Any Churchs you would recommend?

[patriotic]

Bible Baptist in Highland. 

Bro. Poole has been in the area for nearly 40 years and just keeps going stronger and stronger.  Never has "hob-nobbed" much with the large church in the Calumet area.  He's very laid-back too. 

Arlyn Walters pastors in Cedar Lake.  I can't remember name of his church.  Maybe Lighthouse?

 

[CONSPIRATOR]

Over the years people's tastes change. If Mrs. Hyles can handle the music used at a church like First

Dallas then any of us should also be able to handle it. She learned personally and up close from Bro.

Hyles. If Bro. Hyles philosophies did not stick with his wife of over 50 years, why would anyone

else be expected to continue to hold to such a discredited belief system?

This may be one of the sanest posts that I have ever seen.

 

[qwerty]

 

Arlyn Walters pastors in Cedar Lake.  I can't remember name of his church.  Maybe Lighthouse?

Yes, Lighthouse.

They went through a rough patch recently after they decided to follow the Bible more than IFB traditions and standards, but is definitely a stronger church now because of it. I had a chance to stop by awhile back after reading about their work in the community during the holidays and was impressed how they at doing and growing together.

Let me clarify, the rough patch was because of some of the HAC/FBCH dropouts and (IFB) lifers, not because of their regular crowd. It was a sad display and eye opening of the IFBx mentality.

 

[Fresh Air]

Over the years people's tastes change. If Mrs. Hyles can handle the music used at a church like First

Dallas then any of us should also be able to handle it. She learned personally and up close from Bro.

Hyles. If Bro. Hyles philosophies did not stick with his wife of over 50 years, why would anyone

else be expected to continue to hold to such a discredited belief system?

Um, believe it or not, but there are some of us who hold our position b/c we believe it is found in the Bible rather than b/c Bro. Hyles taught/didn't teach it, or b/c Mrs. Hyles (or anybody else) followed it or didn't follow it.

I do not at all deny that she has shown herself to be rather unconcerned with many of her husband's opinions. I do deny that her actions have any bearing at all over whether I should do/shouldn't do what I believe to be right.

 

[Fresh Air]

Yes, Lighthouse.

They went through a rough patch recently after they decided to follow the Bible more than IFB traditions and standards, but is definitely a stronger church now because of it. I had a chance to stop by awhile back after reading about their work in the community during the holidays and was impressed how they at doing and growing together.

Let me clarify, the rough patch was because of some of the HAC/FBCH dropouts and (IFB) lifers, not because of their regular crowd. It was a sad display and eye opening of the IFBx mentality.

So when he rather suddenly swerved course from what he had taught/preached all those years into something more widely palatable, and some of his people who still believed strongly in those now former positions were bothered by it, they were just supposed to shut up and go along?

If a teaching is particularly important to you, and it is suddenly abandoned by your church and criticized by the same pastor who used to uphold it then I guess you are just supposed to swallow it with a smile and throw your belief overboard at the same time...

You don't believe that, but that sure is how your post read. What you believe is that the positions he changed were  things of minor importance - to you. My point is that they aren't of minor importance to other people, and it isn't sad for them to fight for what they believe is important.

 

[Bruh]

Over the years people's tastes change. If Mrs. Hyles can handle the music used at a church like First

Dallas then any of us should also be able to handle it. She learned personally and up close from Bro.

Hyles. If Bro. Hyles philosophies did not stick with his wife of over 50 years, why would anyone

else be expected to continue to hold to such a discredited belief system?

Um, believe it or not, but there are some of us who hold our position b/c we believe it is found in the Bible rather than b/c Bro. Hyles taught/didn't teach it, or b/c Mrs. Hyles (or anybody else) followed it or didn't follow it.

I do not at all deny that she has shown herself to be rather unconcerned with many of her husband's opinions. I do deny that her actions have any bearing at all over whether I should do/shouldn't do what I believe to be right.

Exactly Tom.  Thank you. 

That "IS" the problem, they bought into his belief system.   

 

[WESLEY]

Yes, Lighthouse.

They went through a rough patch recently after they decided to follow the Bible more than IFB traditions and standards, but is definitely a stronger church now because of it. I had a chance to stop by awhile back after reading about their work in the community during the holidays and was impressed how they at doing and growing together.

Let me clarify, the rough patch was because of some of the HAC/FBCH dropouts and (IFB) lifers, not because of their regular crowd. It was a sad display and eye opening of the IFBx mentality.

How did the church change?  Also, when did this happen?

So when he rather suddenly swerved course from what he had taught/preached all those years into something more widely palatable, and some of his people who still believed strongly in those now former positions were bothered by it, they were just supposed to shut up and go along?

If a teaching is particularly important to you, and it is suddenly abandoned by your church and criticized by the same pastor who used to uphold it then I guess you are just supposed to swallow it with a smile and throw your belief overboard at the same time...

You don't believe that, but that sure is how your post read. What you believe is that the positions he changed were  things of minor importance - to you. My point is that they aren't of minor importance to other people, and it isn't sad for them to fight for what they believe is important.

 

[qwerty]

Yes, Lighthouse.

They went through a rough patch recently after they decided to follow the Bible more than IFB traditions and standards, but is definitely a stronger church now because of it. I had a chance to stop by awhile back after reading about their work in the community during the holidays and was impressed how they at doing and growing together.

Let me clarify, the rough patch was because of some of the HAC/FBCH dropouts and (IFB) lifers, not because of their regular crowd. It was a sad display and eye opening of the IFBx mentality.

So when he rather suddenly swerved course from what he had taught/preached all those years into something more widely palatable, and some of his people who still believed strongly in those now former positions were bothered by it, they were just supposed to shut up and go along?

If a teaching is particularly important to you, and it is suddenly abandoned by your church and criticized by the same pastor who used to uphold it then I guess you are just supposed to swallow it with a smile and throw your belief overboard at the same time...

You don't believe that, but that sure is how your post read. What you believe is that the positions he changed were  things of minor importance - to you. My point is that they aren't of minor importance to other people, and it isn't sad for them to fight for what they believe is important.

I guess it all depends of where the teaching originated from.....

They had their chance to fight and take their concerns to the deacon board and membership but got nowhere.  Their next resort was to try and pull as many members out of the church by whatever means necessary, even lying and tale-bearing.  One of the folks personally told me that they were merging with another local church (Faith).  I know Dave Weemhoff and he knew nothing of it and has never met with Arlyn. 

There was no criticism or condemnation of any belief(s), he was just no longer going to be preaching against things that had no Biblical foundation. Pant's on women was the straw that seemed to break the camel's back.  He was not going to make an issue of it, if you wear pants, so be it, if you wear only skirts and dresses, so be it.

To demonstrate their firm foundation in the scripture regarding pants, the wife of one of the families that left was at our home a few weeks after the announcement in her jeans.  Another wife was also visiting with her daughter in jeans.  Seems like the men had more of an issue with keeping their wives in check.

 

[BALAAM]

Yes, Lighthouse.

They went through a rough patch recently after they decided to follow the Bible more than IFB traditions and standards, but is definitely a stronger church now because of it. I had a chance to stop by awhile back after reading about their work in the community during the holidays and was impressed how they at doing and growing together.

Let me clarify, the rough patch was because of some of the HAC/FBCH dropouts and (IFB) lifers, not because of their regular crowd. It was a sad display and eye opening of the IFBx mentality.

So when he rather suddenly swerved course from what he had taught/preached all those years into something more widely palatable, and some of his people who still believed strongly in those now former positions were bothered by it, they were just supposed to shut up and go along?

If a teaching is particularly important to you, and it is suddenly abandoned by your church and criticized by the same pastor who used to uphold it then I guess you are just supposed to swallow it with a smile and throw your belief overboard at the same time...

You don't believe that, but that sure is how your post read. What you believe is that the positions he changed were  things of minor importance - to you. My point is that they aren't of minor importance to other people, and it isn't sad for them to fight for what they believe is important.

I guess it all depends of where the teaching originated from.....

They had their chance to fight and take their concerns to the deacon board and membership but got nowhere.  Their next resort was to try and pull as many members out of the church by whatever means necessary, even lying and tale-bearing.  One of the folks personally told me that they were merging with another local church (Faith).  I know Dave Weemhoff and he knew nothing of it and has never met with Arlyn. 

There was no criticism or condemnation of any belief(s), he was just no longer going to be preaching against things that had no Biblical foundation. Pant's on women was the straw that seemed to break the camel's back.  He was not going to make an issue of it, if you wear pants, so be it, if you wear only skirts and dresses, so be it.

To demonstrate their firm foundation in the scripture regarding pants, the wife of one of the families that left was at our home a few weeks after the announcement in her jeans.  Another wife was also visiting with her daughter in jeans.  Seems like the men had more of an issue with keeping their wives in check.

Ah, yes. The fundamentals of the faith. Gotta stand for the fundamentals.  lol

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=qwerty]Seems like the men had more of an issue with keeping their wives in check.[/quote]

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=BALAAM]Ah, yes. The fundamentals of the faith. Gotta stand for the fundamentals.  lol[/quote]

On this issue, the truth of the Christ stands or falls...or something?

 

[Bruh]

Yes, Lighthouse.

They went through a rough patch recently after they decided to follow the Bible more than IFB traditions and standards, but is definitely a stronger church now because of it. I had a chance to stop by awhile back after reading about their work in the community during the holidays and was impressed how they at doing and growing together.

Let me clarify, the rough patch was because of some of the HAC/FBCH dropouts and (IFB) lifers, not because of their regular crowd. It was a sad display and eye opening of the IFBx mentality.

So when he rather suddenly swerved course from what he had taught/preached all those years into something more widely palatable, and some of his people who still believed strongly in those now former positions were bothered by it, they were just supposed to shut up and go along?

If a teaching is particularly important to you, and it is suddenly abandoned by your church and criticized by the same pastor who used to uphold it then I guess you are just supposed to swallow it with a smile and throw your belief overboard at the same time...

You don't believe that, but that sure is how your post read. What you believe is that the positions he changed were  things of minor importance - to you. My point is that they aren't of minor importance to other people, and it isn't sad for them to fight for what they believe is important.

I guess it all depends of where the teaching originated from.....

They had their chance to fight and take their concerns to the deacon board and membership but got nowhere.  Their next resort was to try and pull as many members out of the church by whatever means necessary, even lying and tale-bearing.  One of the folks personally told me that they were merging with another local church (Faith).  I know Dave Weemhoff and he knew nothing of it and has never met with Arlyn. 

There was no criticism or condemnation of any belief(s), he was just no longer going to be preaching against things that had no Biblical foundation. Pant's on women was the straw that seemed to break the camel's back.  He was not going to make an issue of it, if you wear pants, so be it, if you wear only skirts and dresses, so be it.

To demonstrate their firm foundation in the scripture regarding pants, the wife of one of the families that left was at our home a few weeks after the announcement in her jeans.  Another wife was also visiting with her daughter in jeans.  Seems like the men had more of an issue with keeping their wives in check.

I am persuaded that a person should be in a church because of Doctrine not because of "standards". 

Part of the problem of people leaving the IFB IMO is that they were Baptist because of standards (at least it seems that way to me) instead of Doctrine. 

I hear stuff like, the IFB is judgmental and "SOME" churches are "VERY" judgmental.  But that is not why I am Baptist.  Also, I hear, those "STANDARDS" are not even in the Bible, o.k but again that is not why one should be a Baptist. 

As far as my belief system I am Baptist because of Doctrine not whether or not a certain small sect of the IFB is judgmental or their "STANDARDS" are not found in Scripture. 

There could be many reasons one will leave a church.  The primary reason IMO should be over Doctrine, not "STANDARDS".     

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Bruh]I am persuaded that a person should be in a church because of Doctrine not because of "standards".  [/quote]

I am persuaded that a person should be in a church because it is a place where they can best serve the body of believers and the local community in the fulfillment of the Great Commission.

 

[Bruh]

[quote author=Bruh]I am persuaded that a person should be in a church because of Doctrine not because of "standards". 

I am persuaded that a person should be in a church because it is a place where they can best serve the body of believers and the local community in the fulfillment of the Great Commission.
[/quote]

I agree.  But before joining a church, wouldn't a person sit and ask Doctrinal question first? 

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Bruh]I am persuaded that a person should be in a church because of Doctrine not because of "standards". 

I am persuaded that a person should be in a church because it is a place where they can best serve the body of believers and the local community in the fulfillment of the Great Commission.

I agree.  But before joining a church, wouldn't a person sit and ask Doctrinal question first? [/quote]

I would choose a vibrant, alive, moving orthodox church with some questionable doctrines over a spiritually dead church that I completely agreed with doctrinally every. single. time.

 

[16KJV11]

[quote author=Bruh]I am persuaded that a person should be in a church because of Doctrine not because of "standards". 

I am persuaded that a person should be in a church because it is a place where they can best serve the body of believers and the local community in the fulfillment of the Great Commission.

I agree.  But before joining a church, wouldn't a person sit and ask Doctrinal question first?

I would choose a vibrant, alive, moving orthodox church with some questionable doctrines over a spiritually dead church that I completely agreed with doctrinally every. single. time.
[/quote]
What doctrines are you willing to compromise on?

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=16KJV11]What doctrines are you willing to compromise on?[/quote]

The better question would be: What doctrines will I not compromise on?

Answer: The ones expressed in the ecumenical creeds and the primacy of the greatest commandments. That's pretty much the essence of Christianity.

 

[Smellin Coffee]