Keith Jenkins  on November 7th, 2009

First let me acknowledge that I realize that my comments will never change your mind or anyone else’s for that matter. Having said that, I would like to address some statements you made.

First, I am assuming you are unfamiliar with the Dallas area. The suburbs are already saturated with churches of all denominations. In particular, there is a Southern Baptist Church in a suburb north of downtown that would dwarf FBC Dallas. So why go to the suburbs?

Seccondly, “‘take the church’ to where the people are” is exactly what we are doing. Downtown Dallas is exploding with Lofts, condominiums, hotels, etc. A rapidly developing Arts district is just a few blocks away. It is my understanding that we are one of the fastest growing downtown areas in the nation.

Third, you seem to assume that the church has $130 million in the bank just waiting for us to spend. Typically, God doesn’t rain down $100 bills directly from heaven into the offering plates of churches. If He did, I am sure we would have heard about it in someone’s blog. Instead, He uses individuals to funnel financial support to the church. We, like most churches, depend on individual members as well as non-members to submit to the Will of God to give whatever He wants them to give as well as to what He wants them to give. Since all blessings come from God, FBC Dallas is not necessarily more able than your church to give $130 million to any ministry. Just about three years ago FBC Dallas gave over $1 million to foreign missions through the SBC Lottie Moon annual offering. You say that pales in comparison to $130 million. At that time it was more than any church in the Southern Baptist Convention had ever given to that annual offering.

Yes, FBC Dallas could stay in the old decaying buildings. We could wait for the “younger” generation to drive by our church on the way to some enormous church in the suburbs and wonder if that “old church” still has church services. We can hope they will recognize that we have a thriving “young married” ministry and a dynamic Pastor with a vision for the future. And we can hope and pray that our current generation does not leave and/or die, leaving us with many “old, empty” buildings and no one to give to any ministry. We can abandon the lost souls moving to and living in the downtown Dallas area. We can watch as that $130 million becomes diluted by families and individuals leaving FBC Dallas, taking their financial resources with them and going to any one of hundreds of churches in the suburbs.

Or, we can invest in and nourish a growing church that will attract new generations, both now and in many years to come. We can have a place for people to come and hear the Gospel preached. We can see people come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. Praise God from whom all blessings flow.

And, yes, my family is one of those that drive downtown from a suburb just to attend FBC Dallas because we believe we are being obedient to God’s will. This is where He wants us to serve.

AJWired  on November 11th, 2009

Hey Keith,

thanks for the comments and I respect where you’re coming from. Just a few notes on your comments. If you’ll permit me, I’d like to address each paragraph:

First – you’re right, I don’t live in Dallas. That said, I am somewhat familiar with the area having been there 6 times and even visited FBC Dallas before. You asked why go to the suburbs? Well, I think there are several good reasons why you go to the suburbs. In SC, much like Texas, there is a church on “every street corner” many of which are SBC. Yet, as is true for both of our locations, over 50% of the population is unchurched. If an incredibly large church is in the suburbs, why isn’t it reaching those people? Why do church plants plant in major metropolitan cities like Dallas, Atlanta and Charlotte if there are already good churches there? Statistics show that most people come to church by personal invite. Our experience is that they are much more likely to come if they have to drive only 15 minutes vs driving 30 to 45 minutes. To a believer/churched person, that may not be a big deal. To an unchurched/dechurched person, it typically is.

Second – I think you may have misunderstood what I’m saying. I am not saying abandon the downtown district at all. I’m saying instead of spending so much money in trying to retrofit or even rebuild the entire ONE property to accommodate EVERYONE that would come to FBCD, think about having a multiple campuses with the original campus being your central location. That may mean downscaling or even selling SOME of the downtown property in order to focus on going multi site.

Third – having been involved in SBC churches all my life and multiple giving campaigns, I’m pretty versed in the fact that God uses His people and their willingness/obedience to sacrificially give in order that the work of God can be accomplished. I think that it’s great that FBCD gave that amount to the Lottie Moon offering as well. I don’t doubt that it was the largest amount given by a SBC church. I wish more churches would follow that lead in the support of reaching the unreached. That said, the comparison to what other churches are giving is not what stewardship is based on in my opinion. Rather, it is based being the best stewards of God’s money in reaching the unchurched and making disciples. 1 million compared to 130 million does pale in comparison any way you slice it…unless you use government math And I say if your church can raise 130 million, go for it. Just don’t think it should be spent on building a totally new campus in one location downtown.

Think about it this way: what if we took a little over half of the proposed cost….say 70 million. Spend 20 million to renovate parts of your current campus, possibly not all. Spend the rest of the 50 million to develop two or three (possibly 4) multi site campuses where you have live worship bands or blended choirs, with children and student ministry. You could use video teaching technology to deliver messages to those campuses. Just a thought.

Here’s what bothers me. It is this statement: “We could wait for the “younger” generation to drive by our church on the way to some enormous church in the suburbs and wonder if that “old church” still has church services. We can hope they will recognize that we have a thriving “young married” ministry and a dynamic Pastor with a vision for the future. And we can hope and pray that our current generation does not leave and/or die, leaving us with many “old, empty” buildings and no one to give to any ministry. We can abandon the lost souls moving to and living in the downtown Dallas area. We can watch as that $130 million becomes diluted by families and individuals leaving FBC Dallas, taking their financial resources with them and going to any one of hundreds of churches in the suburbs.” First of all, like you said earlier, the 130 million is not there yet. Second, is it about building the Kingdom or preserving a tradition. I don’t doubt your sincerity, your love for Jesus, your love for FBCD or your obedience in going there. I grew up in a larger SBC church in a downtown area and understand the experience and workings at play. But could it be the reason that these younger generations are driving by so many of these older churches is because they are not able to or refuse to engage the culture in a relevant way? The message MUST stay the same, but our methods MUST change. Having a slamming new campus doesn’t mean that our churches are automatically going to be effective either.

I couldn’t agree with you more on this statement:
“Or, we can invest in and nourish a growing church that will attract new generations, both now and in many years to come. We can have a place for people to come and hear the Gospel preached. We can see people come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. Praise God from whom all blessings flow.”

I just think the way you accomplish this can be done more effectively and with less money than what is being pursued. There is a more effective way to accomplish this than spending 130 million to refurbish a landmark in downtown Dallas.

Peace,
Alan

Keith Jenkins  on November 12th, 2009

Alan,
I’m not quite sure of the validity of your point as to churches in the suburbs. I doubt that anyone is not within 15 minutes of churches of several different denominations in any midsize to large city; at least in the Bible belt. Chuck Swindoll, T.D. Jakes, Tony Evans, Jack Graham, Ed Young, just to name a few, already have mega-churches in the suburbs of Dallas. And I could not begin to enumerate the number of small to medium size churches that are already in the suburbs. There is a “First Baptist Church” in every suburb of Dallas as well as every other town in Texas. Apart from God working in the hearts of people, I doubt that one or one hundred additional churches in the suburbs are going to make a dent in the 50% number of non-churched people. People “don’t come” to church because they “don’t see the need”, not because they have to drive longer than 15 minutes. First Baptist Dallas is in a downtown area of many thousands of people, both churched and non-churched. Although I don’t’ have any specific statistics, I have to believe that any church that moves to a new location will be primarily made up of current church members and members of other churches who just want to test the waters of a new church. Sure you will get some new non-churched people which is obviously the goal, just as we will if we stay where we are, build new facilities, or downsize from what we have. We are not trying to “retrofit or even rebuild the entire ONE property to accommodate EVERYONE”. Although we welcome anyone and everyone who wants to come, our target is the people of downtown Dallas. Sure, many, if not most, of our church members are from the suburbs — NOW. But if we are successful, many more non-churched people from the new loft apartments and condominiums in downtown Dallas will come – if they are invited.

With regard to the $1 million given to the Lottie Moon offering, I completely agree “comparison to what other churches are giving is not what stewardship is based on.” I understand your interpretation of my comment. However, I used that analogy as an example as to what people are willing to give. People give to different ministries or causes based on where their heart is. Some will give to Missions and not a building program. Some will give to the media ministry and not the youth ministry. Some will give faithfully every week and others will only give to special offerings for specific purposes. Some give anonymously, while others give for the recognition they might receive. I’m not trying to be judgmental; only practical. My point was, people gave to Missions for that particular offering and although it was the largest ever given by any SBC church, it was still nowhere near $130 million. I would love for our church to be known as the church who gave $130 million to the Lottie Moon offering, but that much was not given. However, we just announced this capital campaign and already have over $60 million pledged for the new campus. The $130 million is not some arbitrary number someone pulled out of the air. It is based on architectural design, building material costs, labor and estimated time to complete. Your “say 70 million” is a number pulled from the air, based purely on your opinion and speculation.

It would be better if you knew more about our current facilities prior to making a judgment. Our current Sanctuary, where we conduct two Sunday morning services and one Sunday evening service has about 1800 capacity. Some years back it was designated a historical landmark; not by the church, and not sought out, but by some Historical Society. Consequently, we cannot tear it down. This, of course, means that if we ever build a larger capacity worship center downtown, we have to tear down other buildings. Even potential new owners would be unable to demolish the current Sanctuary. The current buildings were built over the past 100 years or so. In some cases, these buildings are in such close proximity that you would think they were one building instead of multiples. You can literally walk from the newest building that was completed about three years ago, to the farthest building without going outside. It would be difficult to do a partial demolition of anything less. By the way, the newest building will remain. The current Sanctuary is connected to it. I would compare this to a situation where one might take a car to a trusted mechanic to work on a transmission problem. He informs you that your transmission needs to be rebuilt and it will cost $1800. I don’t think you would ask if he could rebuild half for $900. You would either have it completely rebuilt or you would do nothing. The new worship center will have about 3000 capacity; only about twice the current capacity. In order to build this new worship center, a youth building and a building that contains most of our Sunday School classes will have to be demolished, which presents a need to replace those buildings. In order to replace those buildings, buildings that house our choir and orchestra areas as well as our children’s ministries will need to be demolished; and so on and so on …. It is all or nothing.

“Preserving a tradition?” hardly. You obviously are unfamiliar with our church. The image you are painting of our church – refusing to change old methods – is exactly what we are trying to overcome. It is not about the past, it is about the future. By the way, in addition to the two Sunday morning traditional services, we have a contemporary service, loud music and all , that usually has about 800 in attendance that meets in the new building I referred to earlier. It was basically built for that service and the Young Married ministry.

I can tell by your comments “The message MUST stay the same, but our methods MUST change”, that you are a Baptist at heart, but you do not want to associate with the “old traditional” ways of the stuffy, unchanging, ultra conservative Baptists. By the way, your statement “having a slamming new campus doesn’t mean that our churches are automatically going to be effective“ is true, but avoiding the use of the word “Baptist” does not guarantee it either.

I understand that, on the surface, $130 million is an enormous amount of money to spend on new buildings. It is my understanding that it is larger than any church in the U.S. has undertaken. But just as your statement “comparison to what other churches are giving is not what stewardship is based on” is true, comparing what FBCD is spending to what other churches spend is not a valid basis for comparison either.

Love you, brother! Maybe we can visit, the next time you’re in Dallas or when I am in SC.

Keith