IFB Cultic Element

[Bro. Williams]

Are we not all transgressors? I didn't say they physically bowed down to preachers or their pictures, nor did I say that they prayed to dead ones (although from previous posts it is apparent some did!), so kindly don't put words in my mouth.

My statement was that "some of these preachers are... made into gods or demigods. (For many have mentioned with the explicit following some of them have without warrant.)"

The point was that some men follow some of these preachers as if they are the Living Christ Himself, and some of these preachers expect that. And yes I am aware of at least from personal experience that exhibits this trait, where preacher and associate are oft apt to say "we are the authority!", in regards to all truth and knowledge (even to outside churches, pastors, christians, etc.). My quote was in regards to the following of the people and the further worship of these men, hence the statement in the parentheses.

If you are not aware of this situation, then you have not been around as much in your many years as you would like to boast that you have, or possibly you have done it with closed eyes.

Now listen, I am IFB. I became IFB by choice (not reared or brought up in or dragged into, etc). I know that the IFB movement is the closest to Biblical doctrine that can be found, that is why I became one. I have no qualms against IFB in general, but I will call a spade a spade, even if it is in my own camp. Don't forget, you addressed me on this issue, I was replying to someone else to begin with.

 

[Rippon]

BW , is Matthew 5:22 in your KJV or not ? If it's there than you fall under its condemnation . Get off your high horse .

 

[AF Guy N Paradise]

You know the pictures and autographs don't really bother me because my true earthly heroes and people I look up to are now preachers, missionairies, and basically anyone serving God full time.

However, that last church that I mentioned earlier was creepy and it came from the Hyles type in Longview, TX.

I still love sports and follow most of them pretty closely but I no longer look up to any of the players as a hero any longer. And look at how many athletes and celebrities are idolyzed these days. I would much prefer my kids look up to Godly men and women anyday over the wordly ones that so many look up to today.

 

[Bro. Williams]

John:

I just had the oppurtunity to street preach again, and to pass out about 500 Gospel tracts. I am not in the mood to argue the point any longer. I will not be swayed, nor will you. I will be careful in these things, and you may have liberty in them if you so choose. I wish to have no further arguments on the subject at the moment, for I am somewhat burdened with the masses at the moment. Don't get me wrong, I'm worthless when it comes to having a heart towards the lost in comparison to most (that doesn't stop me from going mind you), but something about tonight, the fact that I was alone, and the fact that there were so many people, and so man... souls in peril, I'm just kinda bummed. As a missionary, I am sure you know what I mean. Truce for the moment? BTW, I will even let you be right if you want, and I'll take back the fool thing. Why not? It won't matter in heaven when all is said and done other than a rebuke for one or the other (and maybe a chastisement).


Rippon: I have seen no good come from you yet. Also, I cannot find the last post that I sent in regards to[personal attack deleted] but you should repent. Furthermore, you know I have the verse you mention. To expound,
1)I wasn't angry without cause
2)I didn't say Raca
3)I didn't say "thou fool" (to be specific)
and most importantly, (and most obvious to those who can read 5th grade English)
4) I am sealed forever in the palm of HIS hand, I am in no danger of hell fire.

[personal attack deleted]

 

[John of Japan]

John:

I just had the oppurtunity to street preach again, and to pass out about 500 Gospel tracts. I am not in the mood to argue the point any longer. I will not be swayed, nor will you. I will be careful in these things, and you may have liberty in them if you so choose. I wish to have no further arguments on the subject at the moment, for I am somewhat burdened with the masses at the moment. Don't get me wrong, I'm worthless when it comes to having a heart towards the lost in comparison to most (that doesn't stop me from going mind you), but something about tonight, the fact that I was alone, and the fact that there were so many people, and so man... souls in peril, I'm just kinda bummed. As a missionary, I am sure you know what I mean. Truce for the moment? BTW, I will even let you be right if you want, and I'll take back the fool thing. Why not? It won't matter in heaven when all is said and done other than a rebuke for one or the other (and maybe a chastisement).

My desire is not to be right but to do right and follow and say what is right and be a disciple of Him Who is always right.

But I'll accept this.

God bless.

 

[Bro. Williams]

as we say in ky, presheate it. until next time...

 

[Ulsterman]

Well, Ulsterman, I'll agree that Bro. Hyles' actions towards a picture of my grandfather are somewhat cultic. However, it is my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) that Catholics actually ask the saints for help. If so, that means they are trying to make the saints into divine beings that can answer their prayers, and that is idolatry. I really don't think that was Bro. Hyles' attitude towards my grandfather, at least not that I've ever heard.

I was wondering is it really right to confine idolatry to its strictest definition? After all rebellion and stubbornness Samuel likened to idolatry (1 Sam 15:3), and Paul likened covetousness to idolatry (Col 3:5).

If someone makes an image, but doesn't pray to it, does that make it any less an idol? In Roman Catholicism there is a recognition that images are not the reality, but are often likened to a photograph, i.e., I have a photograph of my children on my wall, I know the picture is not my children, but it reminds me of them. Many Catholics uses images in this way, "I know it is not Jesus, mary etc., but it reminds me of them," and I think most Baptist preachers would discourage it. Again it is "cultic". Jack Hyles knew that the picture on his wall was not Dr. Rice, but he spoke to it any way. The argument used in defence of Catholic images is the same argument being used here, and in my view it is unhelpful as it certainly opens the door to idolatry if it does not directly equate with it.

 

[John of Japan]

I was wondering is it really right to confine idolatry to its strictest definition? After all rebellion and stubbornness Samuel likened to idolatry (1 Sam 15:3), and Paul likened covetousness to idolatry (Col 3:5).

You are right here, but I'm sure you'll agree that we can't make the word mean anything we want it to. As a certain American radio voice likes to say, "Words mean things."

If someone makes an image, but doesn't pray to it, does that make it any less an idol?

Actually, yes. Note that God Himself ordered images of cherubim to be made, as well as other images such as the pomegranates (sp?) on the hem of the priest's garment. Simply making an image is not idolatry. The line is crossed when the image is worshipped. Until then the image is art and not idol.

I was down at the Kodokan in Tokyo once, the world headquarters of Judo. There is a memorial statue of Jigaro Kano there. It is different in many ways from a Buddhist or Shinto idol. However, an old man came up to it, clapped his hands twice (to get the spirit's attention) and bowed his head and prayed to it. From art to idol in one easy lesson!

In the case of independent Baptists as we've been discussing, the issue began with photos of preachers on the wall. If those are idols, then I think we're all in trouble. It would be pretty radical to ban all photographs.

In Roman Catholicism there is a recognition that images are not the reality, but are often likened to a photograph, i.e., I have a photograph of my children on my wall, I know the picture is not my children, but it reminds me of them. Many Catholics uses images in this way, "I know it is not Jesus, mary etc., but it reminds me of them," and I think most Baptist preachers would discourage it. Again it is "cultic". Jack Hyles knew that the picture on his wall was not Dr. Rice, but he spoke to it any way. The argument used in defence of Catholic images is the same argument being used here, and in my view it is unhelpful as it certainly opens the door to idolatry if it does not directly equate with it.

The difference here is one of theology. You can disagree with the doctrine, but it is not the same as the Catholic teaching in my mind. Jack Hyles believed (getting it from John R. Rice's sermon, "Spectators in the Heavenly Grandstand," based on Heb. 12:1-2) that the believers in Heaven can at times see and know what is happening on earth. Therefore, when Jack Hyles spoke to the picture of my grandfather, he was not worshipping it, but believed he was speaking directly to Dr. Rice in Heaven. Now I disagree with that practice. I believe it might open the door to idolatry as you say if a weak brother copies the practice and goes too far, but I don't believe it is idolatry.

 

[av1611jim]

So you are saying "idolizing" a person is not idolatry? You may want to look up the definition! :laugh:

Bro Williams;
I admit that was a poor choice of words. But I did use quotes to show that I was in reference to someone else's use of the word. In addition; had you been able to get past that word (used early in my comment) you would have learned why I used that word.

These men are often looked up to for a good number of valid reasons and I think you know that. But they are NOT put on the same level as God.


Go back and re-read my post. You will find that you jumped on a single word in your haste and, my friend, that was unwise.

 

[Bro. Williams]

Bro Williams;
I admit that was a poor choice of words. But I did use quotes to show that I was in reference to someone else's use of the word. In addition; had you been able to get past that word (used early in my comment) you would have learned why I used that word.

These men are often looked up to for a good number of valid reasons and I think you know that. But they are NOT put on the same level as God.


Go back and re-read my post. You will find that you jumped on a single word in your haste and, my friend, that was unwise.

What is unwise is not saying what you mean and inadvertantly saying what you don't mean.

Also, I never said they were put on the same level as God. I said they were made gods and demigods. Big difference, little difference. I know the majority of IFB preachers would preach that a poster of a musician on a wall is idolatry (especially if it was signed), there is no difference in the principle. It is still man worship, and when you worship something, you are elevating it.

 

[thomas15]

I would like to weigh in with my opinion on the OP question. Unlike most here on this forum, I did not "grow up" in the church. Yes, my parents took us kid's to church (early 1960s to early 1970s- Baptist church in the USA which had at the time an old time preacher) however by the time I started high school church was a distant memory. In HS I attended mass with my firends (for social reasons) and in College attended various conservative main line and Baptist churches and was saved at that time.

We were involved with a liberal main line church for a number of years and left due to spiritual starvation. Looking around town we sampled everything leaving the GARB church for last. This is where we ended up however I spent more than a few Sundays in Conservative Baptist and Calvary Chapel.

Then we moved to a different state. The local IFB church which is very close to our house and I really want to like this place makes me very uncomfortable because it I feel that some of their practices are "cultic" in nature. I think that we have a certain amount of freedom in Christ and I believe that the Holy Spirit guides us in our behavor choices. I'm an adult and do not need to be told every week from the pulpit what to wear and how to act.

I'm much more comfortable with a church that is a little less strict but certainly Bible based gospel. I'm not a liberal by any streach of the imagination. Like many here I dig deep into the Bible and I do not take the words of any man on a par with Bible truth. Maybe I have a bad attitude but I hope that if I'm wrong on something that I would be open to correction by someone who rightly divides the Word but to do that I really need to see what the whole Bible say's on the subject.