The influence of the 'new' IFB's.

[TheRealJonStewart]

There is a growing number of (mostly) younger IFB pastors and churches that have resisted the influence and traditions of past IFB leaders and are making their own way.
It might just save this movement.

http://www.ideaday.net

They might be IB's but I doubt they are F's. But that just me

Explain this. They seem to be fundamental in their doctrine.

Ockenga was fundamental in doctrine but not a fundamentalist.

If you want to go back to Fosdick, Lyman Stewart and the publishing of The Fundamentals, they are indeed fundamentalists by technical definition.

I didn't need to go back that far. I went to the late 40's where the word "fundamentalist" was discarded by Ockenga and his crowd the and the majority of baptist followed him. The "younger" crowd you mentioned aren't heading to a new place {unless I misread}. One thing one can learn from church history is that though the names may change the battles are the same.

I agree Bob, the battles are similar. Ockenga, Fuller etc. didn't want to be called Fundamentalist because of basically 2 reasons....the cultural isolation and lack of scholarship the fundamentalists seemed to value. Looking back, neither group has been free of missteps and scandals. But, the new IFB's are, instead of fighting in open warfare, simply going their own way. They just don't believe pants on women, KJVO, wearing a tie while preaching or having a drum set in church qualify as fundamentals of the faith.

Not preaching with a tie is not the equivalent of not believing in the literal translation of the Bible.

 

[Norefund]

What personal preference disagreements caused them to leave?

We found out in the sermon this morning that whole families are leaving our church for other churches in the area due to personal preference disagreements with the pastor. We are talking about things on which the Bible is silent. The other churches are coming out and saying where do you find that in the Bible.

More and more people who are studying the Bible now are demanding real scriptural answers, not just the old IFB saw do as I say because I said so meme. They are now noticing that scriptures are being stretched to the point of breaking. If the Bible does not clearly teach it don't say it does as that just stimulates people to study the scripture to see what they say as opposed to what the pastor says they say.

Individual soul liberty is foundational in a Baptist church. The pastor is not the final authority the Bible is and I'm not talking about just the King James Version.

 

[bgwilkinson]

What personal preference disagreements caused them to leave?

We found out in the sermon this morning that whole families are leaving our church for other churches in the area due to personal preference disagreements with the pastor. We are talking about things on which the Bible is silent. The other churches are coming out and saying where do you find that in the Bible.

More and more people who are studying the Bible now are demanding real scriptural answers, not just the old IFB saw do as I say because I said so meme. They are now noticing that scriptures are being stretched to the point of breaking. If the Bible does not clearly teach it don't say it does as that just stimulates people to study the scripture to see what they say as opposed to what the pastor says they say.

Individual soul liberty is foundational in a Baptist church. The pastor is not the final authority the Bible is and I'm not talking about just the King James Version.

What caused them to leave? The pastor has said that the Bible says it is a sin to drink wine. Several people have challenged him to prove that, well it didn't go so well as he was completely unable to prove that from the Bible.

When they showed him 1Ti 3:3  "Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;" where a man is qualified to pastor if he is, "not given to wine". He could not overcome that one. It is sometimes hard to misinterpret the scriptures when they are so plain.

Best he could do was show the warnings against drunkenness, but the families already knew that and did not dispute drunkenness was directly condemned in the Bible. They decided to go to a church where the deity of Christ and the virgin birth were counted as fundamentals of the faith and more important than an argument about drinking wine.

 

[Norefund]

In what context was the subject of the families leaving presented in the sermon? Were  they being disparaged for leaving?

What personal preference disagreements caused them to leave?

We found out in the sermon this morning that whole families are leaving our church for other churches in the area due to personal preference disagreements with the pastor. We are talking about things on which the Bible is silent. The other churches are coming out and saying where do you find that in the Bible.

More and more people who are studying the Bible now are demanding real scriptural answers, not just the old IFB saw do as I say because I said so meme. They are now noticing that scriptures are being stretched to the point of breaking. If the Bible does not clearly teach it don't say it does as that just stimulates people to study the scripture to see what they say as opposed to what the pastor says they say.

Individual soul liberty is foundational in a Baptist church. The pastor is not the final authority the Bible is and I'm not talking about just the King James Version.

 

[BALAAM]

I'm not sure they seek to redefine or lead an IFB movement. I've never read they intended such. They have simply rejected the tenets of the other 2 groups and have gone their own way.

Ahhh.... now I understand. I thought, by your title, that was the case. 

Sorry.
They self identify as IFB, but aren't actively seeking to redefine the terms. I know what (little) I know from my acquaintance with one of the men who helps organize the idea days.

So they're IFB? Meaning they are independent from one another, so why are we concerned? It's their choice.

Independent doesn't mean that we don't care if they are right or wrong; it means that we acknowledge that we don't have the authority to make them act as we wish.

So instead they lash out at each other, decrying whatever bug-a-boo of disagreement they have, and proclaim the other side to have descended into the "pit of hell" to come up with the horrible subject of disagreement. And they wonder why there is so little respect for their methodology.

You know this is so true! I have been out of ifb churches for about 4 or 5 years but because that is my background I continue to read a lot of their articles, tweets, etc. There seems to be this feeling that if you are not casting stones, sticking needles in peoples eyes, condemning all you are different than you, or hurling spears then you are a compromiser and not really preaching the bible.

One of these pukes just tweeted that any bible college who allows their students to miss any church service for work is failing to teach the bible. They only care about money. I am sure that his 25 people were amused.

 

[bgwilkinson]

In what context was the subject of the families leaving presented in the sermon? Were  they being disparaged for leaving?

What personal preference disagreements caused them to leave?

We found out in the sermon this morning that whole families are leaving our church for other churches in the area due to personal preference disagreements with the pastor. We are talking about things on which the Bible is silent. The other churches are coming out and saying where do you find that in the Bible.

More and more people who are studying the Bible now are demanding real scriptural answers, not just the old IFB saw do as I say because I said so meme. They are now noticing that scriptures are being stretched to the point of breaking. If the Bible does not clearly teach it don't say it does as that just stimulates people to study the scripture to see what they say as opposed to what the pastor says they say.

Individual soul liberty is foundational in a Baptist church. The pastor is not the final authority the Bible is and I'm not talking about just the King James Version.

They were not being disparaged, was just a matter of fact statement that there were disagreements over drinking wine.

This is an example of where the pastor has encouraged Bible study, so that has been going on in earnest. It usually results in the pastor being asked to prove his positions from the Bible on things that are doubtful.

Tithing is another one where the pastor is unable to make the case. He just says he believes in it and gives examples of how God has blessed him.
Seems close to the prosperity gospel.

 

[Norefund]

Maybe they could all just rename themselves. There could be Shiite Baptists and Sunni Baptists.

I'm not sure they seek to redefine or lead an IFB movement. I've never read they intended such. They have simply rejected the tenets of the other 2 groups and have gone their own way.

Ahhh.... now I understand. I thought, by your title, that was the case. 

Sorry.
They self identify as IFB, but aren't actively seeking to redefine the terms. I know what (little) I know from my acquaintance with one of the men who helps organize the idea days.

So they're IFB? Meaning they are independent from one another, so why are we concerned? It's their choice.

Independent doesn't mean that we don't care if they are right or wrong; it means that we acknowledge that we don't have the authority to make them act as we wish.

So instead they lash out at each other, decrying whatever bug-a-boo of disagreement they have, and proclaim the other side to have descended into the "pit of hell" to come up with the horrible subject of disagreement. And they wonder why there is so little respect for their methodology.

You know this is so true! I have been out of ifb churches for about 4 or 5 years but because that is my background I continue to read a lot of their articles, tweets, etc. There seems to be this feeling that if you are not casting stones, sticking needles in peoples eyes, condemning all you are different than you, or hurling spears then you are a compromiser and not really preaching the bible.

One of these pukes just tweeted that any bible college who allows their students to miss any church service for work is failing to teach the bible. They only care about money. I am sure that his 25 people were amused.

 

[Bob H]

They just don't believe pants on women, KJVO, wearing a tie while preaching or having a drum set in church qualify as fundamentals of the faith.

As far as these "standards" goes I grew in a Wesley/Arm home & church. Baptist aren't the only ones with such standards. I know of alot of independent pentecostals whose standards make these independent baptist standards look liberal. In Ockenga's time the bible version debate didn't exist. The only other one was the 1901ASV, one of my favorites BTW, but it never caught on. Rock music wasn't even invented yet and it was not a issue and the how you dress  wasn't an issue yet either. These "issues" had NUTTIN to do with fundamentalism or even Ockenga's new evangelicalism and never will. These are just smoke screens thrown up by those who are not fundamentalist and fall on the neo side of things........................In fact these "issues"  mentioned are "B " things not "F" things 

I agree Bob, the battles are similar. Ockenga, Fuller etc. didn't want to be called Fundamentalist because of basically 2 reasons....the cultural isolation and lack of scholarship the fundamentalists seemed to value.

Well TB.......I don't know. The best way I can explain it is thru Spurgeon and the downgrade. Spurgeon discovered that there were liberals in the BBU which he was a part of. Some denied the inspiration of scriptures, the diety of Christ among other fundamentals. He sounded the alarm yet nuttin was done. So he not only separated from the liberals but also from the believers who stayed in BBU. Spurgeon was a true fundamentalist. Okenga didn't want to separate from these folks so he coined the new evangelical movement and thus he worked with these folks in religious and soul winnings endeavors. The ecumenical movement took full steam. The reasons you stated were used but I'm not sure they were the real ones.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

They just don't believe pants on women, KJVO, wearing a tie while preaching or having a drum set in church qualify as fundamentals of the faith.

As far as these "standards" goes I grew in a Wesley/Arm home & church. Baptist aren't the only ones with such standards. I know of alot of independent pentecostals whose standards make these independent baptist standards look liberal. In Ockenga's time the bible version debate didn't exist. The only other one was the 1901ASV, one of my favorites BTW, but it never caught on. Rock music wasn't even invented yet and it was not a issue and the how you dress  wasn't an issue yet either. These "issues" had NUTTIN to do with fundamentalism or even Ockenga's new evangelicalism and never will. These are just smoke screens thrown up by those who are not fundamentalist and fall on the neo side of things........................In fact these "issues"  mentioned are "B " things not "F" things 

I agree Bob, the battles are similar. Ockenga, Fuller etc. didn't want to be called Fundamentalist because of basically 2 reasons....the cultural isolation and lack of scholarship the fundamentalists seemed to value.

Well TB.......I don't know. The best way I can explain it is thru Spurgeon and the downgrade. Spurgeon discovered that there were liberals in the BBU which he was a part of. Some denied the inspiration of scriptures, the diety of Christ among other fundamentals. He sounded the alarm yet nuttin was done. So he not only separated from the liberals but also from the believers who stayed in BBU. Spurgeon was a true fundamentalist. Okenga didn't want to separate from these folks so he coined the new evangelical movement and thus he worked with these folks in religious and soul winnings endeavors. The ecumenical movement took full steam. The reasons you stated were used but I'm not sure they were the real ones.

Fundamentalism by definition is a belief system. The term was coined during the modernist controversy and was solely based on 'fundamental beliefs'. The extra biblical standards are Johnny come lately to the debate and are a moving of the goal posts.

I disagree with your contention that the neo-evangelical debates didn't have a scriptural component. Lindsell's Battle for the Bible is exhibit A.

And your super power of judging 'real' motives is above my pay grade.j

 

[Bob H]

Fundamentalism by definition is a belief system. The term was coined during the modernist controversy and was solely based on 'fundamental beliefs'.

Then 1948 happened. You can't leave that out. He coined the term new evangelical and that "movement" began. The definitions then moved. When references were made about both terms since then they weren't referring to the 20's.

I disagree with your contention that the neo-evangelical debates didn't have a scriptural component. Lindsell's Battle for the Bible is exhibit A.

I hope I didn't imply otherwise. I read both of Lindsell's books. He wanted to dump the term cause it wasn't good. {and BTW they did}

And your super power of judging 'real' motives is above my pay grade.j

Ockenga's motives were put out himself in his speech for all to see

 

[Norefund]

Ok. I?m confused. I went and listened to the Sunday morning sermon on YouTube. Pastor Wilkerson spent half the sermon quoting verses that he believe supports the position of never drinking any alcohol. I didn?t get the impression that he considered it a personal disagreement. My take was that he really thinks the Bible says don?t drink any alcohol at all.

(Disclaimer) I don?t agree with his position.

In what context was the subject of the families leaving presented in the sermon? Were  they being disparaged for leaving?

What personal preference disagreements caused them to leave?

We found out in the sermon this morning that whole families are leaving our church for other churches in the area due to personal preference disagreements with the pastor. We are talking about things on which the Bible is silent. The other churches are coming out and saying where do you find that in the Bible.

More and more people who are studying the Bible now are demanding real scriptural answers, not just the old IFB saw do as I say because I said so meme. They are now noticing that scriptures are being stretched to the point of breaking. If the Bible does not clearly teach it don't say it does as that just stimulates people to study the scripture to see what they say as opposed to what the pastor says they say.

Individual soul liberty is foundational in a Baptist church. The pastor is not the final authority the Bible is and I'm not talking about just the King James Version.

They were not being disparaged, was just a matter of fact statement that there were disagreements over drinking wine.

This is an example of where the pastor has encouraged Bible study, so that has been going on in earnest. It usually results in the pastor being asked to prove his positions from the Bible on things that are doubtful.

Tithing is another one where the pastor is unable to make the case. He just says he believes in it and gives examples of how God has blessed him.
Seems close to the prosperity gospel.

 

[Twisted]

Ok. I?m confused. I went and listened to the Sunday morning sermon on YouTube. Pastor Wilkerson spent half the sermon quoting verses that he believe supports the position of never drinking any alcohol. I didn?t get the impression that he considered it a personal disagreement. My take was that he really thinks the Bible says don?t drink any alcohol at all. 

So no more Binaca?

 

[TonyHutsonComedian]

Popular IFB evangelist/comedian Larry Brown puts Rick Warren and other seeker sensitive churches on full blast. Another famous comedian/evangelist Tony Hutson isn't fond of Warren either.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjd8G__rt_4

Still don't know who Tony Hutson is.

Evangelist, Gospel Singer, Comedian, Food Critic, Music Critic, Voice Actor, and Professional Power Lifer.

 

[bgwilkinson]

Popular IFB evangelist/comedian Larry Brown puts Rick Warren and other seeker sensitive churches on full blast. Another famous comedian/evangelist Tony Hutson isn't fond of Warren either.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjd8G__rt_4

Still, don't know who Tony Hutson is.

Evangelist, Gospel Singer, Comedian, Food Critic, Music Critic, Voice Actor, and Professional Power Lifer.

Ok, so who is the red faced guy with high blood pressure?

 

[TonyHutsonComedian]

That's Dr. Tony Hutson lifting those barbells. When he comes to an IFB church near you its better than any HBO stand up comedy routine.

 

[bgwilkinson]

That's Dr. Tony Hutson lifting those barbells. When he comes to an IFB church near you its better than any HBO stand up comedy routine.

He's not a real doctor.

 

[Twisted]

He's not a real doctor.

He just plays one in church.

 

[sword]

Popular IFB evangelist/comedian Larry Brown puts Rick Warren and other seeker sensitive churches on full blast.

Still, don't know who Tony Hutson is.

Evangelist, Gospel Singer, Comedian, Food Critic, Music Critic, Voice Actor, and Professional Power Lifer.

Ok, so who is the red faced guy with high blood pressure?

For the record:
Tony was lifting 1014 lbs at a Georgia power lifting meet.
At the time the national record was under 1100 lbs.
He would later hold the Tennessee state record for a short time.

 

[sword]

He's not a real doctor.

He just plays one in church.

In the 25 years I have known Tony Hutson I have never heard him refer to himself as Dr.
In his church he goes by Bro. Tony or Pastor.

Often when introduced as Dr., he will make light of it and will make a joke about another crook in a pigs tail does not make any more pig or something about lipstick on a pig. He often downplays any intro he get and often ask that they not use the Dr. before his name. Many times I have heard him qualify that it is only honorary.

I suspect Alvin does not like Tony and Larry Brown's stance on alternative and transgender lifestyles.

He seems to be a wee bit self-conscious in that regard. I say if you believe it own it.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

He's not a real doctor.

He just plays one in church.

In the 25 years I have known Tony Hutson I have never heard him refer to himself as Dr.
In his church he goes by Bro. Tony or Pastor.

Often when introduced as Dr., he will make light of it and will make a joke about another crook in a pigs tail does not make any more pig or something about lipstick on a pig. He often downplays any intro he get and often ask that they not use the Dr. before his name. Many times I have heard him qualify that it is only honorary.

I suspect Alvin does not like Tony and Larry Brown's stance on alternative and transgender lifestyles.

He seems to be a wee bit self-conscious in that regard. I say if you believe it own it.

The only knowledge I have of him is the video of him gulping the bottle of water while speaking in Longview (I believe). In that vid he appears to be the stereotypical IFB-X pastor. I'm positive there's much more to him than that...but it's hard to get out of my memory bank.