Tell me if Landmarkism has significant impact on the Southern Baptist Convention.
The convention Schedule is up at Baptist Press: ‘Everyone Can’ challenge to permeate SBC annual meeting. (Thanks Gene Bridges for the notice.)
Throughout the meeting, as a part of the “Everyone Can” campaign, there will be baptisms at the SBC. Check out the way it is listed:
“11:35 Baptism*” – This is for Tuesday morning. There are other instances as well.
You noticed the asterisk? Here’s the note that goes with it:
“* Because baptism is an ordinance of the church, all baptisms will be conducted with full approval and support of a sponsoring home church, members of each of which will be present to witness.”
Does Landmarkism heavily influence the SBC? You tell me.
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
Wes Kenney
on May 17th, 2006
@ 5:09 pm:
Art,
I don’t personally hold to the Landmark belief that there is a demonstrable succession from the first century church in Jerusalem to Trinity Baptist Church in Valliant, Oklahoma.
I do, however, believe that the ordinance of baptism was given by Christ to the church in the Great Commission, so it is reassuring to see that the planners of the convention are aware that some might be concerned about baptisms being conducted outside a local church’s authority, and that that concern has been addressed.
[ducking]
Kevin Bussey
on May 17th, 2006
@ 5:12 pm:
Man,
Can you believe this? If it is good enough for Paul….
art rogers
on May 17th, 2006
@ 7:47 pm:
Wes,
I know full well your beliefs on this topic, having exhausted this topic with you over at Tim Sweatman’s blog a few months ago – where I came to love and respect you. ; )
art
Wes Kenney
on May 17th, 2006
@ 8:35 pm:
Aw, come on Art,
Let’s hash it all out again!
I don’t think I ever tossed in my conviction that the entirety of the GC was given to the church and not to individuals, did I?
Come on, it’ll be fun!
(Praying for the fourth…)
Michael Harrison
on May 17th, 2006
@ 10:24 pm:
Art -
I too am praying for the 4th and am excited.
This is not the first time that Baptisms have taken place on the convention floor and been attributed to a local church.
In my opinion, the church does not have to sanction the baptism, but it better hold it for the process of discipling a new brother or sister of ours.
Thanks for stretching me!
You do’ man…
Michael
Perry McCall
on May 17th, 2006
@ 10:32 pm:
Landmarkism does have an effect on the SBC but the position of baptism being an ordinance of the Church is from our reformed tradition of Scripture alone and more specifically the regulative principle. I agree with the position but I do struggle with it. I revisit it at least once a year.
Alan Cross
on May 17th, 2006
@ 11:11 pm:
I’m a newbie at this, but does anyone find it odd that we are having baptisms at the convention? Doesn’t that seem pretty theatrical? How do you get on that list?
Anonymous
on May 18th, 2006
@ 1:34 am:
What is lankmarkism?
Ben Stratton
on May 18th, 2006
@ 6:53 am:
Art,
Even the Baptist Faith and Message says that baptism is a church ordinance, obviously referring to the local church. Those Baptists who do not believe this are out of step with the Baptist Faith and Message, our Southern Baptist heritage, and (I believe) the Bible.
Wes Kenney
on May 18th, 2006
@ 7:24 am:
I was hoping Ben would show up…
art rogers
on May 18th, 2006
@ 7:32 am:
Wes,
I know you were!
Ben,
Thanks for your comments.
New Reader,
Ben holds to a Landmarkist view Baptist history and theology. His statement is an answer to the affirmative to my question.
In other words, Ben saying that church authorizing baptism is historically and theologically accurate tells you that the practice is a Landmark belief. The answer to the question is Landmarkism affecting the SBC is, “Yes.”
To be fair, Ben believes that the SBC mostly has a Landmark tradition and that the opposition to such is in the minority.
I believe the exact opposite.
Let’s leave it at that, shall we, Ben? ;)
God bless you, brother.