gospel proclamation. That said, any Gospel that does not lead its people to bless the communities in which they live by promoting righteousness (like racial equality) and does not lead its people to demonstrate the Gospel in the community by embodying justice and compassion is a truncated Gospel. The true Gospel produces people who take care of the orphan and widow and promote Kingdom principles in the place they live.

Southern Baptists have not embraced a good, robust philosophy of Gospel-centered ministry… a theology that keeps the preaching of the message central while pouring itself out for the orphan and widow.

2 more tomorrow…

Re: the SBC, there’s a lot to process, but here’s a few quick thoughts:

• The preaching at the Pastor’s Conference was some of the best we’ve ever had. The messages, for the most part, had a new depth in both Gospel and Scripture. This is a profoundly good development for the SBC… as we have often, despite our creed, not been a people who reflected Gospel-depth and Scripture-centrality in our preaching.
• The passing of the Great Commission Resurgence resolutions signals a new day in the SBC. Frankly, the majority of the 7 resolutions are only “symbolic”, but they are important symbols nonetheless. For example, even before the passing of these resolutions there was nothing stopping churches from giving to Southern Baptist causes rather than through the Cooperative Program. In other words, you could always give your money directly to the IMB or to a seminary and still have that counted as “Southern Baptist giving,” thus making you eligible for participation in Southern Baptist mission efforts and a recipient of the privileges of membership. But passing these resolutions is a symbolic statement that we recognize that local churches are going to exercise increasing discretion in how and where they give, and that Convention structures are going to have to adjust to that new reality. Please note that our passing of this resolution did not create  that kind of “independent” giving, we simply recognized it. The reality is that in the flat world we live in, churches are going to increasingly give to things they know about and can be more personally involved in. If the SBC refuses to recognize that, we will find that the amount of churches engaging in the Convention is going to rapidly decrease. We’ll spend every Convention hearing various institutions argue about  how to get larger pieces of a shrinking pie. Some (who were well-meaning) tried to argue that sanctioning this type of designated giving will destroy the SBC, which is built on cooperative, undesignated giving. Quite the contrary, I believe. Not sanctioning this type of giving will destroy it. As I noted, this type of giving is the new reality, and will only increase in the days to come. Thus, if you draw a line that pushes churches that give this way out, then a lot of them are just going to leave. So, if you’re going to draw a line, draw one that brings these churches in, not pushes them out. Embrace the future, don’t guard the past. And the argument that it is morally wrong for churches to designate where there gifts go in the Convention because no pastor would want his members designating where their offering goes is not a good one for one simple reason: the SBC is not a church. The local church is a body of people that covenant together and submit to one another. That is not true of the Convention. The local church is sovereign in the New Testament (under Scripture and Jesus), not the Convention. In other words, we as local churches don’t “submit” to the SBC, we utilize the structures of the SBC to more effectively accomplish our mission. Thus, we have a right (even a responsibility) to carefully evaluate where our missions money will get the greatest return. We, as a local church, want to give to the overall structure of the SBC because we do love and trust our leaders (i.e., giving through the Cooperative Program), but we also want to give to special things God has laid particularly on our hearts.
• This “new movement” is substantiated by the election of Vance Pitmann as Pastor’s Conference President and Bryant Wright as Southern Baptist Convention president. Both Vance and Bryant are not your typical “Conventionites.” While both exhibit classic, orthodox “Southern Baptist values,” such as zeal for mission and love for the Gospel, both are also innovative and independent thinkers.  They are the kind of men I believe that most younger pastors will be happy to follow.
• One of my favorite moments was when Summit Church planter @JoshShank rapped (literally, a rap) a resolution calling on the SBC to quit hatin’ on other like-minded movements, like Acts 29, who differ with some of us on minor things but agree with us on major things. It was a hoot.  May our movement be characterized by love for the Gospel and charity toward all, especially those who love the Gospel like we do.

All in all, I was very encouraged this year. God blessed us and answered our faith… and I think good days are ahead.

The SBC is built on the principle that churches can do more together than they can alone. When it comes to things like international church planting and theological education, joining together with other like-minded churches is much more effective than flying solo…  And so, for that reason, our church will remain in this network, and because of the positive momentum in Orlando, we are excited about the days ahead. It’s a great organization to accomplish overseas church planting through. Currently, we have about 65 of our members supported through the IMB, a force that would cost us millions if we had to do it alone. This network has also enabled us to have a number of our students getting a world-class education in an accredited seminary (like SEBTS in Wake Forest) at a greatly reduced cost. We are grateful and excited about the days ahead.

I have chosen, and our church has chosen, to remain an active part of the SBC. I have served on the Great Commission Task Force (GCRTF) for the past year, working at the request of the President to dream about strategies for greater missional effectiveness for our Convention. For me, this has had, and has, nothing to do with saving a Convention. God may or may not choose to use and preserve the SBC in the future. The SBC is merely a tool that God has used to assist His churches in accomplishing the Great Commission. The “tool” for the task is not the point, the task itself is, and if the tool ever gets in the way of the task, we should discard the tool and pursue the task. But I believe that there are some things about the SBC that are very strategic in this day and hour for the forward progress of the Great Commission, and I believe that it would be both unhelpful and unwise to walk away from it yet. So all this, for me, is about the Great Commission, and us together getting it accomplished in the world.

The Southern Baptist Convention is a denomination unlike any other denomination, in that it is not really a “denomination,” at least classically defined. The SBC is, and has always been, simply a network of churches who voluntarily come together for the purpose of a common mission. We believe there are things churches can accomplish better together than they can alone. The Baptist Faith & Message 2000 serves as the doctrinal parameters for determining those like-minded enough to be a part of that network. Over time, the SBC has developed a number of initiatives and agencies that greatly assist local churches in accomplishing their purposes. Some of these agencies work better than others, but through the SBC local churches are better able to plant churches overseas, domestically, and train pastors for ministry than they could have alone.

I am a personal beneficiary of the cooperative efforts of Southern Baptists. First, I received a world-class theological education at the Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary and graduated with 2 post-graduate degrees, with no debt (almost unheard of!). That was because my tuition was heavily subsidized by the Cooperative Program. Second, I served as an overseas church planter, and did not have to spend several years raising support in order to respond to get to the field. I was vetted, trained, supported, and put on the field in a relatively quick amount of time because of the Cooperative Program of Southern Baptists. If you’ve ever served overseas, you know that this is the envy of missionaries all over the world, and something we should not take for granted. Third, our church, the Summit Church, currently has 65 of its members serving through the IMB on a church planting project overseas. I do not know the exact cost to our church that supporting those 65 would be, but I know it would be in the millions, and we as a church could not do it alone. Through the Cooperative Program we are able to have more of our members on the field, and with better training, support and teamwork, than we could alone.

All this to say, I am grateful for our Convention and know that our participation in it has exponentially increased our missional capacity.

Here is why I am excited about the recommendations of the Task Force, and why this is a strategic moment you should consider being a part of.

1.     The recommendations of the task force direct more SBC money to the nations. This is the bottom line. More of the money we give to missions needs to go the part of the world with the least access to the Gospel. With over 6500 unreached people groups in the world, and 1.6 billion people with no access to the Gospel, it just does not make sense for us to retain most of our missions money in the Southeastern part of the United States. I hasten to say that this is not something for only our Convention to consider; each church and each individual Southern Baptist needs to consider how they are allocating their resources in light of global lostness.

Our own church, the Summit Church, has tried to increase its giving to missions every year for the last several years. This has often been an arduous and trying process, but I know it is what we need to be doing. Our decision to allocate increasingly large portions of our budget to church planting has affected the kinds of buildings we can build, the kinds of programs we offer to our people, and etc. We are certainly committed to reaching our local city, but we don’t believe it honors God to spend undue money on ourselves when so many have never heard the Gospel. We use a phrase around our church: “Live sufficiently; give extravagantly.” We are trying to do this as individuals; we are trying to do this as a church. And we want any missional network we are involved in to do the same thing. The recommendations of the GCRTF are a step toward that end.

“But,” you say, “the recommendations do not go far enough!” … and, unfortunately I agree. But please keep this in mind: Rome is not built in a day; it’s not rebuilt in a day, either. This is the first of many important steps we need to take as a Convention toward greater effectiveness for the nations. You say, “But it still is not enough to warrant the investment of my church’s money.” Well, that leads me to the 2^nd reason I am most excited about the recommendation of the GCRTF.

2.     The recommendations of the task force recognize that local churches have the right to follow the leading the Holy Spirit in the investing of their money. The GCRTF is recommending that all giving to Southern Baptist causes be recognized as ”Great Commission Giving.” Southern Baptist churches may choose to invest not only in the Cooperative Program (which covers the entirety of our work) but also special projects and initiatives that the Holy Spirit lays upon their hearts. Southern Baptist churches have done this for years, and by recognizing it we are simply acknowledging that the local church has the right to determine how to invest her money.

One of the things I love most about being a Southern Baptist is that our Convention recognizes it is the local church that is primary in God’s kingdom. Jesus gave the Great Commission to the church, not to a denomination… and while we as local churches can network together for greater missional effectiveness, we can never surrender those responsibilities God has given to us to any board or agency. That means that as a Southern Baptist, you are free to participate to the extent and in the ways you and your local congregation deem best for the furtherance of the Great Commission that God has given to you. There is no compulsion; there is only voluntary cooperation. As you sense, as I have, that cooperation with other Southern Baptists enables you to reach higher and farther than you ever could have alone, you can enthusiastically invest your resources with us.

So, to my younger Southern Baptist friends, this is why you need to come to Orlando. You need to affirm this movement in our Convention toward the priority of church planting and the centrality of the local church. This is an historic hour.

My heart is full of confidence. God did something 20 years ago in the Southern Baptist Convention that was almost unheard of and has no counterpart in American religious history: He brought us back from the swamp of liberalism. The conservative resurgence was, in every way, a move of God. I cannot believe that He did that just to let us die in the wilderness of missional ineffectiveness. What God starts, He is always willing to finish. The naysayers have already prophesied the doom of our Convention—just like they did in Nehemiah’s day, in Jesus’ day, and in the early church. But they were wrong then, and they are wrong now.

But we need your help. Do not commit the sin of Meroz, whose tribe was cursed because he did not come “to the help of the Lord” when the battle was being fought (Judges 5:23). I’d urge you not to be caught on the sidelines in this strategic hour of battle.

Please, let’s be together in this movement in Orlando.

So there it is… To our church planting teams in Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and South Africa… this is for you guys. We’re expecting great things from God, and attempting great things for Him. Believe together with us, OK?

"A lot of valid ministries, institutions and organizational structures have emerged over 165 years (in the SBC), all doing good work. I don’t intend to attack or disparage the work of any aspect of our convention. But what is our priority? Every church faces the same dilemma of limited resources and having to decide not whether something is good, effective and needed, but what is priority?"

I can certainly understand Steve's question… and hate that it has to be asked. But I understand why it is, and I can answer pretty confidently "no." I might have to go back and review what Danny Akin actually said in that message, but I am quite sure that no "acid test" regarding style has been given in the GCR task force talks about what should be considered "acceptable preaching." And I have worn jeans to every GCR meeting except one, and that was because my wife bought me a kickin' new pair of dress pants I wanted to show off.

Regarding preaching, Danny Akin's (who is a close friend) concern is that preaching be biblical and Gospel-centered. That is actually a direct quote I heard Danny say this past week… And I'm certain that "biblical" and "Gospel-centered" is something we can all agree are non-negotiables for Baptist preaching. We all have opinions, perhaps strong ones, about the best way to ensure we are doing that… some may believe it ought to be "verse by verse" exposition, others maybe feel more freedom in creative packaging. I certainly have opinions on that. But style is not nearly as important as substance. And style (reasonably speaking) will not be, and should not be, a defining issue for a Great Commission Resurgence. Until someone can get me a chapter and verse citation for why preaching must be verse by verse, it will not be a defining issue for us.

If it helps, Steven Furtick, while not on the GCR, is a good friend of
mine that I speak with regularly (read Steve's original question for
context on that one). And it is also worthy of note thatAndy Stanley is a keynote speaker at this year's pastor's conference.

My own preaching style, for whatever it is worth, is a mixture of "book" studies (currently we are in a series called "Mystery & Clarity" through Ephesians) and topical series. Last year we were about 2/3 book study and 1/3 topical, and some messages were mixtures of both. John Stott said in his excellent little book A Preacher's Portrait that a Bible teacher is a "steward" of God's word. House stewards in Paul's day were charged with feeding the children what the parents had bought for them. A good steward knows how to balance the children's meals, and how to serve it to them in a way they will eat it. In the same way, we must know what our people can handle and how best to serve it to them. Thus the good pastor, I believe, is certainly committed to teaching the "whole counsel of God," but also knows his audience and serves it to them in a way that they can get it. How to do that is the sacred charge of each pastor, and we may disagree on the best form of that, but it is not a reason for division.

And, for the record, we call the "platforms" at most of our venues "stages," and if anyone refers to the band as the "praise team" we immediately put them under church discipline.

A Great Commission Resurgence will be built on the centrality and priority of the Gospel, not on a particular style or way of dress. (I'll be talking more about this at our upcoming Advance the Church event this Thursday, though the audience there will not be exclusively Southern Baptist.)

And, to note, every time I've gone to meet with the IMB I've worn jeans and an untucked shirt, too. Please don't tell my mom.

(First, a little context… our church does a lot of its church planting and mission work through an organization called "the Southern Baptist Convention." The SBC is simply a group of churches (about 45,000 churches total) that unite together for the purpose of mission. I have been selected by the convention to be on a task force called "the Great Commission Resurgence" to analyze how we could more efficiently get to the work of planting churches around the world. Being a part of the SBC does not mean that we are "ruled" by any denominational hierarchy, nor does it mean that we agree with all statements by any other SBC pastor. The SBC is a missional network, and one we are quite pleased to work with. Their church planting agencies and relief organizations are some of the best in the world).

Hezekiah had lived a life of stunning faithfulness. 2 Kings says that "He did what was right in the eyes of the Lord," going beyond the normal "I'll tear down the false idols of the nation" even to destroying the bronze serpent Moses had made, because he recognized it had become an superstitious amulet for the Israelites and competed with trust in God (2 Kings 18:3-4). Because of that, God blessed his kingdom mightily.

Toward the end of Hezekiah's reign, however, he did 3 disastrous things:

• When he got sick, he beseeched God for healing like God owed it to him. There was nothing wrong with the request, as God ultimately healed him, but it gives us insight into his proud heart. He forgot that everything God had done for him was grace, and took God's blessing for granted (20:2-3). 
• He boasted in his achievements, rested in them, and grew complacent. He began to think that he was invulnerable (20:12-18).
• Worst of all, when God did announce judgment on Israel, which would entail Judah being carried away into exile in the coming years, Hezekiah thought, "Well, at least it won't be in my lifetime and I'll have peace during my days." He did not care about the vitality of the country for future generations, only that the national structure would serve him the rest of his days (20:19).

This passage ought to make us consider, soberly, the following questions:

• Do we realize that everything God has given us, as a movement of churches, is grace, and if at midnight tonight God gave us what we deserved, then not a single Southern Baptist church would exist tomorrow?
• Do we realize how vulnerable we really are, and how desperate we are for God?
• Do we tend to rest more in our accomplishments or believe God for the future? 
• Do we care more about future generations than we do ourselves?

I think we have to realize that God has kept our movement of churches alive despite, and not because of, what we've done. I think we also must leave the past in the past (though we are certainly thankful for it and learn from it) and focus all our attention on what it will take to reach the coming generations.

God, keep us from being Hezekiah, and help us to be more like Jesus, who really did have a past worthy to boast of, but still turned his back on it and submitted even to death so that future generations could be saved!

Denominations have a future, but only insofar as they function as missional networks and not as religious hierarchies.

I have tried to say on numerous occasions on this blog that there are no denominations in the Bible. Frankly speaking, it is easier to find evidence in Scripture for having a concubine than being a part of a denomination (via Ed Stetzer).

But there is plenty of evidence in the New Testament of churches working together in networks.  The local church is the sole hub of ministry in the New Testament, and no denominational "authority" should exist over top of it. But local churches have always found it more effective to work together than to work alone, and functional networks can end up being a kind of denomination. And that is the "good" kind of denomination. Fortunately, the SBC was founded as a missional network, so we don't need to re-envision ourselves…we simply need to return back to our roots.

The Great Commission Resurgence (of which I am on the national task force) is about returning the SBC to its missional roots, as well as re-aligning the SBC around our core purposes.What is that core purpose? Planting churches in every nation on earth, including ours. That is what churches can really do better together than they can alone. 

Often our busyness with 'the good' has kept us from 'the essential.'

The reason we needed a conservative SBC resurgence back in the 1970's was that liberalism had corrupted some of our institutions, and our money and our efforts were being wasted in ministries that didn't proclaim the authority of God's word or emphasize the priority of the Gospel of Jesus. We desperately needed to restore integrity to Southern Baptist institutions, and thank God He gave that to us.

The reason we need a Great Commission Resurgence is that now our money and our effort are being diluted into secondary and tertiary things. That is, of course, better than being thrown away in liberalism, but our money is still not getting to the primary mission. Without a great commission resurgence we are, practically speaking, in the same place we were before the conservative resurgence! Our efforts toward the global mission of Jesus are not as effective as they could be!

I think you'll enjoy these provocative, somewhat surprising articles. Note especially Johnny Hunt's call to prayer.

And how about the name of the SBC? Anybody besides me ready to change the name? Why does our  name highlight one region of one country, when our vision, our makeup, and our goal is the world?

Danny Akin: SBC Must Change

Al Mohler to Younger Southern Baptists: Don't Leave, It's Just Getting Interesting

David Dockery on The Future of the SBC

Johnny Hunt's Call for Prayer

Do Denominations Have a Future?

I serve on the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force for the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). Our responsibility is to offer guidance as to how the cooperative efforts of like-minded churches can thrive in the next generation. People often note (correctly) that "denominations" are not in the Bible. That is true, but cooperation is biblical, and "conventions" are a way like-minded Christians can cooperate together. As Jesus taught, we can do much more when all the parts of the body is working together than we can do alone.

I was recently asked, in a discussion panel, what I hope the SBC looks like in 5 years. It was a good question, and here is what my answer is:

• I want to see a Convention where initiative is restored to the local churches. Good parachurch ministries FACILITATE the ministry of the church.
  BAD parachurch takes ministry from a local church and does it for her.
  Bad parachurch says, "Give us money and people and we'll do ministry
  for you."

  In my opinion, the SBC has, in many places, descended
  into a “bad parachurch” model. The perception is that local churches
  should give, send people, and allow the institutions to do the work.

  Many
  pastors, particularly younger ones, are no longer content with that
  model. They believe that the Great Commission was given to them, not to
  the denomination. They want to use cooperative networks to plant
  churches, but they don’t want the networks to do the work for them.

• I see a convention that is defined by, and known for, cooperation in international and domestic church planting, not boycotts or politics.

  I also want to see us give our time and energies mostly to things inside our 'core competencies.' Our church does not believe that everything we do has to have its genesis in a Southern Baptist church or institution. A lot of the "non-Baptist" body of Christ has produced helpful literature and ministry resource we should use and not attempt to re-invent.

  The one thing that we do best with other "Baptist" churches is plant churches.

  Whenever a "corporation" gets away from its core competencies, it turns into a hairball of inefficiency. Things that don't propel the mission of the SBC, things that just don't work, or things that are done just as well by other parts of the body of Christ ought to be carefully examined, and be open to re-engineering or elimination.

  It's not that any of these things are bad things, it's just that they keep us from doing efficiently the 'one' thing that we come together for.

Obviously, that is not a full and exhaustive description, but these are at the core of what I hope to see in the SBC of the future.

For more on this, see:

• The New Young Southern Baptist: Orthodox, Connected, Unconventional
• Why we desperately need a Great Commission Resurgence 1 2
• The SBC as GM and a Shopping Mall
• A Time to Sacrifice