How would YOU prove......

[No Nicolaitans]

I don't mean to interrupt the exchange, but I would like to offer another input. I realize that what I'm about to say may not go over well, so if this offends anyone...buck it up. LOL!

For years now, the world and other denominations have viewed IFBs as legalists...and I hate to say it...but rightly so (to an extent). In our desire to separate ecumenically and from the world, we have built ourselves a reputation of being legalists. By legalist, I'm referring to today's generally held meaning...not the true meaning.

Now, I'm a firm believer in separation...so don't think I'm speaking against it. What has happened though is this...in our desire to separate, many IFBs have become modern-day Pharisees. Many requirements and rules have been put in place by many churches and pastors. To ensure enforcement of these rules, involvement in certain aspects of the "ministry" requires one to abide by the rules. So, members (wanting to please their pastor) are forced to abide by those rules if they want to participate in certain aspects of the ministry...

So, we further produce more modern-day Pharisees in the membership; whereas, many members look down on other members who don't meet the standards set forth. So then we have even more Pharisees produced because they...want to please the members...who want to please their pastor.

All of that to say this...

Separation is good and right...when it comes from the heart. And when it comes from the heart, it's because you want to please the Lord...not your pastor, not Brother So-in-so, and not Sister You-know-who. Separation should come from one's heart...not because one is brow-beat and forced into it. The Pharisees of the Bible looked good on the outside. They had their religiosity down to a T, and they were admired by others...but inwardly, they were white-washed tombs full of dead men's bones...and I've seen a lot of that in today's churches.

What makes an Independent Baptist independent?

One thing that stands out is our view on separation. We believe the Bible, and we have a heart and willingness to take it literally. We desire to please the Lord with our lives, and in so doing, as we study his word, we will grow. As we grow, we become more and more fashioned into his image. As we become more and more fashioned into his image, we will look and act more like him and less like the world (and other denominations). I can tell the difference between someone who has grown into separation and someone who was forced into it...or someone who adopted it in order to please someone else. The Lord wasn't at all pleased or impressed by the Pharisees...and just to be honest here...I'm not either.

You can't force-feed a baby and expect him to all of a sudden grow and be a child in just a few weeks.

You can't force-feed a child and expect him to all of a sudden grow into a teenager in just a few weeks.

You can't force-feed a teenager and expect him to all of a sudden grow into an adult in just a few weeks.

You can't force-feed an adult and expect him to grow into an older man full of wisdom in just a few weeks.

They all have to grow, and as Christ's followers, we do too...

One reason I'm an Independent Baptist is because I believe in separation...separation from ecumenism and separation from the world. Why? Because that's what the Bible teaches, and since I want to please the Lord, I'm willing to allow him to grow me and mold-and-make me more and more into his image. Why? Because I love him. I'm not perfect by any means. None of us are...and that includes the modern-day Pharisees.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

17 minutes ago, No Nicolaitans said:

Now, I'm a firm believer in separation...so don't think I'm speaking against it. What has happened though is this...in our desire to separate, many IFBs have become modern-day Pharisees. Many requirements and rules have been put in place by many churches and pastors. To ensure enforcement of these rules, involvement in certain aspects of the "ministry" requires one to abide by the rules. So, members (wanting to please their pastor) are forced to abide by those rules if they want to participate in certain aspects of the ministry...

So, we further produce more modern-day Pharisees in the membership; whereas, many members look down on other members who don't meet the standards set forth. So then we have even more Pharisees produced because they...want to please the members...who want to please their pastor.

All of that to say this...

Separation is good and right...when it comes from the heart. And when it comes from the heart, it's because you want to please the Lord...not your pastor, not Brother So-in-so, and not Sister You-know-who. Separation should come from one's heart...not because one is brow-beat and forced into it. The Pharisees of the Bible looked good on the outside. They had their religiosity down to a T, and they were admired by others...but inwardly, they were white-washed tombs full of dead men's bones...and I've seen a lot of that in today's churches.

As a complete "aside" that is NOT at all central to the thread discussion --

The above reality is the reason that, although I have NO intention to depart from the "independent, fundamental Baptist movement" or to cease describing myself as an "independent, fundamental Baptist," I myself do NOT actually "fit in" very well with the "independent, fundamental Baptist movement" as a movement.  Far too often I find myself in disagreement with the "party line" of the movement; and I am just too "stubborn" simply to submit my position of personal, particular, precise Bible study unto that "party line," which makes the "movement" a bit unhappy with me. 

Edited January 6, 2017 by Pastor Scott Markle

[No Nicolaitans]

29 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

As a complete "aside" that is NOT at all central to the thread discussion --

The above reality is the reason that, although I have NO intention to depart from the "independent, fundamental Baptist movement" or to cease describing myself as an "independent, fundamental Baptist," I myself do NOT actually "fit in" very well with the "independent, fundamental Baptist movement" as a movement.  Far too often I find myself in disagreement with the "party line" of the movement; and I am just too "stubborn" simply to submit my position of personal, particular, precise Bible study unto that "party line," which makes the "movement" a bit unhappy with me. 

So you're saying that you're an Independent Independent Fundamental Baptist? Sorry Bro. Scott...I couldn't resist. : )

[Pastor Scott Markle]

29 minutes ago, No Nicolaitans said:

So you're saying that you're an Independent Independent Fundamental Baptist? Sorry Bro. Scott...I couldn't resist. : )

Ah, yes -- I guess that I am an IIFB.

[Jim_Alaska]

1 hour ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Ah, yes -- I guess that I am an IIFB.

And this I exactly why I said in a post on this very subject last year that once we start down this path there is no end to descriptive designations for what we are.

At that time I posted that I had never heard of the designation IFB until I became a member of this board. I have been an Independent Baptist from the very beginning and had only heard the name "Independent Baptist" as a description of what we are.

I do understand that what you said Bro. Scott, was said "tongue in cheek", but it does reinforce the point I was making that once we start adding descriptive words to our identification there is no end in sight.

As for me I'll stick to "Independent Baptist" and continue to explain what I mean by that.

[Salyan]

On ‎1‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 8:41 AM, No Nicolaitans said:

Hmmm...I don't know that I could prove it. Perhaps for me, the proof is in what can't be proven? After all...unlike other "denominations",

1. My "Denominational Headquarters" can't be physically visited by anyone; however, I'll gladly give someone the directions of how to get there.
2. I also can't physically take anyone to meet my "denomination's" President, C.E.O, and C.O.O. However, I'll gladly introduce someone to them through the means that they have provided.
3. If a person wants to see my "denomination's" Creed, I'll gladly show them; however, it might take them awhile to read all of it, because it's a book and covers A LOT of information. After all, though it's one book, it consists of 66 separate books and those books are further broken down into 1,189 chapters. I suspect that most people would lose interest after reading it for awhile. They may not like it either, because it uses all of those old-fashioned and archaic words that people seem to have so much trouble with today. Unfortunately, that's the only "Creed" that I accept...so please don't expect me to offer you an easier-to-read version of our "Creed". I could give the fundamentals that our "denomination" abides by, but it's based on our Creed...so...
4. My "denomination" only has two officers below our President, C.E.O., and C.O.O.; which are, pastor and deacon. A person could visit them...so that's feasible.
5. My "denomination" only consists of our President, C.E.O, C.O.O. (as noted above), the pastor and deacons (as noted above), and the members of our local church. Membership in my "denomination" is granted upon a person's salvation testimony and baptism. Everything is handled "in-house" in my "denomination", so if someone experienced a problem or had a need, and if our "in-house" system wasn't adequate for them to file their complaint or need, they would have to take it up with the President, C.E.O., and C.O.O. However, please see article #2.
6. My "denomination" only offers baptism to those who have given testimony of salvation. So, though it's very sweet and moving, we unfortunately won't baptize an infant. We only baptize by full immersion too, and I don't think many people would appreciate our dunking their infant under water.
7. My "denomination" only offers the Lord's Supper to the members in our "denomination" (please see article #5).
8. My "denomination" doesn't restrict members from their ability to act as a priest. All members are fully capable and encouraged to approach God personally, pray to him, and worship him personally in spirit and in truth. Our sole mediator is the C.E.O of our "denomination"...the Lord Jesus Christ.

I could go on a bit longer, but I think I've said enough.

This is downright awesome.  May I borrow it, No Nic? There are some people I'd love to share it with.

[No Nicolaitans]

9 minutes ago, Salyan said:

This is downright awesome.  May I borrow it, No Nic? There are some people I'd love to share it with.

For the low low price of just $9.95, you too, can use this descriptive description that describes what I was trying to describe...and I'll throw in a prayer shawl for free...normally priced at $39.95...

LOLOLOL!

Yes ma'am. Feel free to use it. Nice to hear from you Salyan!

[DaveW]

So what then are the fundamentals that are non-negotiable?

Those attributes that define biblical fundamentals that would be cause for separation?

In volume the Bible speaks only a very small amount about baptism or indeed about salvation.

Let's say that the Bible is only 20% directly about baptism and salvation.

Is EVERYTHING ELSE unimportant, or is it important to understand and learn about the subject matter of the other 80%?

And what of that is important enough to find agreement on?

(To be clear, I am not suggesting ANY of the Bible should be disregarded.)

Can one for instance deny the virgin birth and still RIGHTLY call themselves an IB?

[Genevanpreacher]

Baptism mode.

Eternal security.

Church offices.

Lords supper mode.

Salvation by faith alone.

'1 John 5:7' mode (trinity).

Virgin birth.

Holy Scriptures only source of teaching - not mens opinions.

 

Edited January 7, 2017 by Genevanpreacher

[...]

On 1/5/2017 at 3:36 AM, DaveW said:

If Independent Baptist doesn't mean anything anymore then it is meaningless..........

From my experience, the term Independent Fundamental Baptist helps me get a rough idea about the beliefs of an individual or a church.  It helps me to know that they aren't Catholic or Presbyterian or whatever and that they are KJV only, but that's about it.  IFB churches and individuals are so varied, that I believe the term to be almost meaningless and I believe it to be an obstacle to others.  

When I tell people that I am an IFB, if they have heard the term before, they usually ask, "You mean like Westboro Baptist?"  If not that, they as, "You mean like Steven Anderson?" or "You mean like Kent Hovind?"  To which I reply, "No, more like David Cloud," but almost no one I have spoken with has even heard of David Cloud.

My point is that most people, that I speak with, have either never heard of IFBs or, if they have, they equate it with hateful preachers, hateful picketers or crazy conspiracy theorists.  While they and I may share beliefs in some doctrines or practices, I would not align myself with them.

I think the term IFB is most useful for other like minded and mindful searchers in finding each other, but to use with extreme caution and discernment.

[DaveW]

And this is because people have watered down what it means...........

[Genevanpreacher]

How can it be watered down?

This year, on the 11th of January in fact, I will be saved for 30 years, and I still have never heard the term IFB used to describe an independent Bible believing Baptist Church in the 3 states of Indiana, Ohio, and Kentucky. And I have been to quite a few. They have always called themselves Independent Baptists.

I only hear and use the term on OB.

Being fundamental has always been a 'given' in IB churches.

Although the sign of the Church where I got saved and attended for 21 years said "Green Chapel Baptist Church, Independent, Fundamental".

Edited January 9, 2017 by Genevanpreacher

[Jim_Alaska]

I agree GP. As I said in a previous post I had never heard of IFB until coming to OB. I was saved in an Independent Baptist mission work in Fairbanks Alaska in 1975. Our sponsoring church identified itself as Independent Baptist, as did the churches that supported us. Our sponsoring church was Roger's Baptist Church of Garland Texas, a very large, well known church among Independent Baptists.

I was taught and have always believed that the word "Independent" was simply to show that we were not under any convention or fellowship and self governing, as scripture teaches.

[Musician4God1611]

I never tell people that I'm Fundamental. Half the people who use the term don't even know what it means. I tell them I'm "Bible Believing" instead. They know what that means. Seriously, most of the people I know that say they are Independent, FUNDAMENTAL (and yes that is the word they stress the most), Baptist, are just saying that because that's what they've been taught to say. They have no idea what the fundamentals of the faith are.

For that matter, I am wary to even accept the term fundamental until the person ascribing it tells me what it means to them. Bible Believing, on the other hand, is fairly well self-explanatory.

[swathdiver]

On 1/4/2017 at 10:53 PM, DaveW said:

OK folks, there has over time been discussions about what it means to be an Independent Baptist.

My question is: how would YOU prove you are an Independent Baptist as distinct from other independent churches or other "Baptist" groups?

Many people are independent, many people are baptist, but what proof would you give that you are actually an "independent baptist"?

Mods: if you think this could be inflammatory, then please deal with it is you see fit.

 

We preach and teach the WHOLE counsel of God.