I don’t think we disagree at all. The problem is that we are reaping what we sow.

We have walked away from our own mission fields. As the urban centers of our cities “decayed” over the decades we have flown away from them. We sold our buildings to other congregations — likely ones that are not anglo.

We wanted to be in the suburbs where there are better schools. We wanted to be in areas where there is less crime. Now many of us probably spend more money in our two week “mission trips” to some exotic place in Africa each year than the disposible income of a whole family unit living in the inner city only ten miles away from us.

Many of us might consider going to Zimbabwe every year for two weeks and spending $3,000 on the trip. But are we ready to move permanently to a bad downtown neighborhood? Are we ready to buy those church buildings back and set up shop down there?

Taking Memphis for an example: Why did Bellevue move out east? The answer is that is where all their members moved.

Here in OKC there was a church on the corner of SW59th and Western. It sold its land for commercial use (a car dealer) and moved out to Mustang. Over the decades the area morphed from being middle class anglo to 80%+ latino.

What we need is about 500 clones of people like Rev. Fred Luter. We need to put them in the epicenter of the areas that we have walked away from decades ago and are still walking away from.

I think one of the key things that the NAMB and/or a combined IMB/NAMB should be doing is energizing us guys in the pew to provide financial help to support sending people with the right skill sets to retake the turf we abandoned.

One answer to the question of why do we need a GCR is — because we INTENTIONALLY abandoned the mission field. It was part of our “growth” strategy.

The information you share is interesting, and appears, on the surface, to be accurate.

However, I would add the following observations. A true GCR will lead us, as Christ’s disciples, to be more missional in our outlook, which means extending ourselves beyond our traditional demographically-bound comfort zone, and reaching out to other demographic groups. A true CR will lead us to be submissive to the Word of God, and to the Lordship of Christ, which will, in turn, lead us to a true GCR.

Yes, it is true that, as Evangelicals (and Southern Baptists), we face some obstacles in our surrounding context that are different, and in some ways greater, than what they were 30, 40 or 50 years ago. And yet, the power of the gospel is not, and should not be limited, in us and through us, by these obstacles.

At least part of the reason for “decline” in SBC congregations is demographic.

In many states in the Southeast and Southcentral USA as many as half of the counties have lost population in the last three decades.

So we see people moving away from areas which are the SBC base and instead moving into urban/suburban areas. The “problem” with urban/suburban areas, from a historical SBC standpoint, is that these communities are significantly different demographically than they were several decades ago. Large Southern cities such as Atlanta, Houston, and Dallas have very large “minority” populations. The SBC does have churches reaching a variety of demographic groups in large cities of the South — such as Latino and Asian populations. However, we have a lot of work to do to “catch up”.

The SBC is doing OK in areas where the demographics are aligned with our traditinal “culture” and where populations are holding steady or growing. These areas are where most of the SBC megachurches are — namely middle class to upper class suburbs.

I have a list of all the megachurches in the SBC. [It was compiled by some guy who did a study on this] Most of the megachurches and growing churches in the SBC (and there are notable exceptions) are in demographic areas at the edge of metro areas where we see upward mobility. Examples would be Saddleback (a very high end enclave of Orange county Calif), Prestonwood (Plano TX – a very high end zip code in suburban Dallas), Quail Springs (a high-end and growing area at the north end of the greater OKC area), Brook Hills (a high end area of new growth in SE Burmingham AL), Bellevue (in the eastern suburbs of Memphis having moved from a “downtown” location), Sagemont (a “new” [by historical standards] development in South Houston), etc. I have not actually done this but I think if you took a list of growing SBC churches most would fit into the class of being in areas where both are true: (a) areas of population stability or growth, (b) affluence compared to the surrounding area within a 100 mile radius.

I believe demographics contributes as much or more to SBC “growth” (or lack thereof) than any other single factor when averaged over all 44,000 SBC congregations. But of course, I have not done a definitive study to prove this thesis.

In summary: We have seen decline in SBC attendance in half the counties in our “Bible Belt” because the population has declined. At the same time we are not keeping up with the growth of the cities where much of the growth consists of demographic groups that used to be called “minorities”.

None of this has much to do either way with the CR and/or the GCR.

Roger Simpson

Thanks for the reply. I do not disagree at all with your entry #9, I just have concerns over people making too-mechanical a connection between prayer and revival, almost as if it obligates God to send revival.

In your #15, you say, “I personally would credit at least part of the problem to the increased involvement of Evangelicals (including Southern Baptists) in secular politics. This has caused many to take their eyes off of the main thing, and, at the same time, caused many unchurched to be turned off by the church.” I think this is a very astute observation, but one which is not welcomed in some quarters of the SBC.

John

I would say that the last 30 years of history in the SBC have taught us that a CR doesn’t necessarily lead to a GCR. However, I would say that it would also be very difficult for a liberal-moderate leaning SBC to have an authentic GCR. The two (liberal-moderate theology and evangelistic fervor/effectiveness) do not go hand in hand. Doctrinal renewal, in and of itself, however, is not sufficient.

I believe we must also take into account the general decline in religious commitment, and response to evangelistic efforts in the US during the last 10-20 years. Not only the SBC, but the US at large, is in need of deep spiritual renewal.

I personally would credit at least part of the problem to the increased involvement of Evangelicals (including Southern Baptists) in secular politics. This has caused many to take their eyes off of the main thing, and, at the same time, caused many unchurched to be turned off by the church.

I am in perfect agreement with your comments.

Thank you for your reply. In the paths the Lord has allowed us each to walk, we have seen some of the same things, and yet, our experiences have also been different. I am sure that this accounts for a good part of our different perspective on some of these issues.

On the bottom line, though, I am also happy to “continue to pray with you for unity in our convention, especially around the Word of God. Also for a true Great Commission Resurgence that will result in a return to our love for evangelism and missions and for a revival in our convention.” I pray God will continue to give us wisdom and discernment to ascertain the path He is marking out for us in the days ahead, and love for one another as we continue to serve Him as members of the same Body.

I was not trying to be cynical or judgmental. I was trying to discuss the prospects for a GCR. Whether you believe the conservative resurgence was positive or negative, you can still have concerns about the GCR task force. I know many who have been strong supporters of the conservative resurgence who have expressed strong concerns about the call for a GCR from Akin and Hunt. Morris Chapman would be one. I could name others. However, if I thought the conservative resurgence was a positive, I would be asking myself what was wrong with the conservative resurgence that has made us need to call for a conservative resurgence.

As far as the motives and wisdom of those leading us or on the task force, I am still concerned with Danny Akin’s original call for a GCR in which he referred to our state conventions as bloated bureaucracies and advocated a revolt against the state conventions. Being from Arkansas I have had over 20 years to observe Ronnie Floyd’s relationship to our state convention and to the cooperative program. I have to admit I question whether this is the best task force we could have to bring about a true GCR.

I do not know if the Doulos has ever been mentioned but I said Para-church groups like the Doulos. I have also had discussions with Jerry Corbaley. In trying to get him to comment on his statement that there were doctrinal problems at the IMB he made the following statement.
“Do our missionaries meet other Christians on the field? Are some of these Christians members of denominations that do not particularly care about the BFandM? Do these Christians have no influence whatsoever on the work?”
I admit I do not understand exactly what he was trying to say. Maybe you do. In any case he seems to be questioning our contact with non SB groups. I don’t have time to collect all the statements but there have been questions from trustees about partnering in church starts and in working with people who may have charismatic tendencies. I think this would include praying together or any other contact.

In any case, I will continue to pray with you for unity in our convention, especially around the Word of God. Also for a true Great Commission Resurgence that will result in a return to our love for evangelism and missions and for a revival in our convention.

David, I did not get a chance to comment on your announcement that you were leaving the IMB but I want to say I have greatly appreciated your support for the IMB, your attitude and your willingness to speak in defense of our missionaries. You will be greatly missed in Spain I am sure but also by the family of missionaries around the world. We look forward to your continued involvement in the SBC.

It may be because I believe that, in general, the Conservative Resurgence was a positive, and even necessary, development in the SBC that I tend to see the present call for a GCR with more hopeful and optimistic eyes. It may be because I don’t think it is ultimately beneficial to be cynical or judgmental towards those who are leading us. To be sure, no one is perfect. And, people have been hurt and mistakes made in our recent history in the SBC. But, unless I have specific information to the contrary, I choose to trust the motives and wisdom of those who are currently leading us.

It is true I have expressed my reservations about some specific decisions related to the IMB and the BoT. I know there has been concern expressed on the part of some specifically related to church planting ministry done in cooperation with other groups, and I have openly expressed my alternative views, and even engaged in debate with some, such as Mr. Corbaley, over these matters. I was not aware, however, that there had been concern expressed about “any involvement with non Southern Baptist missionaries or Para-church groups like the Doulos.” Are you implying these men would be opposed even to praying together with non Southern Baptists or to praying for each other? If that is the case, I have missed that.