A perspective for local denominational organizations/judicatories on how they best empower their churches to serve from the base of their local context.
While certainly not a formal, hierarchy, connectional denomination, but a congregational polity denomination in concept, it clearly is a denomination with implied authority over churches and their affiliation with the denomination. More so now than ever before.
I guess that understanding is part of our conflict. We need a confession like the BFM2000 but most of our SBC churches are very autonomous. They may even do the opposite of what they are told. Yet they will claim to believe in the inerrancy and authority of The Bible.
BTW, the 2000 BFM does not use the word inerrancy. I believe it still uses the phrase--"truth without any mixture of error" that was also in the 1963 statement. So our understanding of the nature of scripture did not change with the 2000 BFM. I have heard reports that the 2000 BFM committee considered the word "inerrancy" and rejected it.
I did not know that the SBC was a denomination. I thought that the SBC was a convention of churches.
While certainly not a formal, hierarchy, connectional denomination, but a congregational polity denomination in concept, it clearly is a denomination with implied authority over churches and their affiliation with the denomination. More so now than ever before.
I guess that understanding is part of our conflict. We need a confession like the BFM2000 but most of our SBC churches are very autonomous. They may even do the opposite of what they are told. Yet they will claim to believe in the inerrancy and authority of The Bible.
BTW, the 2000 BFM does not use the word inerrancy. I believe it still uses the phrase--"truth without any mixture of error" that was also in the 1963 statement. So our understanding of the nature of scripture did not change with the 2000 BFM. I have heard reports that the 2000 BFM committee considered the word "inerrancy" and rejected it.