Editors from Leadership Journal have constructed something like a Missional Family Tree that traces the influence from "The Missional Church" edited by Darrel Guder. The chart accompanies an article by Alan Hirsch on "Defining Missional." It's an interesting visual. Share your thoughts in the comments.

I had an interesting and exciting week last week at two mission boards.

First, it was good to connect with theologically conservative and biblically driven people who care about contextualization-- at the International Mission Board and the Association of Baptists for Worldwide Evangelism.

Well, today I was at First Baptist Church of Alexandria finishing up a weekend Bible conference. It was good to meet their pastor, Don Davidson, and visit with old and new friends. More on that soon...

Visits like this get me in an "historical" state of mind. Those of you who follow the blog know of my interest in history-- particularly when referring to "firsts."

Before blogging, I have:

On Saturday, I was speaking to the General Association of General Baptist Churches in a very rural part of Missouri.

The General Baptist denomination is an Arminian Baptist denomination. In many ways, they are similar to my own denomination, but they do not hold to the idea of "eternal security"-- or the idea that (in popular terms) once you are a believer you can't "undo" that. This view is held by Wesleyans, many Pentecostals, etc.

Over lunch, we reminsced a bit of the Second Great Awakening history.

Today I am in Bowling Green, KY teaching at First Baptist Church, Bowling Green for the Kentucky Baptist Convention.

Here is a photo of the conference from inside the sanctuary of First Baptist. There were about 350 people at the conference and the KBC announced that they are creating a process around our book, Comeback Churches. You can download the PowerPoint here.

---------------------------------------------

Now, you keen students of history know that First Baptist is an important part of the history of the Southern Baptist Convention.

And, since I like to give a "little extra" on the blog...

First Baptist was a key part of what is knows as the Landmark Baptist movement.

Wikipedia explains Landmarkism:

Most theologians and historians who have dealt with Landmarkism have agreed that the following ecclesiological convictions were inherent to the system:

The exclusive validity of Baptist churches

Although different champions of the Landmark Baptist cause have identified different required characteristics, or "marks," that validate a legitimate Baptist church, all varieties of Landmarkism stipulate that legitimate Baptist churches are the only legitimate churches. According to Landmarkism, congregations of other denominational varieties are merely religious gatherings, or "societies," with no claim to the title "church."

The invalidity of non-Baptist churchly acts

Landmark Baptists have refused to recognize as valid any baptisms or ordinations performed in circumstances other than under the auspices of a Baptist church. Thus, Landmark Baptists have declined to allow non-Baptists to preach in Landmark Baptist churches and have required prospective members who have received "pedobaptism" or "alien immersion" to be baptized by a Baptist church before receiving them into membership. Expressed as a syllogism, the Landmark Baptist argument is:

Major premise: To be valid, Christian ordinations and baptisms must be performed by a valid New Testament church.

Minor premise: Only valid Baptist churches are valid New Testament churches.

Conclusion: Therefore, only ordinations and baptisms performed by valid Baptist churches are valid Christian ordinations and baptisms.

The leaders of the Landmark movement were at times called "The Great Triumvirate," made up of J.R. Graves, James Madison Pendleton, and Amos Cooper Dayton.

James Pendleton was the pastor of First Baptist in Bowling Green. His work, Old Landmark Reset, is a foundational document for Southern Baptist Landmarkism. You can download the entire book here, and be sure to note the subtitle: "Ought Baptists to Invite Pedobaptists to Preach in Their Pulpits?"

However, Pendleton did not hold the same views as some other Landmarkers, particularly on "Baptist successionism."

Baptist Successionism

Some Landmark Baptists (not all) believed that the true church could be traced back all the way to John the Baptist. They wanted a view of "succession" that focused on baptism (hence Baptist Successionism). Some saw this as a response to the view of Apostolic Succession, or the belief that Peter ordained (Pope) Linus ordained (Pope) Anacletus... eventually ordained the current pope. I tend to think it had more to do with the Stone Campbell movement's "restoration" views-- Baptists wanted to show they had nothing to "restore." They were always here.

Landmark Baptists believed that the early Christians baptized each other properly. But, they believed, error soon crept in on issues such as baptism. But, some believed there was always a remnant, a "trail of blood." So, the Montanists baptized the Donatists, who baptized the Paulicians... eventually baptizing Southern Baptists.

You can click here to download the chart with all the details. (As a young pastor, I once preached at a rural North Carolina church with this very chart painted on the wall.)

James Milton Carroll, decades later, wrote The Trail of Blood, telling the full story from the Landmark Baptist successionism perspective. You can download the whole book/pamphlet here. Over 2 million copies were published and its influence on the denomination was profound.

Some people mistakenly equate successionism with Landmark ecclesiology although, as with Pendleton, one can be the latter without being the former.

So What is Landmark Baptist Ecclesiology?

Theopedia explains in more detail:

The impetus for the movement was the publication of Pendleton's An Old Landmark Reset in 1854, and the Cotton Grove meeting of Baptists in 1851. The meeting at the Cotton Grove Baptist Church near Jackson, Tennessee sought to answer five questions:

"(1.) Can Baptists with their principles on the Scriptures, consistently recognize those societies not organized according to the Jerusalem church, but possessing different government, different officers, a different class of members, different ordinances, doctrines and practices as churches of Christ?

(2.) Ought they to be called gospel churches or churches in a religious sense?

(3.) Can we consistently recognize the ministers of such irregular and unscriptural bodies as gospel ministers?

(4.) Is it not virtually recognizing them as official ministers to invite them into our pulpits or by any other act that would or could be construed as such recognition?

(5.) Can we consistently address as brethren those professing Christianity who not only have not the doctrine of Christ and walk not according to his commandments but are arrayed in direct and bitter opposition to them?"

The emphasis of Landmarkism is:

-that the church is local and visible only;

-that the church has had a continuous existence since its organization by Jesus before Pentecost until the present day (sometimes called Baptist successionism or church perpetuity);

-that the Great Commission was given to the church (local churches) only; and

-that baptism and the Lord's supper are church ordinances and are only valid when performed by authority of a New Testament (Baptist) church.

So, today I spent that day at a church that was part of a movement... interesting indeed.

Although I am not teaching history today, I thought you might find it interesting!

Here is a picture of the baptistry. It is big-- very big. I am guessing 8 people could fit in there. There is a dome over it and it is the most distinct feature in the sanctuary (which, makes sense, considering the info above).

I will post the written presentations here and then link to the audio presentations as soon as they are up.

Post 1:
Here is the presentation I just gave at the Calvinism Confab at Ridgecrest. Later on, we will post the full report at www.lifewayresearch.com.

Post 2:
Here is the rough draft of Dr. Dockery's presentation on the history of Calvinism. It is a draft, but I have his permission to post it.

Post 3:
Tom Nettles written presentation is now here.. (Thanks for Chris Turner for getting in converted.)