Reply to a Schaap Supporter

[RSS Robot]

January 18, 2011 (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the article)

We recently received the following feedback after publishing a warning (“An Imaginative Christmas,” Friday News, Dec. 24, 2010) about how that Jack Schaap, pastor of First Baptist Church of Hammond, Indiana, twists and adds to the Word of God:

“Why are you such haters on jack schaap? why not stop focusing stupid details. get out and lead someone to the lord. ... Do something better like soulwinning or preaching from the Bible and not having a book review for a church service. Does this guy have nothing better to do than trash on Schaap? This guy needs to get a life. Stop focusing on what other people are doing, and focus on winning those lost souls to Christ!”

______________________

Reply from Brother Cloud:

We don’t hate Jack Schaap, but we are disgusted with his pomposity and we’re not going to ignore his heresies.

The man who wrote this e-mail is spouting standard Hyles theology (Hyles is dead but his influence continues): ignore sin and error in the pew and pulpit and just do “soul-winning.” This supposedly covers a multitude of sins.

View the full article

[irishman]

I do not know bro. Cloud, but from what I have seen on this forum, I don't think I wish to know him! He uses the term "Hyles theology" and claims they ignore sin in the pews, but that is far from the truth; I know I have been a close observer of Dr, Hyles for many years, and been to Pastor School, and many of his services. All three of my children have graduated from HAC and they all wins souls, but they also live a God-honoring life. That is more than many on here can say.

Dr. Hyles has been "king of the hill" in fundamentalism when he was alive, and it is expected that lesser men than him would take pot-shots at him. he has done more for fundamentalism in his time than most men who call themselves fundamentalists. I am not a strict follower of Dr. Hyles, nor anyone else except Christ, but I do respect him. I have coined a saying, "I will leave the criticism to the experts (preachers)". I wonder if Bro. Cloud cries like a baby when he is criticized, and preaches about critcizing the man of God. Dr. Hyles has proven himself as a great man, no matter what anyone else says. It seems the "wannabe's" are the loudest critics. Much is said and done under the guise of "heresy" until the gun is pointed their way!

As for Dr. Schaap. he is by no means a Dr. Hyles, but he has a big job trying to build and keep the First Baptist Church alive. He came in when the church was hitting on all cylinders, and took over, and has done a phenomenal, considering his experience. He has made some changes, as any new pastor does, but the church is still going strong. the "pot-shots" are now aimed at him! Why is it that the small churches (I live in Michigan, and have a friend that took a church position near Port Huron) are the ones that yell the loudest about "numbers" and such? If only they could walk in another man's shoes for a day or two!

Edited January 18, 2011 by irishman

[dantheman2]

I do not know bro. Cloud, but from what I have seen on this forum, I don't think I wish to know him! He uses the term "Hyles theology" and claims they ignore sin in the pews, but that is far from the truth; I know I have been a close observer of Dr, Hyles for many years, and been to Pastor School, and many of his services. All three of my children have graduated from HAC and they all wins souls, but they also live a God-honoring life. That is more than many on here can say.

Dr. Hyles has been "king of the hill" in fundamentalism when he was alive, and it is expected that lesser men than him would take pot-shots at him. he has done more for fundamentalism in his time than most men who call themselves fundamentalists. I am not a strict follower of Dr. Hyles, nor anyone else except Christ, but I do respect him. I have coined a saying, "I will leave the criticism to the experts (preachers)". I wonder if Bro. Cloud cries like a baby when he is criticized, and preaches about critcizing the man of God. Dr. Hyles has proven himself as a great man, no matter what anyone else says. It seems the "wannabe's" are the loudest critics. Much is said and done under the guise of "heresy" until the gun is pointed their way!

As for Dr. Schaap. he is by no means a Dr. Hyles, but he has a big job trying to build and keep the First Baptist Church alive. He came in when the church was hitting on all cylinders, and took over, and has done a phenomenal, considering his experience. He has made some changes, as any new pastor does, but the church is still going strong. the "pot-shots" are now aimed at him! Why is it that the small churches (I live in Michigan, and have a friend that took a church position near Port Huron) are the ones that yell the loudest about "numbers" and such? If only they could walk in another man's shoes for a day or two!

HAC?

[trc123]

Hyles Anderson College

[dantheman2]

Hyles Anderson College

Thanks

[1Timothy115]

I don't know either of them but, if they take your focus off Jesus Christ and our primary mission then, I don't want to know either of them.

[Daniel Gladu]

I agree with David Cloud that Jack Schaap's heresies ought not be ignored, but David Cloud is not innocent either. He teaches a backdoor lordship salvation and says that if a person isn't "willing to change" then they cannot be saved.

To me, we ought not be a part of any of these silly groups because the leaders of them are still sinners. I'm talking about Hylesian groups, Cloudy groups, Ruckmanite groups, Anderson groups and so on so forth. These are men who "preach" the Word of God nonetheless, but we have to take what all men say with a grain of salt and put the Lord above them.

About the reply: the guy is another Schaap follower. He is another person that is ignorant of all the Bible says about other issues other than "soul winning". There is more to the Great Commission than just soul winning. Schaap is just a guy that is the same way. The Bible says "by their fruits ye shall know them." It's enough to know who a false prophet is by their followers.

[John81]

I agree with David Cloud that Jack Schaap's heresies ought not be ignored, but David Cloud is not innocent either. He teaches a backdoor lordship salvation and says that if a person isn't "willing to change" then they cannot be saved.

"Lordship salvation" is most often misunderstood. What it truly means is that one accepts Christ not only as Saviour, but also as Lord, just as Scripture says.

Repentence is necessary for salvation. To repent in the biblical sense means we agree with God that we are sinners, we ask forgiveness for our sins, accept Christ as our Saviour and Lord, and are determined to be new creatures in Christ, which means we have determined to change.

If we truly accept Christ, that means we are not only willing to change, but accepting change.

This isn't backdoor "Lordship salvation", it's Bible. We must accept Jesus as our Saviour AND Lord, as Scripture commands, if we are to be born again in Christ.

[Seth Doty]

I agree with David Cloud that Jack Schaap's heresies ought not be ignored, but David Cloud is not innocent either. He teaches a backdoor lordship salvation and says that if a person isn't "willing to change" then they cannot be saved.

I fail to see why the underlined portion is a problem. You tell me how someone could possibly be saved if their heart was still so wrong that they had no desire to change from their own ways to Gods ways. As long as he is not teaching that someone must FIRST change in ORDER to be saved(and I have never seen evidence that he has done so) then it sounds perfectly biblical to me.

To me, we ought not be a part of any of these silly groups because the leaders of them are still sinners. I'm talking about Hylesian groups, Cloudy groups, Ruckmanite groups, Anderson groups and so on so forth. These are men who "preach" the Word of God nonetheless, but we have to take what all men say with a grain of salt and put the Lord above them.

As far as I have been able to tell the reason these different "groups" exist is primarily due to differences in doctrinal views. Therefore while "putting the word of the Lord above them" might sound good and all of the groups you mention would doubtless agree on that in principle in practice it means nothing since all the disagreements between those groups are based on what exactly the word and will of the Lord is on a given topic anyway. Edited January 19, 2011 by Seth-Doty

[MatthewDiscipleOfGod]

I may not always agree with Cloud but I find him to be a great resource in many areas.

[irishman]

One poster mentions "Jack Schaap's heresies", what exactly are they? Too many people pick up the chant, and don't know what they are talking about. If he is teaching heresy, let the Lord take care of it, what good does it do to gripe about it on an open forum? I believe the hand of God has been upon the work at First Baptist, along with His "stamp of approval"; if he is not doing right the Lord will remove His blessing from the man as well as the church.

As for the type of the Gospel message, and their methods, one can easily see even here on this forum that there are many different views. The Lord knows all about their "door to door" type of soul winning, and He will see to it. All you scholars ought to have more to do than straighten out Jack Schaap. I do not say I agree with him on everything, but I am not here to question his salvation, or determine what they are teaching down there. Many who criticize have never even seen the church or the man they criticize, they simply hear it and pass it on out of their self-righteousness. perhaps, if he is teaching heresy, you will go down there and "straighten him out". By the way, I am just as guilty perhaps, concerning preacher Cloud!

By the way, Lordship salvation is unscriptural. No one can make Christ their Lord until they have first received Him. Also repentance is debatable because we are all just men--flesh and blood- and can't understand all the deep things of the Spirit. Each of those seem to play a part in this so-called heresy, but the debate is an unending battle, and probably always will be on this planet.

Edited January 19, 2011 by irishman

[John81]

Repentance is not debatable. Scripture is clear it's necessary.

[Seth Doty]

I do not know bro. Cloud, but from what I have seen on this forum, I don't think I wish to know him! He uses the term "Hyles theology" and claims they ignore sin in the pews, but that is far from the truth; I know I have been a close observer of Dr, Hyles for many years, and been to Pastor School, and many of his services. All three of my children have graduated from HAC and they all wins souls, but they also live a God-honoring life. That is more than many on here can say.

Perhaps the brush was a bit broad but even so it is not uncommon and I know what he meant by it.

Dr. Hyles has been "king of the hill" in fundamentalism when he was alive, and it is expected that lesser men than him would take pot-shots at him. he has done more for fundamentalism in his time than most men who call themselves fundamentalists. I am not a strict follower of Dr. Hyles, nor anyone else except Christ, but I do respect him.

I never knew or meet Hyles, all I have to judge him by is the pastors and teachers I have known that trained under him. A few were excellent men, but an unfortunately high percentage seemed to be extremely pompous and pushy. To me that sort of fruit doesn't speak particularly well of his training at least even if you should tell me that he personally was very humble. I also know of several "Hyles" school preachers that frequently quote Hyles as if that is somehow a definitive proof of their point. Declaring someone to be "king of the hill" in "fundamentalism" and speaking of those that disagree on doctrinal issues as "lesser men" does not strike me as the biblical model. Truth is, many that are first shall be last; and some of last shall be first. As far as who is who it is wise to stay humble both personally and be modest about lifting other men up even if you personally think they are spot on most all the time. If the apostle Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost went to pains to not be personally lifted up and warned about it then I dare say we do well to keep that in mind. As far as the whole not speaking against "Gods man" which hyles graduates often seem so big on, I agree with it to a point, however it looses something when the preacher himself is constantly hitting on that point. It is one of those things that is true if the preacher is following God, but yet it is also one of those things the preacher is unlikely to hit on very much if he is a humble man and truly following God. It sort of reminds me of Numbers 12. If someone truly is Gods man the point need not be constantly reinforced by the man himself. God is entirely capable of defending his own men in his own way. Edited January 19, 2011 by Seth-Doty

[Daniel Gladu]

"Lordship salvation" is most often misunderstood. What it truly means is that one accepts Christ not only as Saviour, but also as Lord, just as Scripture says.

Repentence is necessary for salvation. To repent in the biblical sense means we agree with God that we are sinners, we ask forgiveness for our sins, accept Christ as our Saviour and Lord, and are determined to be new creatures in Christ, which means we have determined to change.

If we truly accept Christ, that means we are not only willing to change, but accepting change.

This isn't backdoor "Lordship salvation", it's Bible. We must accept Jesus as our Saviour AND Lord, as Scripture commands, if we are to be born again in Christ.

Repentance is simply a change of mind concerning sin, salvation, good works, and the Saviour. It is not turning from sin, that is reformation and law - we are not saved by keeping the law. It is not sorrow for sin - this is also emotional experience based on an individual's feelings at salvation and each ones is different. There is no doubt that repentance is necessary for salvation but the change of actions that take place after salvation have nothing to do with salvation itself.

"We must accept Jesus as our Saviour AND Lord..." An unsaved person is only required to trust Jesus as SAVIOUR and accept Jesus as LORD of salvation, not anything else is required. Where Lordship salvation is in error is teaching that an unsaved person must submit in all areas of his life to the Lordship of Christ and must "make Jesus Lord" of their life. This is what the believer is to do. A saved person surrenders more and more to the Lord every day. It is not a one-time thing at salvation. The Lordship of Christ deals with the believer's sanctification, not justification.

Here is a good quote on the Lordship of Christ from Charles Bing, "Jesus is Lord of all regardless of one's submission to Him. Because He is Lord He has the power and position to save sinners. Sinners who come to Him through faith implicitly or explicitly submit to His authority to save, and may likewise submit to His authority in other areas of life. But since the issue in salvation is salvation, only the recognition of His authority to save is demanded for the forgiveness of sins and eternal life."

Salvation is not about one's willingness to change his own life... it is about one's willingness to trust Christ alone for salvation. All else is completely and totally on God's doing.

[Daniel Gladu]

I fail to see why the underlined portion is a problem. You tell me how someone could possibly be saved if their heart was still so wrong that they had no desire to change from their own ways to Gods ways. As long as he is not teaching that someone must FIRST change in ORDER to be saved(and I have never seen evidence that he has done so) then it sounds perfectly biblical to me.




As far as I have been able to tell the reason these different "groups" exist is primarily due to differences in doctrinal views. Therefore while "putting the word of the Lord above them" might sound good and all of the groups you mention would doubtless agree on that in principle in practice it means nothing since all the disagreements between those groups are based on what exactly the word and will of the Lord is on a given topic anyway.

"I fail to see why the underlined portion is a problem." If David Cloud said something along the lines of, "The evidence of salvation is a changed life" then I would agree with him and have no problem with that because that is what the Bible teaches. However, Cloud goes one step further and says that if a person is not willing to change his lifestyle before salvation ever takes place, he cannot be saved. The conversion of a sinner is a work of God, not a work of man. So, it doesn't matter how much I am willing to turn from my sins/have my life changed around, that is up to God.

The only thing I see as a fruit of these "groups" and their followers is that it is nothing more than attacking each other. And these "groups" in their own eyes seem to think they are the only ones right. We are to preach the Word as it is with all longsuffering. If a person disagrees, then let them disagree. The Lord will deal with them in the end.