IFB in darkness?

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

I understand why the discussion on the IFB was closed in the other forum. That section is for Fundamental Baptist to fellowship and debate. If the moderator who closed that thread feels I am out of line in posting this please delete this thread.

Let me present a little background. I was saved in February 1974. From the very start I have mostly been associated with IFB churches. Through the years I have been a member of 6 different Independent Baptist churches. As a church planter I have had the privilege being involved the Lord's planting of an Independent Baptist church in Ireland. I am associated with an Independent Baptist mission agency. The mission board I am associated with and the churches I have been a part of would all consider themselves fundamentalists. I am a fundamentalist.

I have had occasion to speak in scores of Independent Baptist churches. Most of them would also be fundamentalist.

I have seen the ugliness which is so often associated with IFB churches. I have seen the overemphasis on personal standards. I have seen the 'spirituality checklists.' I have met the 'my way or the highway' pastors. I do know the things that cause offence and I do not condone those situations. I find those situations very sad and have opposed many of them in face to face discussions with their pastors.

Saying that, I find the charge that the 'vast majority of IFB churches' hold to this kind of teaching to be offensive. Out of all the churches I have preached in, many of them in the American south, I can count on both hands the total number of churches like that which I have encountered. I am not going to throw out a generalisation - I am speaking from my own personal experience. The percentage of churches that hold to those views that I have experiences would be less than 10%.

Even then, I have not seen any church that believes that our faith is perfected by works. One poster posted that 'If IFBers are honest they will admit that they believe perfecting of faith comes from keeping traditions.' While some of the extreme IFB churches may teach that standards are evidence of faith, none that I have encountered have ever claimed that they produce perfect faith.' Few that I have encountered would ever claim that standards are evidence of faith.

I guess I was mostly deeply troubled by the comment that spoke of being 'delivered from the darkness of IFB' made by a brother for whom I have high regard and great respect. I have never been involved with one of the hyper-radical 'IFB' groups so I can't speak of them. Perhaps they do 'walk in darkness.' I would not consider them true IFB. However, even the most strict IFB churches I have been in are not walking in darkness. Misguided and poorly taught as they might be, they are people who love the Lord and have a heart for souls. Though I may not always agree with their motivation or methods, the do share the gospel of Christ and people will be in heaven because of them.

There are those who would not consider me a fundamentalist. Some have disassociated because I am 'too liberal' for them. I still contend that these men are my brothers in Christ who desire to do right. We just have different ideas of how to do right. I also praise God for my SBC brethren who are faithfully sharing the gospel and edifying believers. The same goes for any church, no matter that their label, who are doing the same.

Make no mistake - I am an Independent Baptist, and I am a fundamentalist. I am enjoying walking in the glorious light of the gospel of Christ and striving to serve Him. Darkness has not described my life in a long, long time.

 

[freeatlast]

Roger
I did not get into that debate in the other thread you mentioned and so I will admit that I am at some loss as to what you are trying to correct, defend or uphold, but I can tell you that just based on what you have written here about some IFB churches I would not want to be associated with the churches you described.
Anytime we start defending denominations satan has won his battle. It is not about a denomination. Even denominations within denominations. Our arrogant pride over denominations has just about destroyed the truth. It has to be about Christ alone and the truth of the word of God. I am afraid that many have either forgotten this or have never learned it.

 

[HAMel]

I came to know the Lord in 1972 and was directed toward all things Independent and Fundamental. Trusting in the wisdom of those who were supposedly in the know, off I went.

I finally came to the conclusion that for some reason, I just didn't seem to fit in. As my employment caused us to relocate quite often we membered up with a lot of churches along the East Coast and while we were always accepted for membership, we just didn't seem to fit in.

I was too trusting. What the man preached from the pulpit had to be the Gospel Truth, or else he wouldn't be there, so I was lead to believe.

Now, into my mid 60's, it does appear that I sat under way too many sermons laced with agenda and was had. Had, not out of malice specifically but as a result of agenda.

I'm still reeling over the latest revelation that a "Husband of one Wife" means, a "One Woman Man". Wow!!! What a door opener for me. This might be of no big consequence for many of you but was profound to me.

The preacher in one church we attended preached on a regular basis against tobacco and how anyone who ever used the stuff was going straight to hell..., all the while the head deacon was a tobacco farmer.

Believing in the Lord and following the teachings of Jesus should not be that hard. Hey, I was made to feel guilty once for missing a Wednesday night Prayer Meeting but I don't suppose anything will smooth out until after He sets up His Kingdom here on earth.

There's a lot of good and faithful preachers out there really trying and for those who are, I appreciate their efforts. May the Lord bless all of you.

 

[Dr. Bob]

I've been a Baptist since 1958 when baptized at the 4th Baptist Church in Minneapolis (largest ifb church in the upper midwest at the time). It had withdrawn from the Northern Baptist Convention and was affiliated witht he Conservative Baptist Association of America at that time.

Some of the Baptists I've known who are "undependent" and "fundamental" have developed all sorts of man-made rules for righteousness (not in the Bible), preferences they defend as if convictions, man-worship and unhealthy followers.

But that said, some Baptists in conventions have developed similar false teaching or false actions. And some Baptists who are more "moderate" (euphemism for "liberal" so as not to confuse them with true theological liberalism) likewise have their own unwritten "rules", non-biblical teaching and gurus.

So . . this is an issue within every type of "Baptist" in America. It is more prevalent in the IFB since the IFB is a very small percentage of Baptists in America and this "x" type (extreme in doctrine/practice) a larger portion of them.

Estimates: Of the approximate 50 million Baptists in America, only 3 million would be truly "IFB". Of that, if 1 million were "extreme" in doctrine/practice, that SEEMS a huge number. In percentage of ALL Baptists, however, it is hardly a blip on the radar.

 

[HAMel]

On a few occasions I would attempt at listening to Charles Stanley on TV. (Not trying to pick on Stanley) Each and every time I'd get about ten minutes into his sermon(s) and completely drift off into another land. I simply could not muster the attention he required.

Often Stanley would begin to explain that what was really being said in a particular scripture was this, or that, or something else. Being a layman, it appeared to me that our Lord's Word was/is as infinite as He is. How can any man determine the meaning of scripture with surety? The Living Word of God is so deep that all I can do is accept it with faith and each specific Scripture could apply to a thousand different individuals in a thousand different ways. His Word is the Living Word.

"Thou shalt not commit adultery." Short and to the point and I have never done such..., or have I? In my heart? How did that thief on the cross end up in heaven? Why, he didn't even have opportunity to sing in the choir.

 

[TCassidy]

I couldn't agree more, Roger. In my 37 years in the ministry I have been a member of 9 IFB churches. Of those 9 NONE of them have been as characterized by glfredrick and tinytim. In that same 37 years of IFB ministry I have been in hundreds of IFB churches, often representing the two IFB schools I was associated with. In those hundreds of churches I found only 3 or 4 that were legalistic, dictatorial, and proudly exclusivist.

Oh, and I think I know why the other thread was closed (anonymously, of course). We were actually making some progress toward consensus, and that just can't be allowed to happen on the BB. Too much consensus brings the hit count down and the $$ don't flow.

 

[freeatlast]

I couldn't agree more, Roger. In my 37 years in the ministry I have been a member of 9 IFB churches. Of those 9 NONE of them have been as characterized by glfredrick and tinytim. In that same 37 years of IFB ministry I have been in hundreds of IFB churches, often representing the two IFB schools I was associated with. In those hundreds of churches I found only 3 or 4 that were legalistic, dictatorial, and proudly exclusivist.

Oh, and I think I know why the other thread was closed (anonymously, of course). We were actually making some progress toward consensus, and that just can't be allowed to happen on the BB. Too much consensus brings the hit count down and the $$ don't flow.

I will say this. I am never interested in denominations and especially never defending one. However that low blow about the money issue makes it clear that your support of IFB shows the real character of the group.

 

[tinytim]

Roger, I will answer your question tonight. I came back to the other thread last night to answer, but it was closed. Let me reassure everyone that I have been "conditioned" to feel the way I do, by the churches I was a part of growing up.. and I do realize not every IFB CHUrches are not all in darkness. Roger, If I was in Ireland, I would be proud to be part of your church, because you are not like the IFBs I was raised with..

I'll explain tonight... So, everyone please behave so this thread doesn't get closed... LOL

OK, back to Seminary work I go!

 

[InTheLight]

I've been a Baptist since 1958 when baptized at the 4th Baptist Church in Minneapolis (largest ifb church in the upper midwest at the time). It had withdrawn from the Northern Baptist Convention and was affiliated witht he Conservative Baptist Association of America at that time.

Interesting. I attended Fourth Baptist a few times in the 1970's. I would put it in the legalistic camp, but not as stringent as some others.

Estimates: Of the approximate 50 million Baptists in America, only 3 million would be truly "IFB". Of that, if 1 million were "extreme" in doctrine/practice, that SEEMS a huge number. In percentage of ALL Baptists, however, it is hardly a blip on the radar.

This seems to be a fair assessment. So why do I seem to find one of those 3 million?

 

[TCassidy]

I will say this. I am never interested in denominations and especially never defending one. However that low blow about the money issue makes it clear that your support of IFB shows the real character of the group.

What are you talking about? You are not making any sense. What denomination are you talking about? And what money issue?

 

[Dr. Bob]

Interesting. I attended Fourth Baptist a few times in the 1970's. I would put it in the legalistic camp, but not as stringent as some others.

I was there 1957-68 and yes it had some "legalism", but MINIMAL contrasted to many groups/associations and churches. We had no "dress code" (gals wore blue jeans - anathema to legalists); no "one version only mentality" (actually used/recommended the ASV1901 for study); no conduct rules like "mixed swimming" or racial divide (we had multi-race and swimming and canoe trips, etc with both genders together).

Fourth was home to Central Seminary, so 100 quality men (families) + faculty. Great people. And we did cooperate loosely with other churches in the Minnesota Baptist Convention (now Association). Pillsbury Baptist College was also highly promoted and, of course, there were LOTS of rules involved in an ifb college!!

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

...the real character of the group.

Here is part of the confusion - there is no IFB 'group.' There are IFB churches which are so varied and diverse that they cannot be a group.

 

[TCassidy]

Here is part of the confusion - there is no IFB 'group.' There are IFB churches which are so varied and diverse that they cannot be a group.

Yeah, I didn't even bother! What part of "Independent" is so hard to understand?

 

[InTheLight]

I was there 1957-68 and yes it had some "legalism", but MINIMAL contrasted to many groups/associations and churches. We had no "dress code" (gals wore blue jeans - anathema to legalists); no "one version only mentality" (actually used/recommended the ASV1901 for study); no conduct rules like "mixed swimming" or racial divide (we had multi-race and swimming and canoe trips, etc with both genders together).

Fourth was home to Central Seminary, so 100 quality men (families) + faculty. Great people. And we did cooperate loosely with other churches in the Minnesota Baptist Convention (now Association). Pillsbury Baptist College was also highly promoted and, of course, there were LOTS of rules involved in an ifb college!!

My sister graduated from Pillsbury Baptist Bible College, or P.U. as she called it!

 

[robt.k.fall]

And where would

a church like Hamilton Square Baptist of San Francisco go? When we were organized in 1881, the Northern Baptist Convention didn't exist and the SBC confined itself to the south and southwest. So who do we join?

 

[Jerome]

The General Baptist Convention of California

 

[BobinKy]

...Bob

 

[Don]

Yeah, I didn't even bother! What part of "Independent" is so hard to understand?

That's the biggest problem with the OP: lumping all IFBs in one group.

I tend to identify different "camps"; but this isn't meant to say there are specific group affiliations. Perhaps a better word is "influences."

For example, there are those IFB churches that have easily identifiable influences from Jack Hyles and First Baptist Church of Hammond; and there are those with influences from the Bible Baptist Fellowship out of Missouri; and then there's the Pacific coast groups.

Most of these are centered around a college, where the particular influences of a specific pastor or church are ingrained into the students (brain-washing?)

But I have this insight thanks to the military, and the moving around the country I've done. While I can see what the OP was trying to say, as an IFB by choice myself, I cannot agree with the over-generalization/broadbrushing that the OP espoused.

 

[TCassidy]

That's the biggest problem with the OP: lumping all IFBs in one group.

I tend to identify different "camps"; but this isn't meant to say there are specific group affiliations. Perhaps a better word is "influences."

For example, there are those IFB churches that have easily identifiable influences from Jack Hyles and First Baptist Church of Hammond; and there are those with influences from the Bible Baptist Fellowship out of Missouri; and then there's the Pacific coast groups.

Most of these are centered around a college, where the particular influences of a specific pastor or church are ingrained into the students (brain-washing?)

But I have this insight thanks to the military, and the moving around the country I've done. While I can see what the OP was trying to say, as an IFB by choice myself, I cannot agree with the over-generalization/broadbrushing that the OP espoused.

Exactly. Well said.

 

[idonthavetimeforthis]

I think some of the over generalizations towards IFB come from the paper "The Sword of The Lord" (at least where I come from). I know a while back they did a series on why Southern Baptist were wrong, etc. How many of you IFB subscribe to & read The Sword?