The Rise of Non-Denominationalism, the Decline of the SBC, and How to Counter It
We live in an era when denominational titles carry less weight than ever before. Non-denominational churches have seen significant growth over the last few decades, reshaping the American religious landscape. Recent data from the 2020 U.S. Religion Census show that “non-denominational” congregations now account for over 21 million adherents, making them the largest “Protestant” religious group in the country (second only to Catholics) and representing more than 13% of U.S. churchgoers. In fact, over the last decade alone, the number of Americans attending independent Bible churches nearly doubled, surpassing the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) by several million adherents.
By contrast, traditionally large denominations are shrinking. The SBC—long the largest Protestant denomination—has seen membership fall for 18 consecutive years, down to 12.7 million in 2024 (a 50-year low, from a peak of 16.3 million in 2006). Other historic groups like the United Methodists have likewise hemorrhaged members. The trend is undeniable: many Americans are drifting away from denominational identities toward a generic, non-denominational Evangelicalism or dropping formal religion altogether.
One practical reason for this shift is perception. Denominational brands, including “Baptist,” are sometimes perceived as outdated or exclusive, even when they represent rich theological traditions and confessional clarity, unlike the ambiguity of “non-denoms.” A 2022 Lifeway Research study found that 43% of Americans say a church with “Baptist” in its name is “not for them,” compared to only 33% who say the same about a “non-denominational” church.
Yet the same study found that more Americans are open to attending Baptist churches (57%) than are closed to the idea, suggesting that perception is only part of the story. Nevertheless, it is no surprise that many congregations have dropped identifiers like “Baptist” from their names in an effort to remove “barriers to entry” for visitors. In some cases, Southern Baptist churches have become “The Bridge Church” or “Grace Community Fellowship,” advertising a friendly, mere Christian identity without overt ties to the SBC.
Research from the Pew Research Center indicates that younger generations, in particular, exhibit a growing distrust of organized religion and a preference for personalized spirituality. A 2022 Barna Group study found that 74% of U.S. teens describe themselves as moderately or highly spiritually open, underscoring a growing preference for spirituality over institutional religion among younger generations. All of this pressures churches to downplay denominational distinctives in order to attract people who might otherwise never walk through the doors.
Yet the irony is that many “non-denominational” churches are often Baptist in all but name. They practice believer’s baptism by immersion, local church autonomy, congregational governance, and an evangelical view of salvation; commitments which are (essentially) classic Baptist polity and doctrine, just without the historical label. As one commentator quipped, a large portion of non-denominational churches are essentially Baptists in denial. If so, what is really gained by shedding the Baptist name and connection? Pragmatically, it may alleviate a stigma for some seekers, but what is lost in the process?
This question lies at the heart of the current identity crisis. What is lost may be too important to forfeit. Doctrinal identity, ecclesial accountability, and historic rootedness are not optional features of the church’s life. They are essential to its integrity and witness.
The solution is not to retreat into obscurity, but to reclaim Baptist identity in a way that is transparent, theologically robust, and compelling to a skeptical age.
The Consequences of Shedding Denominational Identity
Moving away from a clear Baptist identity may seem convenient, but it comes at a cost. The first casualty is often doctrinal clarity. Without the anchor of shared doctrinal standards, churches can drift into a vague, lowest-common-denominator theology. Over time, core convictions erode.
For example, consider the phenomenon of “doctrinal drift.” A sobering study by Barna two decades ago found alarming confusion among churchgoers: only 43% of Baptists strongly believed that good works do not earn salvation (implying a majority were open to a works-earned salvation), and 66% said Satan is not a real being. In other words, most self-identified Baptists in that survey held beliefs that deviate from historic Christian orthodoxy.
More recent research likewise reveals widespread theological illiteracy across American Evangelicalism. Such drift can happen anywhere, but it becomes especially prevalent when a church’s teaching is unmoored from any wider confessional accountability. A congregation that downplays its Baptist (and biblical) distinctives may gradually absorb whatever trendy teachings or cultural doctrines tickle the ears. The result is a kind of doctrinal entropy—beliefs morphing with the spirit of the age.
History warns us of where this leads. R. Albert Mohler Jr., reflecting on these trends, noted that many Americans “have been negotiating away the core doctrines of the Christian faith—all the while claiming to remain Christians.” He issued a grave caution: “Christianity is defined by certain definite and non-negotiable doctrines. Without these, there is no Christianity at all—just the emptying sanctuaries of declining churches and denominations.”
In other words, if we surrender the substance of our faith to chase cultural relevance, we may gain the world’s approval for a time, but we will lose our very soul, and people will ultimately walk away anyway. To state it plainly, empty doctrine produces empty pews. The Southern Baptist Convention’s own membership freefall in recent years, alongside the broader decline of mainline Protestant bodies that long ago compromised on core beliefs, illustrates this truth in real time.
During the Downgrade Controversy of the 1880s, the great Baptist pastor Charles H. Spurgeon fought against precisely this kind of doctrinal slippage in the Baptist Union of Britain. As theological liberalism spread, Spurgeon observed churches adopting a creedless, culture-pleasing “Christianity” that, in his view, barely deserved the name. He famously warned that “a new religion has been initiated, which is no more Christianity than chalk is cheese. And this religion, being destitute of moral honesty, palms itself off as the old faith with slight improvements, and on this plea, usurps pulpits which were erected for Gospel preaching.”
In this vivid image, Spurgeon exposes the danger of accommodating error: a counterfeit faith that appears to be the old faith in outward form but has hollowed out its content—Scripture’s authority is denied, the atonement is dismissed, sin and hell are downplayed, and so on. He knew that if Baptists sacrificed doctrinal truth for respectability, they would cease to be true Baptists or even true churches. Ultimately, Spurgeon chose to withdraw from the compromised Baptist Union rather than lend his name to what he perceived as a betrayal of the gospel. That controversy cost him greatly, but his principled stand has echoed through the decades.
Southern Baptists took those lessons to heart a century later during the Conservative Resurgence. In the 1960s and ’70s, SBC conservatives determined not to repeat Spurgeon’s “Downgrade” mistake; they mobilized to correct liberal drift in the seminaries and renew the denomination’s commitment to biblical inerrancy and orthodoxy. It was a painful but necessary course correction, a modern reclamation of Baptist identity and conviction.
The point is that Baptist identity matters because truth matters. A confessional identity devoid of specific doctrinal content is meaningless, but a Baptist identity anchored in clear theology is a bulwark against error. Baptist churches have historically been confessional churches, not hierarchically controlled, but voluntarily united by shared statements of faith. Remove that shared doctrinal commitment, and what remains is a social club or a random gathering with no common cause.
This is why reclaiming our Baptist identity must go hand in hand with recovering robust doctrinal standards in our preaching, teaching, and practice. As Mohler incisively observed, the only alternative is an empty shell: Christian in name, but not in substance.
Baptist Distinctives and Confessional Heritage
What exactly do we mean by “Baptist identity” and “Baptist distinctives?” The answer lies in both historical documents and enduring theological principles. From their emergence in 17th-century England, Baptists were defined by certain convictions: believer’s baptism (as opposed to infant baptism), the regenerate church membership of gathered saints, the autonomy of the local congregation under the Lordship of Christ, the priesthood of all believers, congregational polity, and a firm belief in the supreme authority of Scripture over all creeds and traditions.
Early Baptists were English separatists who rejected state control of the church and insisted that the church be composed solely of believers—those who personally professed faith in Christ. To clarify their doctrine, they penned confessions of faith. John Smyth and Thomas Helwys, for instance, produced an early “Short Confession” (1610) affirming basic Christian orthodoxy and Baptist principles. As the movement grew, both Particular (Calvinistic) Baptists and General (Arminian) Baptists issued more detailed confessions of faith.
One landmark statement was the Second London Baptist Confession of 1689. This confession (a Baptist counterpart to the Presbyterian Westminster Confession) set forth a comprehensive Reformed Baptist theology, declaring doctrines of Scripture, God, salvation, the church, and last things, while modifying specific points on baptism, church government, and the role of civil authority to reflect Baptist convictions. It was widely influential in England and the American colonies and continues to guide many Baptists today.
The 1689 Confession, along with its American adaptation in the Philadelphia Confession (1742), and the New Hampshire Confession (1833), demonstrated that Baptists were not doctrinal minimalists. On the contrary, from the beginning, we have been a confessing people—believers who unite around a defined body of biblical truth. As Joe Harrod, Associate Professor of Biblical Spirituality and Associate Vice President for Institutional Research at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, notes, 17th-century Baptists “used the form of public confessions of faith to demonstrate the continuity of their doctrines with Christians who had come before and to explain and defend their practices against accusations of heresy,” and this “confessional impulse remains an important hallmark of Baptist identity.”
In other words, to be Baptist has traditionally meant to stand unapologetically in the stream of historic, orthodox Christianity (affirming the Trinity, the person of Christ, salvation by grace, etc.), while also highlighting distinctives like believers’ baptism, liberty of conscience, and congregational governance as biblical teachings. Rather than obscure those distinctives, our Baptist forebears published them for the world to see.
In the Southern Baptist context, this confessional heritage is reflected in documents such as the Baptist Faith & Message (BF&M), first adopted in 1925 and subsequently updated in 1963 and 2000. The BF&M summarizes core doctrines that SBC churches agree upon, from the inerrancy of Scripture, to the necessity of personal conversion and believer’s baptism by immersion, to the symbolism of the Lord’s Supper, the autonomy of each local church under Christ, and the cooperative missionary impulse. It is not as exhaustive as the 1689 Confession, and it leaves room for intra-Baptist disagreements on Calvinist vs. non-Calvinist soteriology. Still, it provides guardrails for theological soundness and a baseline of unity.
Unfortunately, many church members in the pews (and even some pastors) today are barely familiar with these doctrinal statements. Theological catechesis has fallen by the wayside. In some Baptist churches, it would be hard to distinguish the preaching and teaching they offer from that of a typical evangelical “community church.” The language of the Bible has been diluted, and explicit teaching on what it means to be Baptist has been replaced with a vaguer message in order not to “offend.”
But in trying not to offend, we may also fail to convince or convert. People searching for a church home today are often seeking authenticity and substance, rather than ambiguity. Reclaiming our confessional heritage means teaching our people, young and old, the rich biblical doctrines that our Baptist forefathers fought for, and showing how those doctrines apply to today’s questions.
Re-embracing Baptist distinctives also fosters unity and accountability. When a church publicly identifies as Baptist in belief and practice, it signals that it stands within a known theological tradition and is accountable to that tradition’s standards. In the SBC, each church is autonomous, yes, but to cooperate in a shared gospel mission, we must have doctrinal agreement. A network of totally miscellaneous churches with nothing in common but a convention funding mechanism will not hold together for long.
That is essentially what has happened in other denominations that experienced schism; a lack of a strong, shared theological identity leads to fragmentation when tested by cultural or doctrinal crises. By contrast, if we all intentionally recommit to being unabashedly Baptist (in the best, biblical sense of the term), we reinforce the foundations that bind us together. We fortify our common mission with a common doctrine.
As Amos 3:3 asks, “Can two walk together unless they be agreed?” Southern Baptists’ most significant periods of growth and evangelistic impact, whether the missionary expansion of the late 19th century, the post-World War II evangelism boom, or the conservative resurgence era, coincided with times of doctrinal consensus and clarity among our churches. In short, doctrine fuels devotion and mission.
Clarity on Baptist doctrine can ignite confidence in our people: We know what we believe, why it matters, and why we cooperate. That confidence is attractive in a world of uncertainty.
The Need for Theological Clarity and SBC Institutional Reform
How do we reclaim our Baptist identity today? It will require intentional efforts on multiple fronts.
First, Southern Baptists must pursue theological clarity in our teaching and preaching. Pastors and leaders should educate their congregations on creeds and confessions and why they are biblical. This means preaching the whole counsel of God, not avoiding doctrines that are out of step with culture. It means explaining why we baptize believers (and only believers, Romans 6:4). It means teaching why church membership matters – because the New Testament envisions a committed community of the born-again, exercising church discipline and mutual edification (Matthew 18:15-17, 1 Corinthians 5). It means reminding our people why we insist on the Lordship of Christ over the conscience, because no state or ecclesiastical hierarchy can bind the soul; only Scripture can.
It also means articulating our commitments in contested areas of theology and ethics: the inerrancy and sufficiency of Scripture, the exclusivity of Christ for salvation, the reality of hell and urgency of evangelism, the biblical design for marriage and gender, the sanctity of human life from the womb to the grave, and so on. These are not optional side issues; they are part of a holistic biblical worldview that Baptists have historically championed. Clarity on these will set us apart in a confused culture—and that is a good thing. As our Lord said, let your light shine before men. We cannot shine if we cover our distinctive light under a bushel of compromise.
Second, Southern Baptists must couple theological clarity with institutional reform and integrity. Reclaiming Baptist identity involves not only what we teach, but also how our denomination’s institutions operate and serve the churches. In recent years, many Southern Baptists have become concerned that some of our entities and leaders are not fully aligned with the convictions of grassroots churches. The Center for Baptist Leadership, Christ Over All, Founders Ministries, and many others have raised legitimate questions about transparency, accountability, and fidelity within SBC institutions.
For example, the SBC’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) has faced sharp and proven criticism for acting at odds with the values of the churches it represents, such as opposing a strong pro-life bill in Louisiana in 2022, baffling many pro-life Southern Baptists. Almost 43% of Southern Baptist messengers voted to abolish the entity at the recent SBC Annual Meeting in Dallas. Likewise, controversies have erupted over mission boards, seminaries, and publishing arm regarding finances, curriculum content, and more. These incidents signal a disconnect between “the people in the pews” and the denominational bureaucracy. If left unaddressed, such rifts only accelerate the drift away from denominational commitment. Why would churches remain committed to the SBC if its agencies or leaders do not reflect those churches’ beliefs and priorities?
Thus, a critical aspect of reclaiming Baptist identity is the revitalization of our institutions of Baptist life. That is, the slow and steady work of reforming the SBC’s structures and entities to restore trust and realign them with Baptist distinctives. This includes radical transparency in how Cooperative Program funds are used and how decisions are made. Institutional renewal requires a willingness to reform bylaws, constitutions, and leadership as necessary to bring our practice back in line with our principles.
In summary, institutional reform means ensuring that the tail does not wag the dog. The entities (seminaries, mission boards, commissions) exist to serve the churches in their gospel mission, not to set a separate agenda. Reclaiming identity means that Southern Baptist churches reassert their ownership of the convention and hold entities accountable to theological fidelity and mission effectiveness. It may involve hard conversations, leadership changes, or even structural overhauls (as some have mooted, for instance, abolishing or reconstituting the ERLC if it cannot regain the churches’ trust.
All of this can be accomplished in an orderly and gracious manner through established processes (such as the annual meeting and trustee system), but it will require vigilance and courage from the churches. The end goal is a healthier convention that truly reflects Baptist distinctives in both word and deed.
Third, flowing from clarity and reform, Southern Baptists must engage the culture biblically under our renewed identity. Baptist identity has never been about isolation from the world; Baptists have been at the forefront of many social and cultural movements – from championing religious liberty in the founding of America, to advocating for abolition of slavery and later civil rights (though our history on those issues is mixed, we have shining examples of Baptist voices for justice), to the pro-life movement and defense of family values in recent times. Being Baptist should mean both staunch theological orthodoxy and vibrant cultural engagement, grounded in Scripture.
If we jettison our identity to blend in with generic Christianity, our voice in the public square is actually weaker, not stronger, because we become just another echo of the culture. But if we stand firm on biblical truth, we have something distinct and powerful to say to the world. A culture lurching between moral relativism and spiritual emptiness is secretly hungry for clear answers and firm direction. Who will provide it if not convictional churches? Here, our Baptist emphasis on soul competency and voluntary faith speaks volumes against both secular authoritarianism and nominal, state-church religion. Likewise, our commitment to biblical family structure and personal conversion offers a hopeful alternative to broken homes and institutionalized unbelief. We must not be ashamed of being different; we should graciously model a better way, showing through our lives and advocacy that Jesus Christ is Lord over every aspect of life.
Engaging the culture as Baptists means wielding the biblical worldview both confidently and convincingly, embracing the call in the BF&M to “to seek to make the will of Christ supreme in our own lives and in human society.” We should do this not to build a theocracy, but to be salt and light, influencing all spheres (education, law, media, etc.) for the common good and the glory of God. A bold call for biblically-grounded cultural engagement implies that as we recenter on our biblical convictions, we will naturally confront issues like gender ideology, abortion, racism, and religious freedom with greater confidence and clarity. Far from making us irrelevant, a strong Baptist identity will empower us to speak to the culture with prophetic relevance, offering the gospel’s answers to the void left by modern secularism.
A Call to Recover and Renew Baptist Witness
Reclaiming Baptist identity in this non-denominational age is not about reverting to sectarian pride or clinging to a “tribal” label for its own sake. It is about returning to our founding theological roots and distinctives so that we can faithfully fulfill our Lord’s calling. It is about ensuring that the term “Baptist” means something concrete and substantive: a people of the Book, who uphold salvation by grace through faith in Christ alone, who practice the ordinances as delivered in Scripture, who govern our churches under the headship of Christ, who cooperate for the Great Commission, and who refuse to compromise the truth. This identity has always been worth preserving.
When English Baptists in 1689 affirmed a lengthy confession of faith, or when Southern Baptist messengers in 1925 adopted a convention-wide confession for the first time, they were saying, “Here we stand; we can do no other.” In our generation, we face new challenges: The rise of religious pluralism, postmodern relativism, a youth exodus from church, and the siren song of an undefined spirituality. In such a time, a hazy faith will not do. People are searching for an anchor, and we have one in the Word of God, as cherished in our Baptist tradition.
The task before us is to renew that tradition for today’s context. We must cultivate a new generation of Baptist pastors and leaders who are thoroughly grounded in Scripture and aware of our heritage—men and women who can convincingly articulate why being Baptist (as opposed to just generically evangelical) yields a healthier, more biblical church. We must disciple our members in the doctrines of grace and the Baptist vision of church and mission.
We should encourage our churches to proudly state their affiliation (not hiding “Baptist” in fine print), coupled with an explanation of what it means. Such transparency is honest and attractive to those seeking a faithful church home. If someone disagrees with those beliefs, they are free to go elsewhere, but many will be drawn to a church that actually stands for something. As we clarify our identity, our partnership with like-minded churches will also grow. The SBC’s cooperative mission programs will flourish if churches truly share a common vision. We may even see fewer churches leaving the SBC or young people drifting to non-denominational ministries (Or Roman Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy) because they will sense that being Southern Baptist is being part of something vital and true.
In reclaiming our identity, we should also extend a hand of friendship to evangelical allies outside our fold, not in a spirit of superiority, but of solidarity in truth. We can say to non-denominational brethren: We rejoice in our shared love for Christ and Scripture; let us reason together about ecclesiology and doctrine. Some may see the value in historic confessional anchoring and join or rejoin Baptist associations. At the very least, a strengthened Baptist witness will help sharpen our fellow evangelicals, just as iron sharpens iron. A rising tide lifts all boats: a renewal among Baptists can encourage renewal in other traditions as well, toward a broad revival of orthodox, biblical Christianity across our land—on earth as it is in heaven.
Ultimately, this is about the glory of God and the fidelity of Christ’s church. Jesus prayed for His followers to be sanctified in the truth (John 17:17) and to be one so that the world may know Him (John 17:21). A clear Baptist identity, embraced with humility and love, serves both aims: it sanctifies us in the truth of God’s Word, and it unites us in a meaningful oneness that the world can actually see. There is no virtue in fragmentation or confusion. But there is great missional power in a movement that knows exactly what it believes and walks in unity of purpose. The early church in Acts was “devoted to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship”—both doctrine and community—and “the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.” If we devote ourselves again to the apostles’ teaching (the core of which is distilled in our Baptist confessions) and to true fellowship (the kind of cooperation that demands doctrinal agreement), perhaps the Lord will be pleased to add to our number again as well.
Theology provides clarity; reform keeps our institutions true to that theology; and cultural engagement takes that truth to the world in word and deed. This is a call to revival and reformation among Baptist Christians. It is a call to pray for a fresh work of the Holy Spirit in our midst, turning our hearts back to the Scriptures and the convictions drawn from them. It is a call to graciously but firmly push back against the pressures to water down doctrine or hide the Baptist name. It is a call to reform whatever is broken in our denominational machinery so that it again serves the churches and the Great Commission wholeheartedly. And it is a call to stand boldly in the public square as Baptist believers, not for the name itself, but for the sake of the gospel behind the name. For if the salt loses its saltiness, how will it be made salty again?
In a time of confusion, let’s offer clarity. In a time of compromise, let’s hold fast to conviction. In a time of division and drift, let’s unite around truth.
The task is challenging, but the reward is great: a renewed Baptist witness that shines like a city on a hill. By reclaiming our Baptist identity, we are really just reclaiming the banner of Jesus Christ’s unfiltered truth and Lordship under which our Baptist forefathers marched. May we be found faithful in our generation to carry that banner, for the good of Christ’s church and the advancement of His Kingdom.
