Why The Rift?

[Boudreax]

What do you think?

 

http://theolderpaths.wordpress.com/2014/06/21/why-the-rift/

[Bro K]

What do you think?

 

http://theolderpaths.wordpress.com/2014/06/21/why-the-rift/

Not much. There is really only one old path: the one that Jesus made for us.

If one doesn't like the leadership.....talk to the leader and if he still doesn't like it....move on down the road instead of causing discord among the brethren.

Personally; the only leader I have is my Pastor.

[Ukulelemike]

THough somehow I suspect you won't be back to read any responses to this, rather, you just want to grind your axe and depart, yet I will respond. If I am wrong about you, I apologize.

 

A few things about your article.

 

1: I recommend you giving some names and examples. If you are going to make accusations, which on the whole I am not disputing prOBlems, but you need to be prepared to lay out a few details. I certainly am well aware of some scandals in the IFB circles, and most of the IBF folks I know have made no bones of speaking against them. But how can we agree or disagree or even learn if you don't give us some examples?

 

2: You cannot treat all IFB's as a single entity under one denominational statement-we are independent for a reason. I have been a part of IFB churches for many years, maybe 25, and have been in large ones and small ones and while there have been similarities, there have been many differences, as well. One of the big issues I have seen in some of the larger ones, though not all, is the Pastor=King mentality; don't question the pastor, ever, that's like questioning God Himself. I never bought into that, and it is what was behind the whole issue with Jack Schaap-he was raised in it, married into it and groomed to be so. A pastor is just a sheep who leads the other sheep under the Shepherd.

 

3: Billy Sunday, Billy Graham Spurgeon, McArthur, these are all just men-some like some more than others. That Billy Sunday worked with ther churches to bring his meetings to a town are not at all like Billy Graham deliberately turning over potential converts to Catholic priests and Mormon workers. Big difference in methods and results. But they are still just men. And men like men no matter which kind of church you go to-you'll never be happy there.

 

The biggest thing you left out was, what will you do now? Where will you go? What are you even looking for? I have heard the complaints and the arguments, but too often, these folks just rejecet God and His churches and end up castaways. What are you seeking? A church that teaches right doctrine by a perfect man? You'll never find it. What are your plans?

[Boudreax]

THough somehow I suspect you won't be back to read any responses to this, rather, you just want to grind your axe and depart, yet I will respond. If I am wrong about you, I apologize.

 

A few things about your article.

 

1: I recommend you giving some names and examples. If you are going to make accusations, which on the whole I am not disputing prOBlems, but you need to be prepared to lay out a few details. I certainly am well aware of some scandals in the IFB circles, and most of the IBF folks I know have made no bones of speaking against them. But how can we agree or disagree or even learn if you don't give us some examples?

 

2: You cannot treat all IFB's as a single entity under one denominational statement-we are independent for a reason. I have been a part of IFB churches for many years, maybe 25, and have been in large ones and small ones and while there have been similarities, there have been many differences, as well. One of the big issues I have seen in some of the larger ones, though not all, is the Pastor=King mentality; don't question the pastor, ever, that's like questioning God Himself. I never bought into that, and it is what was behind the whole issue with Jack Schaap-he was raised in it, married into it and groomed to be so. A pastor is just a sheep who leads the other sheep under the Shepherd.

 

3: Billy Sunday, Billy Graham Spurgeon, McArthur, these are all just men-some like some more than others. That Billy Sunday worked with ther churches to bring his meetings to a town are not at all like Billy Graham deliberately turning over potential converts to Catholic priests and Mormon workers. Big difference in methods and results. But they are still just men. And men like men no matter which kind of church you go to-you'll never be happy there.

 

The biggest thing you left out was, what will you do now? Where will you go? What are you even looking for? I have heard the complaints and the arguments, but too often, these folks just rejecet God and His churches and end up castaways. What are you seeking? A church that teaches right doctrine by a perfect man? You'll never find it. What are your plans?

 

True and I appreciate the advice, I am learning and growing. To foster my own personal growth is one of the reasons I decided to start the blog.

As for what am I trying to accomplish, I wish to bring truth to the forth front. Truth in every area. No matter how uncomfortable or ugly it may be. Truth, though it may not agree with our presuppitions. Every point that I mentioned (I'll get around to validating them) is in some measure an example of an unwillingness to confront or deal with the truth.

[HappyChristian]

Boudreax, I can't open the link on my phone, so can't read it till the weekend is over. But I'd love to know more about you before I do read it. Could you tell us a bit about yourself over in the Introduction forum? Thanks in advance. :-)

[Ukulelemike]

True and I appreciate the advice, I am learning and growing. To foster my own personal growth is one of the reasons I decided to start the blog.

As for what am I trying to accomplish, I wish to bring truth to the forth front. Truth in every area. No matter how uncomfortable or ugly it may be. Truth, though it may not agree with our presuppitions. Every point that I mentioned (I'll get around to validating them) is in some measure an example of an unwillingness to confront or deal with the truth.

Thank you, and as I said before, I apologize for assuming you would not come back. Keep in mind, you will prOBably find some criticism here.

 

But, for what its worth, I have seen much of what you have seen, and you will see others who have, as well, in the IFB circles. At this, you may wonder why many of us have chosen to remain IFB. I can't speak for any but myself, and I won't try, but personally, I remain IFB because from a doctrinal standpoint, I have found it to be, at its core, about the best out there. Mind you, that's removing man's opinions, and let's face ,it, we're all full of those. I like the independent nature of it, and believe that is scriptural; I believe in approaching the Bible literally whenever possible, with exception of clear analogy or symbolism, (ie, Jesus is a door, et al). I like that it is there that I learned the importance of understanding scripture by context,. And believe it or not, it was in the IBF church that had the most initial influence on my life, that I learned that you CAN and SHOULD question a pastor if there is a disagreement, (though of course it is to be done respectfully and from the Bible, not opinion or feeling). My pastor used to say, "If you disagree, that's fine; come see me after service, but bring your Bible because I'm not interested in feelings and opinions, and we'll reason together." 

 

So now I pastor a small IBF church in a small community and try to pass on the things I have learned. I like expository preaching AND topical preaching-they both have their place and can both be found in scripture.

 

So, basically, I am still IFB becuase I believe in the core ideology behind it, not for the men or the associations-I lost many of the men when I had to leave the pre-trib rapture position. If I am wrong I will answer to God, but I won't go back to what my study has shown me to be an error, not for any men's approval. And I will remains an IFB for the sam reason.

[Boudreax]

I too pastor a small IFB church in a small town. I too plan to remain an IFB. I grew up one. However, I have taken quite a journey away from many of the things I was taught as a young person. I just want to help people on that journey, maybe even prod them a little bit. If I am going to remain an IFB, I feel there are some things I should call attention to, though we are 'independent', you cannot deny that we are looked at as a whole.

[Steve Schwenke]

A couple of thoughts on this.

 

1.  The main prOBlem you are addressing can be resolved very easily.  We as human beings have a penchant for following men.  We must be willing to accept the fact that NOBODY has everything correct - not even our favorite teachers or preachers.  When we pin all of our hopes, doctrine, and methods to one man, we are doomed to failure.  Thus, the solution is simple - keep GOD and the BIBLE the main cornerstones of our teaching and preaching.  If we exalt the Lord Jesus Christ, and keep our congregations rooted in the Scriptures, then we are sure to produce Christians who are well grounded in the truth, and not so easily swayed by the workings of men. 

I don't think it appropriate to entirely dismiss everything some good men have done just because they erred on some point or points.  Every man in the Bible that God used failed at some point in time, and some in very big ways.  But God still used them.  We can still learn from them.  And so we can still learn from feeble man, so long as we remember - they ARE MEN. 

 

2.  I don't think the IFB movement is taken as a whole, or ever will be.  The breadth of variance within IFB churches all across the country is so vast, that no generalities can be applied equally.  For instance, not all IFB's are KJV.  Not all IFB accept Pastoral Tyranny.  Not all IFB are dispensational.  Not all IFB hold to expository preaching exclusively.  Not all IFB are conservative in their music.  The differences are so extremely wide, that they cannot possibly be lumped together in one broad category.  We sometimes make broad generalizations based on our own experiences and particular bent of doctrine, but this does not necessitate a commonality between ALL IFB's.   In fact, the average "Joe American" does not even know the difference between the different "branches" of Baptists (i.e. SBC, ABA, GARBC, IFB, etc. et al.) - they simply see the word "Baptist" and think all "Baptists" are alike.  If the average person does not even discern this difference, then how in the world can they see the differences between the different "stripes" of IFB?  They can't.

 

As for me, I just keep my nose in the Bible, and not worry about all of the other circus acts out there.  I don't have time.  Nor did God call ANYONE to do it.  God called us to be pastors, and our jOB is to care for the sheep God has entrusted to us - regardless of how many sheep He seems pleased to give to us.  Romans 14:12 seems appropriate here - in its context. 

Remember the words of our Lord Jesus Christ - "Let them alone.  They be blind leaders of the blind...."

 

In Christ

[MountainChristian]

Boudreax, I can't open the link on my phone, so can't read it till the weekend is over. But I'd love to know more about you before I do read it. Could you tell us a bit about yourself over in the Introduction forum? Thanks in advance. :-)

Here ya go HC

 

 

Why the rift?

You do not have to look long or far to see and hear the frustration of older men, who are leaders in the IFB movement, voicing their concern, even lashing out at younger men, who have walked away from their leadership and influence.

In this, my (our) opening blog post I am going to lay out why. Hopefully, this will benefit all involved.

Trust is the foundation of leadership. Without it there is none. You simply cannot lead people who do not trust you. Many things make up this foundation of trust; integrity, ability, knowledge and so on. Quite often when someone walks away from your leadership, it is because they can no longer trust you. Such is the case with many IFB leaders today. I, along with many of those in my generation have chosen to step out from underneath their influence, simply because we cannot trust them.
Written for them, I lay out why.

1. You will not OBjectively look at the movements past and acknowledge its weaknesses and failures. There is more than one white elephant in the room and when you will not acknowledge it, we cannot trust you.

2. You are not consistent in your positions and associations, when confronted, you offer no explanation. Billy Graham is a compromising evangelical, yet Billy Sunday who avoided the fundamentalist movement and teamed up with Catholics in his crusades is OK? Spurgeon, whose Calvinism, lordship salvation and position on the blood, mirror John MacArthur’s is looked up to and applauded, while MacArthur is labeled a heretic. We cannot trust people who are so willfully ignorant at best and inconsistent at worst.

3.We cannot trust you when you herald a lie for over twenty years after it has been proven untrue and continue to malign a man and his ministry.
See MacArthur.

4.We cannot trust you when you cover up scandal after scandal after scandal, never confronting and dealing with the truth. I know of an issue right now, that has been placed in the hands of several well known IFB leaders and they have done nothing.

5.We cannot trust you to rightfully divide the word of truth and bring us faithful interpretations of Scripture. You knock expository preaching, while bringing in its place the most horrid, out of context, misrepresentations of Gods word. We can’t trust your sermons, your blog posts, your hashtags, or your newspapers articles.

6. We cannot trust you when you write articles and books with wild and far out claims, never taking the time to document and footnote them, When asked about it…nothing.

7.We cannot trust you when you attack the foundations of Scripture and its history of preservation.

8.We cannot trust you when you redefine words to suite your own theological preferences. Two examples, inspiration and legalism.

9.We cannot trust you when you preach with and recommend a man who has been caught committing voyeurism and bankrupted his church while taking in exuberant salaries.

10. We cannot trust you when you are more loyal to men, movements and positions than scripture.

11. We cannot trust you when you shutdown dialogue and debate. We cannot trust someone who will not allow himself to be questioned and held accountable.

12. We cannot trust you when it is extremely OBvious from your statements that you have no idea what you are talking about. Ex. ‘the emerging church’, post modernism, KJV issue…

I really could go on and on, but you get the point. You have lost a generation of young men because we simply cannot trust you. So, instead of lashing out and writing your articles and your subtweets, just show us that you are men of integrity and Scripture.

Why the rift? We don’t trust you.

Just my humble .02….posted here so my wife can have her facebook page back.

Allen Gibson

[HappyChristian]

Thanks, MC. The thought that went through my head as I was reading this is a verse that is actually the one for my class tomorrow - and seems to sum up part of what Bro. Steve said: "Some trust in horses, and some in chariots; but we will remember the name of the Lord our God."

[Genevanpreacher]

It's not often I agree with Bro. Steve, but on this I do.

Reminds me of when John's 'purpose' was being questioned by Peter, after the 'feed my sheep'

speech Jesus gave him.

 

His answer? - "What is it to thee? Follow thou me."

 

So yes, Brother Steve, amen! 

And as you stated, we oughtta -  "just keep [our] nose in the Bible, and not worry about all of the other circus acts out there".

 

Sometimes I need to be reminded.

[No Nicolaitans]

I have no prOBlem with the article; he brings out some good points that need addressing. While it's true that you can't nail down IFBs into a single column of doctrines, standards, etc., I would venture to say that most people (who only have a passing knowledge of IFBs) associate IFBs with the Jack Hyles types of ministries. That has been my experience anyway.

 

Though I don't agree with everything in the article, I have experienced first-hand the type of ministry that's described in it. Unlike many, I didn't abandon God, and I didn't rebel and join some liberal church that was diametrically different than what I had experienced. I remained an IFB and sought out a more balanced IFB ministry that still stood for the truths that we hold to.

 

Again, I see no prOBlem with the article...he could have given more specifics...but in all, I think he's trying to point out some prOBlems. It concerned me that he seems to support John MacArthur, and though I've seen things from Spurgeon that made me think he leaned toward Replacement Theology, I've never seen anything that led me to think he pushes Lordship Salvation. However, Boudreax may be privy to information that I'm not. It doesn't matter though, because I'm not a fan of Spurgeon anyway.

 

Most of us have no prOBlem with David Cloud pointing out prOBlems with IFBs...we point out prOBlems with IFBs...looks like Boudreax is pointing out prOBlems with IFBs.

 

Just make sure your information is correct.

[Miss Daisy]

Something's suspicious. Jeffrey's banned yesterday but then a new member posts an article he thinks of what is wrong with IFB. Sounds VERY FAMILIAR AND VERY RECENT.

 

 I may be wrong, and if I am I apologize. But snakes are sneaky...

[John81]

Sneaky snakes will also drink your root beer! (Sorry, childhood memory flashback)

[Ukulelemike]

Haing read the article, I don't believe this is Jeffery. The article, while it lacks some amount of facts to back what he says, is pretty thoughtful. Few would deny, except for the truly brainwashed, that there are some things, some attitudes and practices that have crept into IFB-ism (if you will), that don't belong there. On the plus side, he is an IFB pastor of a small church, like myself, and has not left, but recognizes that there are issues that do truly need to be dealt with. OBiously none of us has the authority to go into churches and demand changes, but they are things we should be aware of, when we can, and should repudiate and warn about.

 

There are mixed feelings on the issue of, say, Jack Hyles, but few would disagree that he ran his church with an iron fist, and een questioning him was tantamount to blasphemy against God, and not ust from Hyles himself, but from all those around him. That isn't NT Christianity, not a serant's heart, and I lay at least part of the blame for what happened  with Jack Schaap at those feet-he went into a position that he saw granted one virtual immunity to any investigation or questioning, but found it didn't work for him.  By the way, I am not saying Hyles did anything like Schaap did, that's not the point; rather, the feeling of being untouchable and unnaccountable to the church will open the door to temptation and sin.

 

Anyhow, don't mean to get off target, nor to make it a bashing seesion on anyone-but as I said before, there are things that have crept in unawares and they should be talked about. Poor leaders and practices have left many castaways-and while I agree that people need to look beyond the one to the Lord, and if necessary, find a new church, I also know that these leaders will be accountabel, as will the churches that will not rein in a pastor when it is needed.