The Decline of the IFB Movement?

[Tarheel Baptist]

Who are today's IFB leaders who have influence outside of a sphere of 75-100 churches?
And are there any IFB mega churches less than 20 years old?

In fact, how many IFB mega churches exist today...period?

A mega church is over 2000 in attendance, at least that's how I think it's defined.
I ask jXust as a gage of the growth of the movement, not to say thats a sign of success.

I believe our movement is in decline and has been for some time.
What do you think?
Why or why not?


I also posted this on the other forum, in the interest of full disclosure.

I believe we started to decline when we started to focus on building MEGA Churches and not building solid churches. Remember it's all about the numbers!

Building MEGA churches had nothing to do with the decline. Solid churches is probably another thing.  I would argue that the mega churches of the heyday of IFB were pretty solid churches at the time.  What happened to IFB was the focus changed from trying to reach others to the heresy of KJVO, man made staaaaaaaaaaaaandards, and legalism. Don't mean this bad, but the average person with a  spiritual IQ in excess of double digits sees right through the KJVO nonsense and legalism.  Couple that with the nuts leading what is left of the IFB and who wants to be associated with that crowd? 
Most of the people/ministries who left because of this man made up garbage, went to the SBC.  If the SBC were to start focusing on this stuff, it will die/become irrelevant as well. 

.

I think you are correct as far as the strength of the mega churches of yesterday.
Many of them were solid churches, but they somehow forgot that the main thing is the main thing.
Many in our movement fell victim to negative peer pressure, to stand for the truth came to mean hold to extra biblical standards, that even included maintaining a Bus Ministry.

That's the ministry equavilent of  maintaining production of buggy whips.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Anyways, why is smaller worse?

I think you miss the point, a little.

You seem to be right but I'm trying my good brother. 

The point is regardless of small or large churches, what is the state of the movement?

Though I have left new evangelicalism and now a fundamentalist I am not, never was, and most likely will never be a baptist. So when you say "decline" are you more referring to the "B" part or the "F" part?

That depends on how you define fundamental.
By Biblical doctrine or standards and methods....

 

[rsc2a]

.a culture that we are called to reach with the Gospel.

...where's that in the Bible?

Everywhere.

...no, that's not a nebulous answer, no, of course not...

I'll stick with one example for now...it's a biggie:

The Incarnation. God Himself, the Holy, Set-Apart Creator-of-All, stepped off of His throne (sorta, not really) and stepped into His creation. In order to reach mankind, He became man. In order to relate to us, the Creator put on the creation. God, the creator of the universe, became a man in order to reach a culture (humanity) with the gospel. Is He not to be our Model and Guide in all things?

(You'll notice I didn't even mention how the Christianized Jews reached out to the Gentiles although there is another clear example. Or I could mention the Jews carried into exile, Daniel, Rack, Shack, and Benny......)

 

[Fresh Air]

I'm not sure what you mean here Tom.
IF we are to do our part to fulfill the Great Commission, we must spread the Gospel in this generation, this culture.

I take issue with your word choice b/c that word choice illuminates and informs conscious philosophical directions.

We are not called to 'reach' anybody. We are called to 'witness'. 'Reaching' implies we are responsible for their positive response and change of direction. As such, it leads us to ever-increasing and frantic attempts to get them to do so. After all, if ______________ method isn't 'reaching' them than we must try another, for we must 'reach' them, IOW, get them to change/convert/be transformed. It is precisely this sincerely driven pragmatism that informs so many contemporary church innovations. After all, if we aren't 'reaching' people, 'capturing' our city, or 'building the Kingdom' then we are failing the Great Commission. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. We only fail the Great Commission when we fail to witness, not when we fail to 'reach'. 'Reaching' is not the goal at all, obedient/holy/powerful/prayerful/compassionate witnessing is.

'Culture' is a whole 'nuther discussion, but I have to go get my kids from school so I'll just have to set you straight on that another time. 

 

[rsc2a]

I'm not sure what you mean here Tom.
IF we are to do our part to fulfill the Great Commission, we must spread the Gospel in this generation, this culture.

I take issue with your word choice b/c that word choice illuminates and informs conscious philosophical directions.

We are not called to 'reach' anybody. We are called to 'witness'. 'Reaching' implies we are responsible for their positive response and change of direction.

Ah! It's an argument over semantics. Well, that's definitely a good reason for argument on a theological forum! 

As such, it leads us to ever-increasing and frantic attempts to get them to do so. After all, if ______________ method isn't 'reaching' them than we must try another, for we must 'reach' them, IOW, get them to change/convert/be transformed. It is precisely this sincerely driven pragmatism that informs so many contemporary church innovations. After all, if we aren't 'reaching' people, 'capturing' our city, or 'building the Kingdom' then we are failing the Great Commission. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. We only fail the Great Commission when we fail to witness, not when we fail to 'reach'. 'Reaching' is not the goal at all, obedient/holy/powerful/prayerful/compassionate witnessing is.

"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit..." 

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I'm not sure what you mean here Tom.
IF we are to do our part to fulfill the Great Commission, we must spread the Gospel in this generation, this culture.

I take issue with your word choice b/c that word choice illuminates and informs conscious philosophical directions.

We are not called to 'reach' anybody. We are called to 'witness'. 'Reaching' implies we are responsible for their positive response and change of direction. As such, it leads us to ever-increasing and frantic attempts to get them to do so. After all, if ______________ method isn't 'reaching' them than we must try another, for we must 'reach' them, IOW, get them to change/convert/be transformed. It is precisely this sincerely driven pragmatism that informs so many contemporary church innovations. After all, if we aren't 'reaching' people, 'capturing' our city, or 'building the Kingdom' then we are failing the Great Commission. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. We only fail the Great Commission when we fail to witness, not when we fail to 'reach'. 'Reaching' is not the goal at all, obedient/holy/powerful/prayerful/compassionate witnessing is.

'Culture' is a whole 'nuther discussion, but I have to go get my kids from school so I'll just have to set you straight on that another time. 

I see your point.
We present the gospel and God gives the increase....

The Great Commission implies more than just a gospel presentation....it implies a fruitful presentation....baptizing and making them disciples.
It goes to the argument of  methodology....and what is or isn't Biblical.
On the details and specifice, we can and do disagree.
But, there is nothing wrong with effective ministry....

 

[Fresh Air]

"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit..." 

See, and people say modern versions don't change anything of substance...

Mr 16:15  And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mat 28.19  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

:-*

 

[rsc2a]

"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit..." 

See, and people say modern versions don't change anything of substance...

Mr 16:15  And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mat 28.19  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

:-*

hehe...

And the ESV (the translation I quoted) is lambasted as being too biased towards Reformed theology. 

 

[themagneticfields]

"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit..." 

See, and people say modern versions don't change anything of substance...

Mr 16:15  And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mat 28.19  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

:-*

Baptizing without making disciples?

King James Translator's Notes:
teach...: or, make disciples, or, Christians of all nations

Barnes' notes:
Teach all nations - The word rendered "teach," here, is not the one that is usually so translated in the New Testament. This word properly means "to disciple, or to make disciples of." This was to be done, however, by teaching, and by administering baptism.

Clarke's Commentary on the Bible:
Go ye therefore - Because I have the authority aforesaid, and can send whomsoever I will to do whatsoever Ilease: - teach, μαθητευσατε, make disciples of all nations, bring them to an acquaintance with God who bought them, and then baptize them in the name of the Father.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible:
and teach all nations; Jews and Gentiles, first the one, and then the other, the doctrines of the Gospel, and the ordinances of it; whatever they had learned from Christ, or were ordered by him, or "disciple all nations": make them disciples by teaching them;

Vincent's Word Studies:
Teach (μαθητεύσατε)

Rev., rightly, make disciples of.


I'm not sure the "Modern Versions" got it wrong.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

A look on the Hyles Forum on the 666 illustrates, to me, part of the problem with our movement.
Bob Grays book about Dr Hyles goes to the point.
So called mainstream leaders of IFB Dom.....are answering questions no one outside of their very small group is asking.....or cares about.

It really makes me sad....and shows me that contrary to Frags contention, the movement is dead.....except on Planet Extreme.....

 

[Frag]

A look on the Hyles Forum on the 666 illustrates, to me, part of the problem with our movement.
Bob Grays book about Dr Hyles goes to the point.
So called mainstream leaders of IFB Dom.....are answering questions no one outside of their very small group is asking.....or cares about.

It really makes me sad....and shows me that contrary to Frags contention, the movement is dead.....except on Planet Extreme.....

Sooooo....

....your conclusions about the state of the IFB movement is derived from your visits to internet forums. 

Wow.  Who could argue that! 

Might get off your computer and actually visit some of the wonderful, grass root, growing prospering IFB churches all across the country.  Try those you never heard of before.  Stop judging all by a few larger ministries. 

What you will find out is that I am right. 

Course, I usually am. 

 

[Bob H]

Though I have left new evangelicalism and now a fundamentalist I am not, never was, and most likely will never be a baptist. So when you say "decline" are you more referring to the "B" part or the "F" part?

That depends on how you define fundamental.
By Biblical doctrine or standards and methods....

I must be in over my head  Since I'm no baptist ill just bow out. But to try to answer your question there are many books on the rise of the new evangelical "movement" in the late 40's that'll explain the differences between the two groups. BTW, there's only one method and that is found in I Cor. 1 some where around verse 18 give or take a verse

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

A look on the Hyles Forum on the 666 illustrates, to me, part of the problem with our movement.
Bob Grays book about Dr Hyles goes to the point.
So called mainstream leaders of IFB Dom.....are answering questions no one outside of their very small group is asking.....or cares about.

It really makes me sad....and shows me that contrary to Frags contention, the movement is dead.....except on Planet Extreme.....

Sooooo....

....your conclusions about the state of the IFB movement is derived from your visits to internet forums. 

Wow.  Who could argue that! 

Might get off your computer and actually visit some of the wonderful, grass root, growing prospering IFB churches all across the country.  Try those you never heard of before.  Stop judging all by a few larger ministries. 

What you will find out is that I am right. 

Course, I usually am. 

With all due respect, my IFB credentials are as genuine as yours....I have pastored the same IFB church for 30 years and have been in the movement my entire life.
What I said was that the thread discussing Gray and Hyles, and the thread touting Grays soul winning numbers is an example of what is wrong with the movement, and why it has been in decline for decades.

That is not to say that there aren't good churches and good pastors in the movement, I like to think I fit into that category. But, the IFB movement ad a whole is a shell of what it once was.
I don't understand how that could be in dispute...except that you don't like the facts....but they're still the facts.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Though I have left new evangelicalism and now a fundamentalist I am not, never was, and most likely will never be a baptist. So when you say "decline" are you more referring to the "B" part or the "F" part?

That depends on how you define fundamental.
By Biblical doctrine or standards and methods....

Im not sure who has insinuated you're in over your head, but it certainly wasn't me.
Your opinions are as viable as anyone else's.....but that's what they are...opinions.

The fact that the IFB movement is defined by what it opposes is, to me, a problem...as well as a symptom of the problem.
Standards, screens, hymn books and bus ministries are NOT relevant IFB a discussion of Baptist distinctives or a definition of fundamental.





I must be in over my head  Since I'm no baptist ill just bow out. But to try to answer your question there are many books on the rise of the new evangelical "movement" in the late 40's that'll explain the differences between the two groups. BTW, there's only one method and that is found in I Cor. 1 some where around verse 18 give or take a verse

 

[Frag]

A look on the Hyles Forum on the 666 illustrates, to me, part of the problem with our movement.
Bob Grays book about Dr Hyles goes to the point.
So called mainstream leaders of IFB Dom.....are answering questions no one outside of their very small group is asking.....or cares about.

It really makes me sad....and shows me that contrary to Frags contention, the movement is dead.....except on Planet Extreme.....

Sooooo....

....your conclusions about the state of the IFB movement is derived from your visits to internet forums. 

Wow.  Who could argue that! 

Might get off your computer and actually visit some of the wonderful, grass root, growing prospering IFB churches all across the country.  Try those you never heard of before.  Stop judging all by a few larger ministries. 

What you will find out is that I am right. 

Course, I usually am. 

With all due respect, my IFB credentials are as genuine as yours....I have pastored the same IFB church for 30 years and have been in the movement my entire life.
What I said was that the thread discussing Gray and Hyles, and the thread touting Grays soul winning numbers is an example of what is wrong with the movement, and why it has been in decline for decades.

That is not to say that there aren't good churches and good pastors in the movement, I like to think I fit into that category. But, the IFB movement ad a whole is a shell of what it once was.
I don't understand how that could be in dispute...except that you don't like the facts....but they're still the facts.

I think we all tend to judge the whole by our own situation.  Your conclusion is in dispute because it is not based on facts.  When my father started the IFB church I now pastor 39 years ago,  you could count the number of IFB churches across Southern Indiana on one hand.  20 years later, you could count them on two hands.  Today, you would need to borrow many hands.  How is that decline??? 

Also, the churches across our area are prospering.  Most of the IFB churches I know are growing, many (like here) are averaging more in attendance than any time in their history.  Not just that, but they are producing a new generation of young people training for the ministry.  We had a recent Sunday where three of our young men (now in Bible college) came back to preach (preached all three on a Sunday morning, 15 minutes each, people loved it!).  Missions giving is at an all time high.  Praise the Lord! 

There are exceptions to this.  Here is the common denominator of those in decline -- compromise!  Yep, the IFB churches struggling and going backwards ARE NOT THE ONES THAT HAVE HELD THE LINE ON STANDARDS, SOUL WINNING, AND SEPARATION.  It is the ones who decided to pretend to be IFB, but are really following a evangelical template.  They are having as much success as McCain in the last election (all middle-of-the-roaders eventually get run over.)

Those, my well respected friend, are the facts. 

 

[rsc2a]

There are exceptions to this.  Here is the common denominator of those in decline -- compromise!

*gag*

Yep, the IFB churches struggling and going backwards ARE NOT THE ONES THAT HAVE HELD THE LINE ON STANDARDS...

Man's standards or God's standards? Hmm....

...SOUL WINNING...

Yeah...I kinda thought that was God's area of expertise...

...AND SEPARATION...

At least you're being honest here about your un-Scriptural stance...

...all middle-of-the-roaders eventually get run over...

:

 

[Frag]

There are exceptions to this.  Here is the common denominator of those in decline -- compromise!

*gag*

Yep, the IFB churches struggling and going backwards ARE NOT THE ONES THAT HAVE HELD THE LINE ON STANDARDS...

Man's standards or God's standards? Hmm....

...SOUL WINNING...

Yeah...I kinda thought that was God's area of expertise...

...AND SEPARATION...

At least you're being honest here about your un-Scriptural stance...

...all middle-of-the-roaders eventually get run over...

:

You OK?  Many choke on the truth....

God's standards.

Then why did he bother Philip and chase him out to the desert?  Why didn't God just save that eunuch without Philip's help?  Co-labourers with Jesus Christ....

Separation unscriptural? 
2 Cor 6:17-18  Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,  And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.
2 Cor 7:1  Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.

Titus 2:11-15  For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,  Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;  Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;  Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.  These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.



By the way, check your back for tire marks.....

 

[rsc2a]

You OK?  Many choke on the truth....

God's standards.

I don't see where God is opposed to CCM, rock music or even... ....hip hop?
I don't see where He's opposed to long hair on men or tattoos.
I don't see where He's opposed to alcohol...in fact, He did a little wine-making on the side.
I don't see where He's opposed to public schools.
I don't see where He's opposed to pants on women.
I don't see where He's opposed to a man and a woman getting married regardless of how much of a difference there is in the amount of melanin is in their skin.
I don't see where He's opposed to everything not KJV.

Any pet standards I happened to miss?

Then why did he bother Philip and chase him out to the desert?  Why didn't God just save that eunuch without Philip's help?  Co-labourers with Jesus Christ....

Oh...He absolutely could have. And we are co-laborers with Christ. That doesn't mean we just lead people in a 1-2-3 pray after me huckster spiel. "Go and make disciples...."

Separation unscriptural? 
2 Cor 6:17-18  Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,  And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

Perhaps....if you ignored all context and skipped substantial sections of Scripture...

2 Cor 7:1  Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.

Titus 2:11-15  For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,  Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;  Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;  Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.  These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.

Yeah...if only the IFB idea of separation stopped there....

I have a few verses for you:

And I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one. While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. But now I am coming to you, and these things I speak in the world, that they may have my joy fulfilled in themselves. I have given them your word, and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world. And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth. - John 17:11-19

And he said to them,

 

[BALAAM]

A look on the Hyles Forum on the 666 illustrates, to me, part of the problem with our movement.
Bob Grays book about Dr Hyles goes to the point.
So called mainstream leaders of IFB Dom.....are answering questions no one outside of their very small group is asking.....or cares about.

It really makes me sad....and shows me that contrary to Frags contention, the movement is dead.....except on Planet Extreme.....

Sooooo....

....your conclusions about the state of the IFB movement is derived from your visits to internet forums. 

Wow.  Who could argue that! 

Might get off your computer and actually visit some of the wonderful, grass root, growing prospering IFB churches all across the country.  Try those you never heard of before.  Stop judging all by a few larger ministries. 

What you will find out is that I am right. 

Course, I usually am. 

Yes. frag is your typical egotistical, judgemental, pat-yourself-on-the-back type fundamentalist because he adheres to certain standards that you heathen do not adhere to, that is seeing revival every week in his church. Get on board with him. (Or not)

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

A look on the Hyles Forum on the 666 illustrates, to me, part of the problem with our movement.
Bob Grays book about Dr Hyles goes to the point.
So called mainstream leaders of IFB Dom.....are answering questions no one outside of their very small group is asking.....or cares about.

It really makes me sad....and shows me that contrary to Frags contention, the movement is dead.....except on Planet Extreme.....

Sooooo....

....your conclusions about the state of the IFB movement is derived from your visits to internet forums. 

Wow.  Who could argue that! 

Might get off your computer and actually visit some of the wonderful, grass root, growing prospering IFB churches all across the country.  Try those you never heard of before.  Stop judging all by a few larger ministries. 

What you will find out is that I am right. 

Course, I usually am. 

With all due respect, my IFB credentials are as genuine as yours....I have pastored the same IFB church for 30 years and have been in the movement my entire life.
What I said was that the thread discussing Gray and Hyles, and the thread touting Grays soul winning numbers is an example of what is wrong with the movement, and why it has been in decline for decades.

That is not to say that there aren't good churches and good pastors in the movement, I like to think I fit into that category. But, the IFB movement ad a whole is a shell of what it once was.
I don't understand how that could be in dispute...except that you don't like the facts....but they're still the facts.

I think we all tend to judge the whole by our own situation.  Your conclusion is in dispute because it is not based on facts.  When my father started the IFB church I now pastor 39 years ago,  you could count the number of IFB churches across Southern Indiana on one hand.  20 years later, you could count them on two hands.  Today, you would need to borrow many hands.  How is that decline??? 

Also, the churches across our area are prospering.  Most of the IFB churches I know are growing, many (like here) are averaging more in attendance than any time in their history.  Not just that, but they are producing a new generation of young people training for the ministry.  We had a recent Sunday where three of our young men (now in Bible college) came back to preach (preached all three on a Sunday morning, 15 minutes each, people loved it!).  Missions giving is at an all time high.  Praise the Lord! 

There are exceptions to this.  Here is the common denominator of those in decline -- compromise!  Yep, the IFB churches struggling and going backwards ARE NOT THE ONES THAT HAVE HELD THE LINE ON STANDARDS, SOUL WINNING, AND SEPARATION.  It is the ones who decided to pretend to be IFB, but are really following a evangelical template.  They are having as much success as McCain in the last election (all middle-of-the-roaders eventually get run over.)

Those, my well respected friend, are the facts.

And I do not doubt that you and your ministry are prospering....and I'm thankful for that.
Neither do I doubt that there are many other IFB churches that prosper as well.

My experience, down here in the Bible belt, is just the opposite.
In our county there are 200 IFB churches according to the phone book, at least.
There are only three that have 150 or more in attendance, and 20 years ago there were 10 over 1000 in attendance. NOT that attendance is the only gage, but it's one of the most visible.

My home church, which had over 2300 in attendance the last Sunday I was there when I left for college, last week had less than 125 in attendance.
One reason is that the Pastor prides himself in not changing....not the Biblical principles, but hymn books, no evil screen....etc.

Our church is the largest IFB church in our area and, according to some, we have fallen from grace.
We are the exception to your success of McCain example.

If we would understand the difference between Biblical principle and secondary issues we would be much better off.