IFB compared to Baptist churches

Not trying to be a wise guy here ...... are you referring to to the Talmud (prounced Tal mood) (Judaisms Holiest Book)....just trying to get clarification. My friend Carl, who is teaching me Hebrew, is a Talmudic Scholar. He is also a mohel (pronounced moyel).....the guy who does the brit. We call him, "Just a little off the top, Carl" :laugh:...or maybe tip!

 

I cannot understand why that disturbed you.

How did you come to that conclusion by the question I asked? I could have asked that same question of anyone who wrote the same thing. It has nothing to do with you or your denomination or any other church.

I do not have any problem with your responses. What I have a problem with is your false judgements and failure to ask question on points rather than making assumptions and trying to put words in my mouth.

I certainly was not thinking about that. I am not aware of any conversation of that nature. The pastor that several of us had the conversation with was not RCC and is a very godly man.

A question denotes an assumption? Hardly! You assumed that I lumped you with the RCC and that thought never crossed my mind. I still wonder why you made such an assumption. I already knew that you are SBC so why would I lump you with the RCC. Are you mixing me up with someone else?

I am amazed at how you could be so full of false judgements coming from one question.Perhaps you might ask some questions first before making assumptions and judgments. You may just be wrong and if you were you might not like what you get in return.

My point in asking you the question was to get you to think period. "Possible" is not fact. I was simply surprised at how you responded like a tiger at the single question I asked.

I have always had a good opinion even though we have differed on some points. I have seen you bring up some very good points. The thing that bothers me is how I believe you have made some judgments which I see as false and am unable to see where you got some them. For example in the statement you wrote, "Whatever... You can play the role of accuser of the brethren all you like." How in the world can you write such a thing. What evidence do you have that I am an accuser of the brethren? That is quite the judgment on your part. How you come to such a judgment from one question I am unable to comprehend.

I am unable to understand why you sought to intimidate and demean me mentioning about 1 Peter as though I did not know it was a book. Do you really want to go down that route? If you would like to discuss the literary structure and historical context from the Greek text I would be happy to, but I did not sense that was your point.

 

Boy Boys! Your both Christians & Brethren.......remember Christs teaching on forbearance!

 

Typically a talmid is a disciple who studied under a rabbi to learn become like the rabbi. The only time it is used in the OT it is in reference to a pupil in 1 Chron 25:8.

I would assume you know that the Babylonian Talmud is available online at http://www.halakhah.com/ and http://www.come-and-hear.com/talmud/index.html

What I have noticed is that what Judaism is today is not always what Judaism was in the first century.

 

Oh OK a disciple ....got it! & yea, Ive noticed lots of historical differences.....but ya know what, Rabbi Carl will go out for a beer with me. Try to get a Baptist Pastor to relax & have a beer with a laymen. :laugh:

 

Have you gone to a synagogue? The first time I did I was shocked. They had whiskey present. My parents were grape farmers and I have never liked the taste of wine. We always had wine around but seldom ever drank any. Most of my family does not like alcohol. Nobody in my family or anyone I knew who were grape farmers ever got drunk. Many in the city did though.

You may be a little surpried if you really knew the truth. When I first attended a Baptist Church I was shocked at how much beer and wine I saw in homes. When I pastored it was the same story. it seems that so often what is preached as taboo becomes an incentive to know more.

I just found another resource at http://www.ultimatebiblereferencelibrary.com/FreeDownloads.html

 

People who know me on baptist board know that I have very strong feelings about churches that are anti-intellectual, espouse extra-biblical standards, preach extra-biblical doctrines, etc...

And it has been my personal experience that many IFB (Independent Fundamental Baptist) churches do just that.

But I have also recognized that there are undoubtedly many good churches that might call themselves IFB, as well.

Just based on what you have said about this one, it may be one of those good IFB churches.

I agree with Don about his assessment as well.

 

Not against....just points of distinction. I have attended IFB churches that are not like mine, and I still found common ground in what we believe and preach.

I find the same in other types of Baptist churches too.

 

On this we agree.

 

here in MI, the 3 common points contrasting IBF and other baptists are:

Tend to be KJVO
Tend to being more "strictly" following the Law
tend to see other believers as being 'too loose living"
tend to at times judge where other attend as not being 'strict enough!"

 

That's actually 4....

At any rate, I've preached all over MI and:

1. KJVO? Some are, most are KJV Preferred. I have supporting IFB churches in MI which are not either, though.

2. Following the Law? As in OT Law? No way.

3. See other believers as "too loose living"? And
4. Others as "not strict enough?"

I assume by 3 & 4 you mean the doctrine of personal separation. I think this is a too simplistic opinion of this. But in short, yes, IFB churches tend to have high standards of personal separation--sometimes too high, I admit. But as my pastor father used to say, "I'd much rather be criticized for having standards that are too high than for having standards that are too low."

So a certain person posted in another thread that he thought drunkenness was all right. No thanks, I'll stick to my teetotalism.

 

This may be true. In the circles to which I have been exposed which encompass some of the largest and most well known ministries in IFB, KJVO is certainly the majority.

And even when somebody says that he is KJVP, often times this really means he has no confidence in the other versions which is why he uses the King James.

That being the case, he's really KJVO.

I am actually KJVP- I have great confidence in other versions and beleive other versions surpass the King James in some areas- but I think overall, across the board, the King James is hard to beat. I especially like it for reading in public due to the beauty and authority of the language.

To me, that's really what it means to be KJVP.

I agree. I don't think it is the OT law that many IFB churches demand you adhere to. It is man made laws.

I. Thou shalt acquiesce to the authority of the pastor without question.

II. Thou shalt consider the SBC an apostate movement.

III. Thou shalt not wear pants if thou art a woman.

IV. Thou shalt not listen to contemporary music- particularly if the drums are utilized greatly for thou knowest that it carrieth with it the sound of war like the music that lead Israel to worship the golden calf.

V. Thou shalt listen to and sing either starchy, corny music that is heavy on soul-winning themes and light on theology and Christocentricity (if from the north or from Bob Jones or PCC) or music that sounds like Hank Williams Sr. wrote it and speaks more of grandma, the old ways and the woods than Jesus (if from the south) for these types alone are God's music.

VI. Thy people shalt appear in public to be always trying to bring the styles of the 50's back- no matter how weird it looks (after all that's what it means to be a PECULIAR people).

VII. Thou shalt believe that Baptists are not Protestant and that they extend all the way back to the New Testament in a solid unbroken line even though there is no evidence of this whatsoever.

VIII. Thou shalt preach against sin and since everything is a sin, thou shalt preach against everything for it is more important that people doth know standards well than that they know the Savior well.

IX. Thou shalt despise seminary education unless it cometh from an IFB university and therefore thou shalt start a college in one of every ten IFB churches.

X. Thou shalt not ever question what thou believest and hast been trained from birth in IFB churches even if thou hast no Bible support for what thou hast been taught or thou shalt be called a compromiser and a liberal.

Of course this does not characterize every IFB church by any means because many IFB churches are good churches. But it does characterize many other IFB churches to which many of us on BB have been exposed.

Right. See commandment 10. You are a faithful IFB.

 

This is a childish and sarcastic rant against Christian brothers.

Why not rant against the lost folks of the world and leave Christians alone?

John

 

Hi Luke......FUNNY! ....but just so you know, my brothers IFB pastor is a Calvinist.

 

I think this is you keeping the eighth man made fundamentalist commandment.

God bless!

 

Sure. And he may be one of many good IFB pastors.

But just like there are many carnal security churches in SBC but there are also many solid SBC churches- there are many pharisaical IFB churches and many good ones as well.

If John of Japan were to argue that MANY SBC churches are liberal, I would have to agree.

I don't know why Joh cannot stand to admit that many IFB churches are legalistic.

 

I freely admit that many IFB churches are legalistic. What I object to is the common view among ignorant Christians that simply having rules is legalism. If that were true than any church with a constitution would be legalistic. Legalism is the view that rules make you holy, which the large majority of IFB people would deny.

“Legalism is a slavish following of the laws in the belief that one thereby earns merit; it also entails a refusal to go beyond the formal or literal requirements of the law” (Christian Theology, 2nd ed., by SBC theologian Millard Erickson, p. 990).

 

Years ago I looked at pastoring in an IFB Church because of what I had seen in some pastors and people I knew. On BB I have gotten a much different picture by what I see posted than what my past experience had been.

 

Any monolithic opinion of our movement is bound to be mistaken. We have over 13,700 churches in the US alone (2008 survey). In one area of the country the IFB churches may be legalistic (in the correct theological meaning), Ruckmanite and nasty. In another they might be scholarly, godly and progressive. The church in which I am currently in a missons conference is the latter. I've never seen such an innovative missionary conference!

 

Isn't that the definition of autonomous local church? One can be vastly different than another, based on their own tradition, leadership, and doctrine.

Same for ALL Baptist churches, whether SBC, IFB, etc.

BUT, there are some traits that are inhereted and seemingly in the DNA, and that is based, again, on the tradition of the congregation or sect, i.e., the "authorities" to which one turns for information regarding doctrine and practice. As some turn to fundamentalist and some turn to moderate-leaning (and a bare few even turn to true liberal views) those congregations begin to take on the attributes of their mentors.