not the preferred nomenclature

It's been tried a few times in the past, but to no avail. Some are discontent and would like to change the name of the Southern Baptist Convention.

I must say that I too find the label a bit curious. The "convention" really only occurs for a few days in June. So, I'll be the first to admit that "fellowship" or "alliance" or "koinonia" or some such would be a more appropriate description of the entity.

To say we're "Southern" is true to our origin, but not true to the scope of our vision. Wouldn't a church in Milwaukee (Algonquin for the Good Land) find it odd to be a "Southern" Baptist church? In fact, I came across the following from a FAQ page of a SBC church in the north:

"Southern Baptists? Does this mean we are Christians from the south? No. In fact, most of us were born and/or raised in the Fox Valley area. The SBC is a worldwide group of baptist churches who cooperate together to further the Kingdom of Jesus Christ."

I know I would find it odd to see a Northern Baptist church in Texas. 

Okay, more could be said about SBC perhaps not being the preferred nomenclature, but ... what would you use instead?

The symbol/logo, which I like, brings to mind taking the Bible and its message (i.e., the Christ who died and rose again as the substitutionary means of redemption) to the world. Thus, if you're going to have some sort of geographical identifier, I'd love to see something with more of an international flavor. Perhaps International Baptist Something or Other? I like the change they made more than a few years back from "Foreign Mission Board" to "International Mission Board" and would embrace something along those lines.

Perhaps International Baptist Convention? But, then we might have to start making rootbeer as well, lest IBC some after us. What about International Baptist Fellowship?

In a perfect world, we could come up with a name using the same acronym, SBC. Slooge Baptist Convention was one of my ideas, but nobody seemed to like it. What? You got a better idea?! Let's hear it.

What's in a name? In an age where labels are HUGE, I think quite a bit is in a name. I'm an inertia guy; an object at rest tends to stay at rest unless acted upon by a significant force. In this case, the motivation to change the name would have to be significant enough to endure the associated pain. However, I'm inclined to think that such a change could make it easier to reach out to the country and to the world. Ergo, in my mind, it's worth the effort and grief.

My gut tells me that many more feel the way I do, but trying to find some sort of consensus that is appealing enough to overcome decades of tradition would be a huge hurdle.