I wanted to alert my readers to a post I wrote in 2005 about the universities as a mission field. The post is entitled The Great University Commission because I see campus missions as a way to fulfill the Great Commission of Jesus. After all, nearly every country has at least one student studying in an American University at any given moment. Please take a minute and read the post. Feel free to comment and share it with your social network.
Thanks for reading!
After Jesus rose, He spent forty days teaching His disciples. Some of that teaching is recorded in the four Gospels and in Acts. Though we often think of Matthew 28:18-20 as the Great Commission, it is actually just one of four sayings that Jesus said to commission His disciples. When we put all four together we get a much more robust picture of the role Jesus wants us to play.
This is the third in a series of posts that is looking at each of the Great Commission statements of Jesus. Interestingly only one of these is in the imperative and that was in Matthew (“make disciples”). So, once again, when we come to the Johannine Commission, we find an indicative.
John 20:19-23
In the evening of that first day of the week, the disciples were gathered together with the doors locked because of their fear of the Jews. Then Jesus came, stood among them, and said to them, “Peace to you!” Having said this, He showed them His hands and His side. So the disciples rejoiced when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, “Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” After saying this, He breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”
Context: Same context as Luke, but from John’s perspective. In other words, this is the same day as the resurrection and Jesus is, for the first time, revealing Himself to all of the disciples. The text tells us that this was the first day of the week (Sunday) and that the disciples were cowering behind locked doors because they were afraid of the Jews.
Here are a few insights from this passage:
Conclusions: The Johannine Commission is stated very simply yet it is extremely profound. There are a lot of similarities in how we are sent and how Jesus was sent. Jesus invites us and commissions us to go into the world and be a part of reconciling the world to God. It’s our purpose. Jesus may have sent us to our job site, but He sent us there to do what He was sent to do, and not just pull down a paycheck each month. We are sent to our family, our co-workers, and our friends with a purpose. Of course, other parts of the Gospels explain more about a) how Jesus was sent and b) what our task is as a result by being sent, but this one statement lets us know that we won’t be complete if we are just living a selfish life. It’s time to join Jesus’ purpose and live sent.
What insights have you gleaned about the mission Jesus has called us to from John 20:19-23?
The Lukan Commission is quite different from the Matthean Commission (which is usually the one we think of when we think of the Great Commission). This series of posts is intended to help broaden our understanding of what Jesus wants us to do with our time, our talents, our resources, and our passions. Jesus gives His disciples a purpose. The Matthean Commission is extremely important and should not be diminished by this series of posts, but the other commissionings of Jesus are equally informative and important and help us to have a more robust understanding of our role in God’s plan.
Luke 24:44-49
Then He told them, “These are My words that I spoke to you while I was still with you—that everything written about Me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures. He also said to them, “This is what is written: the Messiah would suffer and rise from the dead the third day, and repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning at Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things. And look, I am sending you what My Father promised. As for you, stay in the city until you are empowered from on high.”
Context: This commissioning took place on the same day as the resurrection and it happened in Jerusalem with the 11 “and those with them” including Cleopas and his friend who walked with Jesus on the road to Emmaus. When Jesus appeared in the room they were startled and thought He was a ghost. So He confirms His humanity by asking for some food. He also confirms that the cross wasn’t an illusion by showing them His scars.
Here are a few insights from this passage:
Conclusions: One of the intriguing things about Jesus’ mission and the subsequent commissioning of His disciples is that his birth, life, death, and resurrection were all the fulfillment of prophecy. But until it actually happened with witnesses, it was only a future hope. The resurrection inaugurated an “already but not yet” era that would be corroborated by His witnesses. That present reality still exists today by those of us who are also witnesses and disciples of Jesus.
What insights have you gleaned about the mission Jesus has called us to from Luke 24:44-49?
Matthew is not the only one who records Jesus teaching and commissioning His disciples after the resurrection. In addition to the Matthean Commission there are two Lukan Commissions and one Johannine Commission (there’s also a Markan Commission but it is in a disputed text). Jesus spent forty days after His resurrection teaching His disciples about the mission He was sending them to do.
In this series of posts I want to look at each of these Great Commission texts to mine them for insights into the mission that Jesus gives to us to complete.
Matthew 28:16-20
Matthew is a good place to start since Matthew is the first Gospel in our New Testament. However, that doesn’t mean that the Matthean Commission happened first. In reading through these various commissionings of Jesus, it’s clear that Jesus spent the forty days between His resurrection and ascension “commissioning” and teaching, and training His disciples on a number of matters. He spent time teaching them and explaining to them their task. Since Jesus spent a lot of time with His disciples, the chronology of these Great Commission passages aren’t as important, though I do hope to share a bit of context for each one as this series unfolds.
So let’s take a look at what Matthew records starting at verse 16:
The 11 disciples traveled to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had directed them. When they saw Him, they worshiped, but some doubted. Then Jesus came near and said to them, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe everything I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”
Context: On the mountain in Galilee. It says that when the disciples first saw Him in Galilee, they worshiped, “but some doubted”. These first words of Jesus upon seeing the disciples in Galilee were meant to establish His identity and allay their doubts. Jesus had spent His entire ministry making disciples and now He is telling those disciples to carry on the task. Note that this is not the first time they’ve seen Jesus alive, but they still have doubts.
Here are a few insights from this passage:
Conclusions: When we engage in disciple making, we must realize that we have not made a disciple if they are not trained or are unwilling to make disciples themselves. The Great Commission passages are about reaching the nations through baptism, teaching, and multiplication. If we aren’t engaged in these sorts of activities then we are not obedient to Jesus’ primary will for His followers to fulfill the Great Commission. If we are engaged in activities that don’t result in baptism, teaching, and multiplication of disciples then we need to rethink our activities and maybe loosen up our schedule. Thankfully, Jesus provides a model for making disciples and we have God’s Word, and God’s Spirit to guide us. So get started!
What insights have you gleaned about the mission Jesus has called us to from Matthew 28:18-20?
Sadly, there are a lot churches that are really good at addition, subtraction and division, but not multiplication.
It’s easy to settle for addition, because at least it is positive growth. Addition is safe. Addition is comfortable. But addition is often the result of a lack of vision and mission. Church leaders get bogged down in caring for the urgent and the existing members are happy because the attention is all on them. Sometimes people move into the area and just naturally look for a church. Put out a sign and we can probably grow through addition.
However, addition is just a step away from subtraction. People start to withdraw from the church when the church has no purpose. I bet more people leave the church out of boredom than from being called to fulfill the Great Commission.
Let’s not even talk about division…
Multiplication requires vision and leadership. Multiplication requires sacrifice and commitment. Multiplication is what disciples of Jesus are doing. Multiplication takes much prayer and a lot of hard work. Multiplication requires evangelism and a passion for making disciples. Bill Hull says,
If the church fails to make disciples, it fails to multiply. If the church fails to multiply, it fails.
We all know that division is failure, but so is subtraction and addition. Multiplication brings glory to God. It is what we are commissioned to do. If it’s division, subtraction, or addition, it may or may not be from God, but if it’s multiplication and it brings Him glory, there’s no doubt it’s of Him!
My Father is glorified by this: that you produce much fruit and prove to be My disciples. (John 15:8 HCSB)
There’s a lot of imagery in Jesus’ parables of sowing seeds. We use the same imagery when we talk about “church planting”. The essence of church planting is simply sowing seeds of the gospel into our neighbors lives. This becomes harder and harder for established churches as the outward focus shifts inward.
But that’s okay! The good news is that anyone can be a people planter!
Regardless of whether or not we are starting a brand new church or are a part of an established church we can be involved in people planting. Every church leader can invest in people. Every church member can invest in people too! Another way to say that is, we are all called to obey the Great Commandment and fulfill the Great Commission.
Plant a seed. Pray! Water it. Pray! Watch it mature. Pray! Repeat!!
Our neighbors need to know about the good news and all of us are called to share it with them. People planting is about investing in the lives of our neighbors. We need church planters to be people planters. We need established church leaders to be people planters. We need church members to be people planters.
He is like a tree planted beside streams of water
that bears its fruit in season
and whose leaf does not wither.
Whatever he does prospers. (Psalm 1:3)
Are you a people planter? Are you equipping others to be people planters?
I’ve created a poll on my linkedin profile that asks “what is the most effective environment for making disciples?”
Please go and vote, see what others are saying, and return here to share your thoughts.
Making disciple-making disciples (or making DMD’s) seems rather redundant. Yet, in practice, very few are doing it. Making DMD’s is what Jesus told us to do in Matthew 28:18-20. Instead, many church leaders interpret the commission to “make disciples” in one of two ways. Some “make disciples” by making converts and then telling them to attend a church service. Others gather converts together and attempt to “go deeper” but place no emphasis on being a witness to their neighbor. This is the danger of separating evangelism and discipleship. The former is engaged in evangelism, the latter is engaged in what he or she believes to be discipleship.
Discipleship Training or Transforming Disciples?
Our “discipleship training” has become merely a class or a Bible study that helps us grow in our knowledge about God but it doesn’t always encourage us to live for God. Making DMD’s is a much more robust commitment to the spiritual transformation of another. When Jesus told His disciples to go and make disciples, He was literally telling them to make disciple-making disciples. Just as He invested in them, now they were to invest in others.
Matthew 28:20 says to teach the disciples to obey (or “observe”) all that Jesus commanded. Paul reminds us of this concept in 2 Timothy 2:2 which says, “And what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, commit to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.” Of course, this is not the definition of what it means to make disciples because Paul is only talking about teaching “what you have heard”.
Making DMD’s isn’t just about teaching, it’s about a lifestyle that invites others into your life. In 1 Corinthians 11:1 Paul says, “Be imitators of me, as I also am of Christ.” This goes beyond the important teaching aspect to the equally important but much more vulnerable lifestyle of making disciples. Sermons, seminars, and classes need to be extra-curricular to the more risky and time consuming core curriculum of modeling a transformed life in front of others.
Reproducible DMDs
So what does it mean to “make disciple-making disciples”? The point of stating it redundantly is to emphasize the necessity of reproducibility. Disciples make more disciples but non-disciples don’t make disciples. But understanding what making DMDs is all about is like trying to explain swimming to someone who has never been in a pool of water. The best way to do it is to jump in and splash around. There are some principles and theories about how to do it but if you understand that the goal is to make disciples who will then make more disciples there is at least more motive for making DMDs in the first place.
Once you have the motivation for reproducible disciple making, the how-to becomes clearer. For example, in order for discipleship to be reproducible it can’t be specialized. The leadership training and scholarship of a seminary student is important and certainly plays a role in the body of Christ but it can’t really be referred to as disciple making. Making DMDs is much broader and less specialized. It should be universal to all followers of Jesus. There is no dichotomy between Christians and disciples. Instead, all who desire to follow Jesus will be compelled internally to share Jesus with others; mostly for their love for Him, but also because He commanded it. Anyone unwilling to make disciples as Jesus commanded cannot truthfully consider himself a disciple.
Being a seminary student or a pastor or any other church leader doesn’t automatically mean you are a DMD. Stated in another way, seminary students need to not only engage in their seminary studies, but also need to engage in those activities that are universal to all followers of Jesus. The same goes for pastors and other church leaders. This is just one example of what can be gleaned by understanding that the goal of disciple making is reproducibility. We haven’t defined what making DMD means, we’ve just narrowed it down by shaving off what it is not. Not everyone calling themselves Christian is truly making disciples.
Responsible DMDs
It could be said at this point that making disciple-making disciples should be the goal of all disciple making activity. It should further be stated that it is the responsibility of all followers of Jesus to be involved in making DMDs. The seminary student might happen to be studying Greek and translating passages of Scripture (a worthy and important activity) but she must also be involved in making DMDs. An Administrative Pastor might be responsible for the finances and logistics of a church but he must also be involved in making DMDs. A musician might do her best to learn the guitar and play it well for God’s glory but she must also make DMDs.
These should all be true much like it is also true that a business person or a stay-at-home mom or a consultant must make DMDs if he or she desires to follow Jesus. For some reason, though, our church leaders aren’t even involved in this most fundamental activity in the Kingdom. Jesus told His disciples to make disciples, it follows then, that to follow Jesus we will also make disciples and equip them to make disciples. Those first disciples did what He commanded and that has been the method God has used to advance His Kingdom for nearly 2,000 years.
Making DMDs goes beyond calling people to the least common denominator of devotion. Jesus’ call was to radical commitment, so why do we call people to a fraction of that commitment? Worse: why do we as church leaders often model a fraction of the devotion and commitment that should be inherent in the life of any Jesus follower. It’s like we’re selling life insurance rather than showing someone how to live the transformed, vibrant, abundant life that Jesus offers. Jesus doesn’t offer life insurance, He offers a new life. Making disciple-making disciples is about calling people to live that radical new life and walk along the Way with Jesus while simultaneously inviting others to walk alongside.
Starting a rumor that this logo was created from Word 95 clipart!
I wrote a post a couple of days ago about the need for Southern Baptists to change their name. I gave a compelling argument in my opinion. Now, after receiving a flood of comments and responses on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit and via email, I want to refine my remarks to reflect some of the follow up thoughts to my previous post.
The Intended Outcome for this Article
I hope two things will happen as a result of this post:
1. You, the reader, will comment on this post and use all the means of communication at your disposal to let delegates at this year’s SBC convention know about this debate. Online social media as well as blog posts, email forwards, phone calls, letters and telegrams are all strongly encouraged!
2. Someone versed in the parliamentary procedure at the SBC will need to draft a proposal that we research a name change. In 2004 such a proposal was voted down but only by 55%. 44.6% of all Southern Baptists at that meeting were in favor of researching a name change! Today, I believe it would be 51% if you act now!
Reasons to Change Our Name This Year!
1. We aren’t all Southern.
2. A new name could be the first step in throwing open doors for new church plants in non-Southern states.
3. Churches seeking a denominational affiliation in areas outside the South might consider affiliating with us if we had a different name.
4. A good name reflects a good reputation.
5. Keeping our current name suggests complacency. Changing our name reflects boldness and innovation.
6. A name change might promote innovation and boldness in other needed areas in the convention.
7. Southern Baptist wasn’t a good name to begin with when it was created during the Civil War era.
8. Our culture responds to brands and ‘Southern’ has become irrelevant.
9. Names have to do with reputation and identity. ‘Southern’ doesn’t resonate with anything we want to maintain as our identity.
10a. There are 6.5 billion people in the world. (that’s “b” as in billions)
10b. There are only 105 million people in the South. (that’s “m” as in millions or less than 1% of total world population.)
11a. There are 3.8 million square miles in the US and 92 million square miles in the world.
11b. There are 905,322 square miles in the South. (that’s “th” as in thousands or less than 1% of the total world land area.)
13. Most people have a bad perception of what Southern Baptists are about…a new name could refocus our denomination in a positive direction.
14. Thousands of SBC leaders and pastors are in favor of a name change from WA Criswell to Jack Graham and Danny Akin. Ignoring that challenge for the past half century is insulting to SBC leaders who are not currently located in the South.
15. Some true Southern Baptists (those actually located in the South) tend to have an arrogance that they are the decision-makers for the denomination.
16. A new name and branding would help us truly become a denomination for the 21st century.
17. We may disagree on what a new name might actually be, but ANYTHING is better than ‘Southern’.
18. SBC church leaders outside of the Bible Belt often hide the fact that they are SBC.
19. Some non-Southerners wouldn’t attend an SBC church simply because of their perceptions of the SBC. Changing the name would remove that barrier.
20. In most other areas, people are looking for relevant, transformational churches. Based on the media coverage of the SBC, many wouldn’t even think to look at an SBC church no matter how relevant it actually is. It simply wouldn’t cross their mind much like many of us wouldn’t even think to go to a Roman Catholic Church to find solid Bible teaching and an active engagement with the community.
21. Nothing about our name or logo excites our postmodern, post-Christian culture.
22. Would our Southern churches want to be called the Northern Baptist Convention?
23. People have stereotypes about the South (although they are often unfair and misguided). All the negative stereotypes are then glued to our denomination.
24. Many organizations that go through changes over the years adopt a new name to reflect their fresh identity. This is found in the corporate world AND in our own convention (Think Lifeway, NAMB, the IMB, Guidestone Financial etc.)
25. Our current name is based on a location, not on a vision.
26. Our current name reflects who we were, not who we are or who we want to be.
27. Regardless of what we want the SBC to stand for, what it is perceived to stand for is fundamentalism (if you don’t know that’s a negative term today then you probably won’t be voting in favor of a name change will you?)
28. Our name is not a Baptist distinctive. Changing it would not be a departure from our convictions and distinctives..
29. It won’t cost as much to research a new name as it would have in 2004. Through the use of technology we can get thousands of Baptists involved in brainstorming ideas for a new name and its potential impact.
30. No one comes to faith in Christ because our name is Southern Baptist, but how many have refused to even come to an SBC church, much less start an SBC church or affiliate with an SBC church because of the name?
31. There is absolutely no good reason why ‘Southern’ must be in our name. I challenge you to find one!
__________
33. Half of all the Southern Baptists in the world are located in 5 Southern states: TX, GA, NC, TN, AL. Could that have to do with the name?
34. What’s your reason?
Some Names to Get Us Thinking
We’ve come a long way since 1845 in how we organize and in how we name our organizations. Our name should be something that everyone in the denomination can be proud of. It should reflect who we are and who we want to be. It should generate excitement.
Think of all the conferences and networks that are cropping up today: Acts29, Resurgence, Elevate, Exponential, Fusion, Catalyst. If we were just starting out would we call it the Southern Baptist Convention? A name should represent something about our vision and not just something about our past.
Great Commission Baptist Convention | Cooperative Baptist Convention | Bible Baptist Convention | Great Commission Baptists | Lottie Moon Baptist Convention 
| North American Baptist Convention | International Baptist Convention | Global Baptist Convention | Missional Baptist Convention | Global Baptist Movement | Immersion Baptist Convention |
My personal favorite is the Great Commission Baptist Convention but I’d like to hear your ideas.
I realize that some of these names are already taken. I’m simply providing them here to get us thinking about who we are rather than who we once were. I don’t even like some of the names (indicated by the smileys) but I offer them here as proof that ANYTHING would be better than Southern Baptist Convention.
Take Action NOW!
I want to hear from you! Southern Baptists need to hear from you! What would you call the Southern Baptist Convention? Do you have other reasons why we need to change the name? If you pastor or serve in a church outside the Bible Belt, do you proudly display your Southern Baptist roots or keep it hidden? Have you seen our current name to be a hindrance to your work in the local church? Why or why not?
If you have answers to these questions or if you want to just express your agreement or disagreement, please do so in the comments section below. Let us know who you are (name, church, etc.). Don’t forget to share this today online AND offline. If you link to this post, I will link to yours. If you tweet this post, I will tweet one of yours. Let’s get this name changed once and for all!
[New Post: I've written a newer post entitled 32 Reasons (and counting) Why Southern Baptists Must Change Their Name! It builds on this post so once you've read this post, I encourage you to check it out.]
I usually don’t say much about the Southern Baptist Convention since I am not in the South. The name means little if anything to New Englanders.
If SBC means anything to anybody here, it usually means “fundamentalist” or “anti-something” (anti-gay, anti-Disney, anti-abortion, anti-fun, anti-reasonable, anti-interesting…emphasis on the “anti-”)
For years now I’ve heard of people wanting to change the name of the SBC, but many in our denomination who are primarily located in the South refuse to think progressively towards the future. Many think that if we lost the brand “SBC” we’d never get back our influence and name recognition (what about the costs of remaining the same?). In their view, people wouldn’t know who we are anymore. There might even be some who decide to split off from the new movement and remain “Southern Baptists” as if that were a hill on which to die.
Would it be so bad if some people got confused as to who we were? We haven’t exactly had a stellar, “reputation with outsiders” over the years. Wouldn’t this give us a chance to push the reset button on a denomination that can’t seem to keep up with the growth of the society around us?
Would it be so bad if some extreme “Southern Baptist Only” pastors left the newly named convention? Yes, it actually would, but maybe our 16 million member denomination needs some pruning. Get too big and you lose your pioneering edge. The trouble is, our denomination is “mainline” only in the South. Everywhere else it’s emerging. We may lose some people but we need to do the right thing and encourage people to join us rather than do the irrelevant and non-innovative thing and try to please people.
Newsflash: Probably more people are leaving the SBC thanks to our lack of innovation and relevance in a postmodern, post-Christian culture than there ever will be thanks to a simple but necessary name change.
What would a name change do for the SBC?
- A name change would remove a Civil War era title that means nothing to a post-Christian society.
- A name change would remove a regional brand that means nothing to those of us in emerging regions in North America or those planting churches internationally. After all, we are in the South AND the North, South America AND North America, Southern hemisphere AND Northern hemisphere. “Southern” is irrelevant. It means nothing. There are 3.79 million square miles in the US and 306 million people. Those states that could most easily identify with being called Southern only account for 905,322 square miles and 105 million people.
- On a related note, currently, only Southern Baptists IN THE SOUTH are proud to be called Southern Baptists. Most people in other areas go by their association name or leave it out altogether. A name change would actually improve our brand, not destroy it.
- A name change gives us a chance to choose a name that focuses on what we stand for rather than what we were once against hundreds of years ago. (We were on the wrong side of the debate when we were anti-abolitionists, and even though we are on the right side of the debate when it comes to abortion and homosexuality, does it improve our chances of being heard to constantly be the “anti-” denomination?)
- A name change would maintain our Biblical convictions and Baptist distinctives but would move us to a new era in Great Commission endeavors.
What Do We Call It?
Building on the momentum that has come (especially among younger Southern Baptists) from Dr. Danny Aiken’s call to a Great Commission Resurgence, I want to propose that we name our convention the Great Commission Baptist Convention (GCBC). Should we be known as Southern Baptists? Or Great Commission Baptists? You decide! I think “the GCBC” has a nice ring to it.
- This name would brand us as the Great Commission denomination (if you care about branding which I don’t).
- This name would give our denomination the ability to get out of the way of the local church and become the supporting structure that it was always meant to be.
- This name places the focus on making disciples of every nation. In other words, it focuses on the positive, not the negative.
- This name gives us a fresh start and a new vision for the future.
Will the denomination split as a result of a name change? If it does then it simply feeds the perception in many people’s minds that SBC churches would split over any issue (how many times have I heard people say they wouldn’t be SBC because they heard of one that split over the color of the carpet). The fact that that’s the perception in many people’s minds should be reason enough to change our identity in the first place. The SBC needs to be stronger than that. We need a new name and we need our churches to come together on this issue – NOW! The SBC is already declining in influence among younger generations and I believe the name and the baggage it carries with it is part of the problem.
A Final Plea
Most people know the SBC based on what they’ve heard publicly (usually from the conventions when we’ve voted on controversial issues). As a result, people will rarely give Southern Baptists a chance on a local, more personal level. Our denomination has a proud history, but our name has nothing to do with that. We aren’t the largest Protestant denomination in the US because our name has Southern in it. We aren’t the largest missions sending agency in North America thanks to someone’s genius idea of calling us Southern in 1845.
When the people who are most involved in the Great Commission in the SBC are serving internationally and in emerging, pioneering regions, why are we stuck with a name that doesn’t reflect our identity? Those of us who are trying to pioneer works in difficult areas feel like the most effective way to be a Southern Baptist is NEVER to let anyone know what denomination you are aligned with. Doesn’t the denomination exist to support the local church? Or just the ones in the South?
We know what we WANT “Southern Baptist” to mean, but no one else does. Instead, “Southern Baptist” means anti-abortion and anti-homosexuality and nothing else. As a local church leader I want to deal with issues like abortion and homosexuality on a local level in a personal and loving and Biblical way. Making resolutions and statements about what we are against is not going to change our culture. If we really believe in the local church, then we need to let the local church lead. Our name hinders us from doing that effectively in MOST areas of the world.
According to the American Religious Identification Survey, the “Nones” (those who have no religious affiliation) have grown from 8.2% in 1990 to 15% in 2008. They are the only group to have seen growth in all 50 states, most other groups are declining. In fact, people identifying themselves as “Christians” shrunk from 86% to 76% in less than 20 years. Massachusetts has seen a 21% increase in “Nones” and Vermont has seen the largest increase with 34% MORE people claiming no religious affiliation. If people in New England had a hard time identifying with “Southern” Baptists before, does anyone seriously think that things are going to improve until we change our name? I have a friend in Chicago who told me that the radio talk show hosts STILL make fun of “the day the Southern Baptists came to town” (referring to our strategic focus city initiative that tanked in Chicago though they have been more successful elsewhere).
What are the arguments against changing our name? I can’t think of a good one so please respond in the comments section if you’ve got one. Our denominations refusal to change our name is one more indication of how we are a denomination that is against and not for. I think “Great Commission Baptist Convention” is a great start to removing this perception. But I’ll let others make the innovative decisions necessary for our future because.
I strongly encourage our convention this year to draft, propose, and vote in favor of a resolution to submit a new name to the convention delegates at next years convention.
Oh, and we need a new logo anyway. Living in a macbook, iPhone, Google sort of world, we don’t need something that looks like it came from Word ’97 … just sayin’.
Next Post in Series: 32 Reasons (and Counting) Why Southern Baptists Must Change Their Name!
Related Post: Are You A Public Christian? Please Say No! :: Subscribe