Separation

[Hvnsaved]

I was wondering if IF BAptists take their separation too far in respect to tv coverage. Think of all the souls that would be won if great Fundamental preachers were on the major Christian networks, like TBN, INSP, Sky Angel, etc, etc.. The fact is, the Fundamentalists are strangely nowhere on these networks, which have audienes of millions around the world. The preachers who are regulars on these networks hardly ever preach the gospel. Instead, they only preach money.

Are IF BAptists not taking advantage of worldwide television because of their separatistic stand? Let's face it: IF Baptist leaders could not stand the thought of having a program of theirs on the same network as the 700 Club, which they view as part of Mystery Babylon! Is a rethink in order here???

hvnsaved

 

[mnw]

You really think they would allow an IFB on the same channels? In the UK it is virtually impossible, actually no, it is actually impossible to have an independent Christian radio station. There is one, but it is not quite fundamental/conservative. If that is not allowed what is the likelihood of appearing on regular tv?

I cannot see any of these channels allowing an IFB to preach on these channels without restrictions.

Or...

Just now I am thinking of a time a great circus ring master invited Moody to preach in his tent. Moody refused. Perhaps there are similar grounds for IFB's refusing to go on to some of these channels today.

 

[Ulsterman]

Tom Messer of Trinity Baptist Jacksonville has a regular slot on UCB TV.

 

[mnw]

Well, that's something.

 

[Hvnsaved]

I think you are missing the point. Is a RETHINK in order for Fundamental leadership today in the name of winning more souls?

 

[John of Japan]

I think you are missing the point. Is a RETHINK in order for Fundamental leadership today in the name of winning more souls?

To win more souls is not the primary duty of the Christian. It is to glorify God. There is no way I will compromise my stand against the Charismatic movement in order to get more exposure for my message.

As the Apostle Paul said, "For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just" (Rom. 3:7-8).

To stand shoulder to shoulder with the Charismatics simply means more opportunities for them to steal believers from good churches. Twice here in Japan the Charismatices have tried to steal members from my church. Once they succeeded. No way will I help that process, even to win souls. God does not require us to compromise our convictions for the sake of evangelism. That would not glorify Him.

 

[tinytim]

I tend to agree with you JoJ, especially when you see the TBN ilk.
But I have known some IFBs, (not to pinpoint a certain denomination, but no other seperates like they do) that refuse to even do a spot on a small local radio station. The station is mostly old country, mixed with some new, and some southern gospel. They have daily obituaries, hospital reports, and religious spots, where pastors can do devotionals. Overall, it is a fine station..

Their reason for not doing a spot.... The pastor of the Church of God down the road has one, and they want to seperate from that "club".

That to me is ridiculous.. whatcha say?

A little overboard?

 

[Hvnsaved]

Yeah, it just seems that not only to Fundamental preachers throw away some great opportunities to preach the gospel on tv and radio, but the Church's overall testimony is discredited sometimes when the scoop is that some parts of the Body won't have anything to do with others.

Fundamentalists have to balance things out a little more, in my estimation. It's like saying they teach everything just right, and all other sects are part of mystery Babylon. What IF Fundamentalists were or are wrong on, say, eschatology??? If that possibility exists, then doesn't it come across as hypocritical that they separate from others over various "convictions"?????

"Ecclesiastical separation" seems a contradiction in terms. Separation from the world?? YES!!!!!!!!!!!!! But "ecclesiastical" separation???? Doesn't the Bible teach ONE Church that shouldn't be biting at each other??? Maybe "agree to disagree" on some issues, but not divide over them would be the balance. Worldly Christians should be exhorted, reprimanded, taught, encouraged to be holy, etc......but shunned??? Maybe at some point within a local church context....but an entire movement shunning the rest of the Body. I don't know, but maybe we should go with allowing the local church to do the deciding. IFB Churches are big on "the local church", and that's great. But then they decree "ecclesiastical separation", which is outside the bounds of a local church.....isn't it???? The people they separate from are people they don't even know....all they know is that the church those people attend has a different label than "Independent, Fundamental, KJO"...so they write them off. Seems maybe we Fundamentalists should rethink things a bit.

Again, woldly separation....YES!!! But maybe "ecclesiastical separation" should be confined to the local church....shun those in the local church who have been approached in the scriptural pattern of: 1. A single person going to the worldly Christian, Step 2: Two or three from the local church going to the idividual; Step 3: Bringing that individual before the whole LOCAL church; Step 4: Members of that LOCAL church separate from that individual if no change has occurred. It seems a bit out of place automatically apply step 4 to those outside of our local church without even knowing them and on the basis of simply a different label on the church sign.

What do ya all think??

 

[Ulsterman]

To win more souls is not the primary duty of the Christian. It is to glorify God. There is no way I will compromise my stand against the Charismatic movement in order to get more exposure for my message.

As the Apostle Paul said, "For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just" (Rom. 3:7-8).

To stand shoulder to shoulder with the Charismatics simply means more opportunities for them to steal believers from good churches. Twice here in Japan the Charismatices have tried to steal members from my church. Once they succeeded. No way will I help that process, even to win souls. God does not require us to compromise our convictions for the sake of evangelism. That would not glorify Him.

Amen John. I was targeted by the GOD(less) Channel here in the UK some years ago. They said if our church would distribute some promotional material of their's, they in turn would point any enquirers our way. No thanks.

 

[John of Japan]

I tend to agree with you JoJ, especially when you see the TBN ilk.
But I have known some IFBs, (not to pinpoint a certain denomination, but no other seperates like they do) that refuse to even do a spot on a small local radio station. The station is mostly old country, mixed with some new, and some southern gospel. They have daily obituaries, hospital reports, and religious spots, where pastors can do devotionals. Overall, it is a fine station..

Their reason for not doing a spot.... The pastor of the Church of God down the road has one, and they want to seperate from that "club".

That to me is ridiculous.. whatcha say?

A little overboard?

I agree, tinytim, that case is quite overboard. Where I would draw the line would be a first line of defense of my people. Being small time :smilewinkgrin: , my first concern would be for my local church. I would want to protect my church people from any Charismatic influence or false doctrine ("name it and claim it," healing meetings, unknown tongues, "manifest sons of God" doctrine, etc.). I believe that is a huge responsibility for any pastor. So I would be on no network or station that would involve me either in supportilng Charismatics or giving aid and comfort to their agenda.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

To win more souls is not the primary duty of the Christian. It is to glorify God. There is no way I will compromise my stand against the Charismatic movement in order to get more exposure for my message.

As the Apostle Paul said, "For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just" (Rom. 3:7-8).

To stand shoulder to shoulder with the Charismatics simply means more opportunities for them to steal believers from good churches. Twice here in Japan the Charismatices have tried to steal members from my church. Once they succeeded. No way will I help that process, even to win souls. God does not require us to compromise our convictions for the sake of evangelism. That would not glorify Him.

I'm comin home Elizabeth. This is the big one.:smilewinkgrin:

JoJ,

I agree with you on this issue.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[John of Japan]

"Ecclesiastical separation" seems a contradiction in terms. Separation from the world?? YES!!!!!!!!!!!!! But "ecclesiastical" separation???? Doesn't the Bible teach ONE Church that shouldn't be biting at each other??? Maybe "agree to disagree" on some issues, but not divide over them would be the balance. Worldly Christians should be exhorted, reprimanded, taught, encouraged to be holy, etc......but shunned??? Maybe at some point within a local church context....but an entire movement shunning the rest of the Body. I don't know, but maybe we should go with allowing the local church to do the deciding. IFB Churches are big on "the local church", and that's great. But then they decree "ecclesiastical separation", which is outside the bounds of a local church.....isn't it???? The people they separate from are people they don't even know....all they know is that the church those people attend has a different label than "Independent, Fundamental, KJO"...so they write them off. Seems maybe we Fundamentalists should rethink things a bit.

Please explain how "ecclesiastical separation" is a contradiction in terms. Also, how could one church separating from another church (vis, an IFB church separating from a Charismatic church) NOT be a local church matter???

 

[John of Japan]

I'm comin home Elizabeth. This is the big one.:smilewinkgrin:

JoJ,

I agree with you on this issue.

Joseph Botwinick

Wow, how nice! :applause:

 

[John of Japan]

I'm comin home Elizabeth. This is the big one.:smilewinkgrin:

JoJ,

I agree with you on this issue.

Joseph Botwinick

Wow, how nice! :thumbs:

 

[bapmom]

The radio station in our area has many solid Bible preachers on it.......they even take a public stand against the charismatic movement. And yes, there are several IFB preachers who have spots on that radio station each week, too. I listen and am often blessed.

I think for the most part, what you are seeing is not separation, but lack of funds and lack of time. Most IFB pastors are the shepherd of a small group of folks. They do much of the church work themselves. Now we want to expect them to take more time out of their local church ministries to prepare, record and deliver a sermon for a weekly radio program? This is time-consuming, and it costs money. Don't they buy those spots on radio? I think most IFB churches just feel that they have better uses for their limited funds.

 

[tinytim]

That's a good point Bapmom, but what about the bigger congregations?

 

[bapmom]

the bigger congregations Ive been a part of had radio spots.......and I think they were working on the beginning of their own TV spot right as we were moving out of the area. But it was going to be on the local public station, rather than on some station like TBN. In those cases it would be a matter of separation.........they wouldn't have been on TBN because of the vast majority of TBN's programming.

On the other hand, the larger congregations have to deal with what mnw said....."will the station allow an IFB preacher to actually preach his message and continue having a program?"


one thing Ive noticed is that for the most part when Baptists have a radio spot they are the ones paying for it. All these other programs are always asking for money.

Oh! And I just thought of this too........the IFB preachers I know do sooooo much better preaching to a live, present congregation. I tell ya, I know men who preach on the radio and they seem to enjoy that give and take of an IFB congregation with its preacher. They tend to miss it with a radio spot....and it can sort of show.

 

[John of Japan]

Well said, bapmom.

Furthermore, in my experience IFB pastors and congregations tend to try to reach their immediate area nowadays with radio and/or TV, as opposed to the nation. I've been on a few of those programs over the years, and they are doing well on the local level.

Again, the IFB movement right now is concentrating on worldwide missions. There are many new mission boards and many fine young missionaries coming out under them. When you try to reach the world for Christ, somehow the gazillions of churches and zillions of Christian TV and radio shows in the US fade into the background.

At one time I counted the number of Baptist churches (of all types) in the Chattanooga, TN, phone book. For a population of about 200,000 at that time there were about 200 Baptist churches, or one per 1000 population. And hvnsaved wants us IFB types to try to do more to reach America? Look on the fields of the world, for they are white already for the harvest.

The last IFB pastor I know of who tried for a nationwide TV ministry was Jerry Falwell, and of course he doesn't claim the IFB label anymore. The last evangelist I know of to do so was Jack Van Impe, also no longer IFB. Frankly, I believe that compromise is necessary to operate on a national level like that, as these two cases prove. I think our movement does much better on a local level and then a world level, leaving the national level to others who are willing to compromise in the area of ecclesiastical separation.

 

[bapmom]

That makes sense, JoJ.

 

[mnw]

I have nothing against any Biblically correct method of distributing the Gospel and discipleship. To me, radio is Biblically correct.

However...

Historically, beginning in Acts, the impact on local communities has been on a local level by the local church.

TV/Radio evangelism is good, but personal evangelism and preaching is best.

And should one church separate from another? Over the fundamentals, yes.

There are preachers I would not have in our pulpit. But at the same time I will not denounce nor oppose their gospel message and ministry.

JoJ rightly stated, we have a responsibility, as pastors, to "protect" those under our responsibility, from doctrine we believe to be incorrect.

Perhaps debate on exactly what constitutes a fundamental would be beneficial... :thumbsup: