Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

ABC's 20/20 Special on Independent, Fundamental Baptists


Recommended Posts

  • Administrators

Did anyone see the 20/20 special on IFB's? If not, I recommend you view it and then give your thoughts.

http://abc.go.com/watch/2020/SH559026/VD55121488/2020-48-victims-forced-confession


It made me thankful that my church is not like what was being portrayed on TV.
I did not like how they made it seem like all IFB churches are abusive, mine most defiantly is not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

What really alarmed me that in middle of the program it spoke about the Pastor preached on 2 week old babies being spanked. That I never heard at the several IFB churches I attended over the last 6 years. I seen a few ladies tap the 10 month old tushy very lightly and it worked but not spank a 2 week old like spanking.

I also had a problem of them of thinking dressing in long dresses and skirts are kinda of a old trend and forced about. Yes there some churches I have heard does that but not many does that. I am glad the current church pastor there at that church defended the faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Naturally this worldly program would find a way to attack Christianity in general and fundamentalists in particular.

Unfortunately, all too many have a view of IFBs along these lines; even many professing Christians. The media, and others, have done a great job of demonizing anything "fundamentalist" and anything truly Christian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I used to love watching 20/20 back in the day but I grew out of it because it didn't interest me. I am wondering if they wrapped up churches that is labeled baptist is bad also.

To some, the Baptist name has come to mean a church with stern, grouchy folks who believe they are perfect and everyone else is going to hell. They view Baptist as being "fundamentalist" in the bad way of considering the term.

This is the main reason many Baptist churches that go soft will drop the name "Baptist".

What those who demonize Baptists and fundamentalists are really seeking to do is attack God and turn people from Him.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I watched it via the link. On the one hand the media and the ex-IFB's no doubt have an anti-IFB agenda and are engaged in something of a smear campaign, but that doesn't mean that some of their accusations might not be true. To what extent the accusations are true, half truths, fabrications, or exaggeration it is impossible to say. If you take what is presented at face value though I think it is safe to say such things are not the norm though IFB churches are diverse and there are certainly some that are borderline cultic. I noticed they got some "nice" clips of Jack Schaap saying foolish things, but I suppose that isn't that hard to do. All they would need is a few clips from Steve Anderson and Peter Ruckman to complete their little "IFB's are a crazy cult" "hit" job. If that sort of preaching was all I had to go by I would think IFB's were nuts too. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I watched it via the link. On the one hand the media and the ex-IFB's no doubt have an anti-IFB agenda and are engaged in something of a smear campaign, but that doesn't mean that some of their accusations might not be true. To what extent the accusations are true, half truths, fabrications, or exaggeration it is impossible to say. If you take what is presented at face value though I think it is safe to say such things are not the norm though IFB churches are diverse and there are certainly some that are borderline cultic. I noticed they got some "nice" clips of Jack Schaap saying foolish things, but I suppose that isn't that hard to do. All they would need is a few clips from Steve Anderson and Peter Ruckman to complete their little "IFB's are a crazy cult" "hit" job. If that sort of preaching was all I had to go by I would think IFB's were nuts too. lol


I can agree entirely with what you say above. I would add that I sat under several IFB Pastors and attended many IFB Churches and I've never seen any evidence of these unconfirmed allegations.

Further, the liberal bias and worldly thought almost drips from the sides of interviewer's mouth like saliva from a hungry dog. I wonder what her position on the RCC's recent fame for child molestation is? I feel better now. Edited by 1Tim115
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I watched it and Schaap looked like an idiot as usual. I feel bad for Phelps, he did not look good in the parking lot interview. I can tell you there is more to the story with the girl. Phelps did call the police and the mother considers her daughter to be a liar. Check out their statements at www.drchuckphelps.com. What Pastor Phelps should have done was to make sure the police investigated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

My husband and I watched it...It was pretty frustrating for us, because we actually know P astor C huck P helps (T r i nity pastor accused of covering up rape) and his family very well. We also know J oc elyn Z ic hterman and C am ille L ewi s (the two women who are on the rampage against the "IFB" and who were interviewed on the show). We know the stories behind their desire for vengeance, because we watched each step of their journeys out of fundamentalism. B ri an F u ller (current pastor of T rini ty who was interviewed on the show) is also a personal friend; we were just up at Tri ni ty last year for a conference.

The main frustration we had with the program is that it is pretty much what we expected: sloppy, irresponsible journalism. Although Vargas claimed to have researched "the IFB" for a year, she couldn't manage to tell the difference between...
...Jack Schaap (foaming at the mouth, insulting the women in his church) and the pastor who spanks 2-week-old infants (IOW, crazy people)
and...
churches like yours and mine (and Tri ni ty Baptist).

You'd think that Vargas, in doing all that research about the IFB, would have learned that there are major differences between various IFB churches. But, no, she lumps the good, the bad, and the crazy all together and suggests that "the IFB" is a cult. Scandals and sensational stories mean high ratings; the public cries out for titillation. What other reason does 20/20 need in order to listen to the people with the most dramatic allegations and (even better) allegations about spiritual leaders? And Vargas was rewarded: 20/20 came out on top--#1--this week.

For those interested in the truth behind the Chuck Phelps story, here's a link telling his side: http://www.drchuckphelps.com/ I can vouch for this man's complete honesty. He even admits that, hindsight being what it is, he would probably have handled things a little differently with the "church" aspect (which was not even "discipline," anyway). But legally, he did everything by the book, and he has the records to prove it. The police, not Chuck Phelps, dropped the ball.

Edited by Annie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

There are horrible things that have happened under the auspices of IFB and other groups. The fact that they "zeroed in" on only IFB is telling...they could have compared it to other groups. You know, like the Catholic priests who rape boys and seduce women...

As to the girl who claims to have been raped. If she was, then she needs to be vindicated. But, truthfully: had I been raped by a man who then came to my door when my parents weren't home, there is no way I would have let him in. At 15, 13, 12 or otherwise. If she was raped, why didn't she say something? Actually, she was raped, whether she asked for it or not.

15 year old girls are quite capable of seduction. I've known some. I've also known girls who were raped by men in leadership. It is a problem, but I don't know if I believe she's completely innocent.

My thoughts are kind of along the lines of: she got pregnant and so had to admit to something....but she was still 15 - or actually 16. Forgive? Uh-uh, not if it were my daughter.

I agree, Annie, that was sloppy "journalism."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

What really alarmed me that in middle of the program it spoke about the Pastor preached on 2 week old babies being spanked.


This is nothing new. John R Rice taught that babies should be spanked. I'm not saying they should and I wouldn't do it but his kids seemed to have turned out alright.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

There are horrible things that have happened under the auspices of IFB and other groups. The fact that they "zeroed in" on only IFB is telling...they could have compared it to other groups. You know, like the Catholic priests who rape boys and seduce women...

As to the girl who claims to have been raped. If she was, then she needs to be vindicated. But, truthfully: had I been raped by a man who then came to my door when my parents weren't home, there is no way I would have let him in. At 15, 13, 12 or otherwise. If she was raped, why didn't she say something? Actually, she was raped, whether she asked for it or not.

15 year old girls are quite capable of seduction. I've known some. I've also known girls who were raped by men in leadership. It is a problem, but I don't know if I believe she's completely innocent.

My thoughts are kind of along the lines of: she got pregnant and so had to admit to something....but she was still 15 - or actually 16. Forgive? Uh-uh, not if it were my daughter.

I agree, Annie, that was sloppy "journalism."


Whether she was 15 and was seducing the man she is still innocent. The man was a married man and regardless of how the girl acted she is still a child and he is an adult.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Having been the victim of covered-up abuse myself, a lot of what was said in the 20/20 episode and on this thread hits close to home.

I thought the 20/20 production was relatively balanced in its approach and they did not verbalize a conclusive view that all IFB churches are cults or that they all have the types of problems highlighted in their show. Near the beginning and again in the closing sequences, they equated having standards (specifically dress and music standards) with being a cult, which is dishonest, and they also edited the music and video clips of IFB churches to come across in a very sinister way. Those seemed to be the two most unwarranted representations of IFB churches in their show. They definitely could have gone much further in their attacks, but didn't, and for that I am thankful.

I had also already heard of the women who were interviewed and who seem to have made it their personal goal to destroy the name of fundamental churches through broad-brushing all fundamental churches as being evil and heretical. Their efforts are based mostly on separation issues and allegations of oppression. It seems to me that they add in and magnify the stories of abuse to make their other positions less assailable.

One of the best points raised by the interviewer was the disingenuous practice among most IFB churches of denying their common roots and spheres of influence. The pastor who so graciously granted an interview did a good job of answering most of the questions, but when questioned about the island-like facade adopted by most IFB churches when trouble arises, he dropped the ball. There are very few truly INDEPENDENT Fundamental Baptist churches left. In my opinion, it seems like the "I" in "IFB" most often stands for "Institutional." This opinion is based on the widespread practice of most churches to limit their fellowship to a very tight institution based sphere of influence. Along with joining in some sort of fellowship, most will also only defend those IFB's who are members in good standing with an approved ministry that has sprung from their own preferred institution or association or fellowship.

The thing that disturbed me most as I watched was seeing the letterhead of a prominent IFB lawyer (who, by the way, has helped some of the worst examples of IFB preachers, pastors, and evangelists out of a plethora of legal troubles, mostly having to do with sexual perversion) in one of the video clips of Pastor Phelps' statement to 20/20. To me, that only hurts the credibility of Dr. Phelps. Besides, he says on his own website that there are many particular things he would have done differently in hindsight, so he shouldn't be surprised that others would follow his own lead in finding fault with the way things were handled years ago.

The most encouraging part was seeing a relatively young IFB pastor not defending the lunacy that can indeed be found in some corners of IFB-dom. It was disturbing, however, that he had not figured out a way to let the folks in his church know that he had two registered sex offenders in his church. Every pastor should be aware of who is sitting in the pews of the church where he is the watchman and should find some way to properly warn those for whose very souls he is watching. In that regard, it should be every pastor's goal to keep the children in the watch-care of the church from having to find out the hard way who among their fellow church-goers struggles with sexual deviance.

One thing that all believers should know is that God's grace is sufficient for every need and in dealing with every situation. It will never be acceptable in His eyes for people to use their scarred past to attack those who would endeavor to stay true to God and His word. In fact, God isn't interested in leaving such scars in our past when He can so thoroughly heal us by His grace.

I am a testimony of His power to heal from such wounds. By the way, I am still an independent (not beholden to any institution), fundamental (desiring to be separated from this world unto God for his own glory), Bible-believing baptist.

Praise the Lord and Him alone!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

We had a registered sex offender in our church at one time. This is a small town in a very rural county so most already knew who he was when he came to our church. Our pastor met with him several times and believed he was born again and was sincere in his desire to live for God and serve Him.

Our pastor explained to the man that for his safety, as well as others, he would not be allowed to work in any aspect of the children's ministries. Our pastor also explained this to all those who did work in the children's ministries, as well as to the board members and a few others. The man wasn't "kept under watch" or escorted everywhere in the church, but folks were aware of the safety limitations which had been put into place.

To that man's credit, during his entire time at our church (he has since moved to another State), he never complained about the limitations (though he did express sorrow and regret that such were necessary), he abided by the limitations, he never attempted to see how close he could get to the line of those limitations. He did serve the church faithfully in other capacities and was faithful in church attendance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...