Are You a "Recovering Fundamentalist"?

[Walt]

I understand it the Fundamental Fighting Forums but why must we fight with each other so much. I have a set of standards I practice and attend a church the shares those beliefs. I have many friends who share my standards. I also have many friends who have different standards than mine who go to churches with their standards. I also have a few friends whose churches do not match their standards and they are always complaining about.

I don't care what standards your church has or does not have and you should not care what standards you have. Were never going to agree so why do we try. You preach what you think & we will preach what we think the bible says & God expects. Same with your bible or your music or whatever.

I agree; I take exception to one point - the We're never going to agree so why do we try.

I find the discussion of differences interesting, and some of them HAVE changed the way I look at things. It's rather boring to have a discussion with someone who only agrees with you. The differences as well as the similarities have been a blessing here.

It is a blessing to read "I don't agree with you, Walt, but I respect the way you disagreed with me" (the rare times it happens).

 

[sword]

I understand it the Fundamental Fighting Forums but why must we fight with each other so much. I have a set of standards I practice and attend a church the shares those beliefs. I have many friends who share my standards. I also have many friends who have different standards than mine who go to churches with their standards. I also have a few friends whose churches do not match their standards and they are always complaining about.
I don't care what standards your church has or does not have and you should not care what standards you have. Were never going to agree so why do we try. You preach what you think & we will preach what we think the bible says & God expects. Same with your bible or your music or whatever.

I agree; I take exception to one point - the We're never going to agree so why do we try.
I find the discussion of differences interesting, and some of them HAVE changed the way I look at things. It's rather boring to have a discussion with someone who only agrees with you. The differences as well as the similarities have been a blessing here.
It is a blessing to read "I don't agree with you, Walt, but I respect the way you disagreed with me" (the rare times it happens).

Good point, but if we disagree on which football team will be number 1, Alabama, Clemson, or Florida State we can do so in a civil way. When posters disagree on preferences, methods & standards here, they seem to do it such a hateful way.

 

[sword]

Off the top my head, I believe it's in Galatians, who withstood who over doctrine?
Jack Hyles preached a false gospel and taught how many to preach that false gospel and what big name in the Hyles side of the IFB has denounced Jack Hyles for this?
Division over doctrine is biblical.
I gotta go back to work I'm already late.

What doctrine do you disagree with him on. What false gospel.

I have heard him give a clear plan of salvation many times and it is exactly how I was saved almost 50 years ago. I agree the Holy Spirit must convict the person & the person must sincerely repent of their sins and trust Jesus as their savior but it's not complicated like many make it out to be.

I understand you disagree with him on method, preferences & standards but what doctrine do you disagree with him on?

 

[Bruh]

Off the top my head, I believe it's in Galatians, who withstood who over doctrine?
Jack Hyles preached a false gospel and taught how many to preach that false gospel and what big name in the Hyles side of the IFB has denounced Jack Hyles for this?
Division over doctrine is biblical.
I gotta go back to work I'm already late.

What doctrine do you disagree with him on. What false gospel.

I have heard him give a clear plan of salvation many time and it is exactly how I was saved almost 50 years ago. I agree the Holy Spirit must convict the person & the person must sincerely repent of their sins and trust Jesus as their savior but it's not complicated like many make it out to be.

I understand you disagree with him on method, preferences & standards but what doctrine do you disagree with him on?

Instead of calling men and women to surrender to Christ, Jack Hyles taught asks them only to accept some basic facts about Him.

 

[sword]

Books
EVOLUTION: Fact, Fraud, or Faith?Mar 22, 2016
Christian Resistance: An Idea Whose Time Has Come--Again!Jun 28, 2012

Did he write three and two books with the same title, or is he trying to count multiple editions of the same books as different books? I smell some resume padding.

Y2k: The Event That Could Paralyze the PlanetApr 1999

Hahaha! If I had written a Y2K scare book, I would have taken it off my CV on January 2, 2000.
Then again, I know of one Christian bookstore that was still selling Grant Jeffrey's Millennium Meltdown two years after the fact at full price.

Flying Saucers: Myths, Madness or Made in Moscow?1969

Commies!

The God Haters: Angry Atheists, Shallow Scholars, Silly Scientists, Pagan Preachers and Embattled Evolutionists

Embattled what? Endocrinologists? Epistemologists? Emo kids?

My bad, I pasted the book list straight from Amazon while sitting in traffic. I guess they sell all editions on Amazon so they include them in the list.

The God Haters: Angry Atheists, Shallow Scholars, Silly Scientists, Pagan Preachers and Embattled Evolutionists Declare War Against Christians by Don Boys (2015-09-18)

 

[sword]

Off the top my head, I believe it's in Galatians, who withstood who over doctrine?
Jack Hyles preached a false gospel and taught how many to preach that false gospel and what big name in the Hyles side of the IFB has denounced Jack Hyles for this?
Division over doctrine is biblical.
I gotta go back to work I'm already late.

What doctrine do you disagree with him on. What false gospel.
I have heard him give a clear plan of salvation many time and it is exactly how I was saved almost 50 years ago. I agree the Holy Spirit must convict the person & the person must sincerely repent of their sins and trust Jesus as their savior but it's not complicated like many make it out to be.
I understand you disagree with him on method, preferences & standards but what doctrine do you disagree with him on?

Instead of calling men and women to surrender to Christ, Jack Hyles taught asks them only to accept some basic facts about Him.

I'm not following you here, can you simplify it for me. Can you give me your version of the Jack Hyles plan of salvation and how that differs from the bible plan.

There are plenty of areas where people differ from Jack Hyles but his plan of salvation would not have been one i would have guessed.

He always like Ford Porters "Gods simple plan of Salvation" as well as the Romans Road plan. Do you have a better path you teach?

 

[Bruh]

Off the top my head, I believe it's in Galatians, who withstood who over doctrine?
Jack Hyles preached a false gospel and taught how many to preach that false gospel and what big name in the Hyles side of the IFB has denounced Jack Hyles for this?
Division over doctrine is biblical.
I gotta go back to work I'm already late.

What doctrine do you disagree with him on. What false gospel.
I have heard him give a clear plan of salvation many time and it is exactly how I was saved almost 50 years ago. I agree the Holy Spirit must convict the person & the person must sincerely repent of their sins and trust Jesus as their savior but it's not complicated like many make it out to be.
I understand you disagree with him on method, preferences & standards but what doctrine do you disagree with him on?

Instead of calling men and women to surrender to Christ, Jack Hyles taught asks them only to accept some basic facts about Him.

I'm not following you here, can you simplify it for me. Can you give me your version of the Jack Hyles plan of salvation and how that differs from the bible plan.

There are plenty of areas where people differ from Jack Hyles but his plan of salvation would not have been one i would have guessed.

He always like Ford Porters "Gods simple plan of Salvation" as well as the Romans Road plan. Do you have a better path you teach?

Just what I said, he taught, ask them to except some basic facts.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

If Jesus would accept you the way you are right now would you be willing to ask Jesus into your heart and take you to heaven one day? Yes ok.

Repeat after me but remember you have to mean it in your heart.



Does this sound familiar? Makes sense? This is what he taught and preached. It's that simple 123 repeat after me and before long everybody you talk to about salvation gets saved.

 

[biscuit1953]

To me the biggest doctrinal error of Jack Hyles is his teaching that a head belief is all it takes to be saved.  That is how he got by with his bragging about winning thousands of souls every year by repeating a simple prayer that would have resulted in the entire city of Hammond being "saved." 

This is the same error of Steven Anderson who believes a man can continue being a swindler, liar, cheat, or anything else for the rest of his life with no change of heart and still be saved  just because he believes basic facts about Jesus.  The idea that someone calls for a turning from sin of any kind is a "false gospel" according to Hyles and Anderson.  In short they believe that salvation is simply a head belief in facts about the gospel.
http://www.repentanceblacklist.com/

"If repentance wasn?t necessary for salvation, why then did Jesus command that repentance be preached to all nations (Luke 24:47)?  With so many Scriptures speaking of the necessity of repentance for salvation, one can only suspect that those who preach salvation without repentance are strangers to repentance themselves, and thus strangers to true conversion."  Ray Comfort

 

[Walt]

Off the top my head, I believe it's in Galatians, who withstood who over doctrine?
Jack Hyles preached a false gospel and taught how many to preach that false gospel and what big name in the Hyles side of the IFB has denounced Jack Hyles for this?
Division over doctrine is biblical.
I gotta go back to work I'm already late.

What doctrine do you disagree with him on. What false gospel.

I have heard him give a clear plan of salvation many times and it is exactly how I was saved almost 50 years ago. I agree the Holy Spirit must convict the person & the person must sincerely repent of their sins and trust Jesus as their savior but it's not complicated like many make it out to be.

I understand you disagree with him on method, preferences & standards but what doctrine do you disagree with him on?

I hear the last phrase a lot "we only disagree on method, preferences, and standards"... but (to take one) methods can be just as important as doctrine.  The man who claims that husbands should treat their wives kindly, but beats his wife -- his doctrine that he claims to hold is completely destroyed by his methods.

Jack Hyles may have talked a good game about salvation, but his methods were all about a rush to say a prayer and then to declare people saved; the evidence is overwhelming; Tom Brennan has given testimony of poorly done "big days"; a man "saved" through the ministry to sailors speaks of the "manic pace" of his salvation and baptism.  Then people say "That's not Jack Hyles' fault!" -- I beg to differ.  He was the leader, and he encouraged this kind of thing, turned a blind eye to the problems, and attacked those who brought up problems.

There is his false doctrine that Jesus Christ was eternally human.

There is his false doctrine that if you are seeing a lot of souls saved, God will overlook sins.

There is his false teaching on justice; it is more of a manual on why no pastor should ever be judged by his people, which is contrary to the Scriptures.

 

[Twisted]

To me the biggest doctrinal error of Jack Hyles is his teaching that a head belief is all it takes to be saved.  That is how he got by with his bragging about winning thousands of souls every year by repeating a simple prayer that would have resulted in the entire city of Hammond being "saved." 

This is the same error of Steven Anderson who believes a man can continue being a swindler, liar, cheat, or anything else for the rest of his life with no change of heart and still be saved  just because he believes basic facts about Jesus.  The idea that someone calls for a turning from sin of any kind is a "false gospel" according to Hyles and Anderson.  In short they believe that salvation is simply a head belief in facts about the gospel.
http://www.repentanceblacklist.com/

This is why I NEVER stand at someone's front door and "lead" them to Christ.  If I can't sit down with a person and spend TIME with them, then I leave a tract, thank them and go on my way.

While not true of every encounter, I went with George Godfrey once out door knocking.  He "led" someone to Jesus at the door.  I went with him the next day to follow-up and the person wouldn't even open the door.  He just looked at us out the window.

I also don't enjoy hearing the stories of "20 people got saved at the funeral" by a show of hands.  While possible, mostly that's just rubbish.

 

[Bruh]

Off the top my head, I believe it's in Galatians, who withstood who over doctrine?
Jack Hyles preached a false gospel and taught how many to preach that false gospel and what big name in the Hyles side of the IFB has denounced Jack Hyles for this?
Division over doctrine is biblical.
I gotta go back to work I'm already late.

What doctrine do you disagree with him on. What false gospel.
I have heard him give a clear plan of salvation many time and it is exactly how I was saved almost 50 years ago. I agree the Holy Spirit must convict the person & the person must sincerely repent of their sins and trust Jesus as their savior but it's not complicated like many make it out to be.
I understand you disagree with him on method, preferences & standards but what doctrine do you disagree with him on?

Instead of calling men and women to surrender to Christ, Jack Hyles taught asks them only to accept some basic facts about Him.

I'm not following you here, can you simplify it for me. Can you give me your version of the Jack Hyles plan of salvation and how that differs from the bible plan.

There are plenty of areas where people differ from Jack Hyles but his plan of salvation would not have been one i would have guessed.

He always like Ford Porters "Gods simple plan of Salvation" as well as the Romans Road plan. Do you have a better path you teach?

Just what I said, he taught, ask them to except some basic facts.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

If Jesus would accept you the way you are right now would you be willing to ask Jesus into your heart and take you to heaven one day? Yes ok.

Repeat after me but remember you have to mean it in your heart.



Does this sound familiar? Makes sense? This is what he taught and preached. It's that simple 123 repeat after me and before long everybody you talk to about salvation gets saved.

Sword,

Can you please respond to my post? Thanks!!

 

[sword]

Bruh:
I'm picking up what your laying down here, but did he really preach 123 repeat after me? Can someone who was a member there, for many years, tell me what he taught? Was this what the taught in foster club or was this what people chose to do? How do you know when someone truly is under conviction. What do you use as a gauge. How do you get them to repent of all their sins? 

I'm not a Church of Christ guy, but I think that's why in the bible Christians always got baptized right away. By doing so they were making a huge statement for all to see. It said "I am now a believer in Christ and I'm not ashamed. In that day, to publicly show the world you are a Christian could mean your freedom or even your life. I don't suspect people often said "do you think he meant it" or "was she sincere" when they were taking such a risk to identify with Christ.

Perhaps Baptist churches should go back to posting "Adult Baptisms" instead of souls saved.     

 

[BALAAM]

To me the biggest doctrinal error of Jack Hyles is his teaching that a head belief is all it takes to be saved.  That is how he got by with his bragging about winning thousands of souls every year by repeating a simple prayer that would have resulted in the entire city of Hammond being "saved." 

This is the same error of Steven Anderson who believes a man can continue being a swindler, liar, cheat, or anything else for the rest of his life with no change of heart and still be saved  just because he believes basic facts about Jesus.  The idea that someone calls for a turning from sin of any kind is a "false gospel" according to Hyles and Anderson.  In short they believe that salvation is simply a head belief in facts about the gospel.
http://www.repentanceblacklist.com/

This is why I NEVER stand at someone's front door and "lead" them to Christ.  If I can't sit down with a person and spend TIME with them, then I leave a tract, thank them and go on my way.

While not true of every encounter, I went with George Godfrey once out door knocking.  He "led" someone to Jesus at the door.  I went with him the next day to follow-up and the person wouldn't even open the door.  He just looked at us out the window.

I also don't enjoy hearing the stories of "20 people got saved at the funeral" by a show of hands.  While possible, mostly that's just rubbish.

I am sure we could all tell our stories here but let me tell you this one. I was in church on a Sunday night reading a book called "Cowboy boots in Darkest Africa". It was by Bill Rice and a trip he made to hold revivals in Africa with thousands and thousands saved every day. Dr. Paulson, who was the missions teacher and a former missionary to Africa, asked me how I liked it. We talked about it a little bit and then he said, "If it is so easy then why do some missionaries go to Africa and spend their entire lives just trying to get a little work or two going? Don't believe everything you hear son."

 

[biscuit1953]

Off the top my head, I believe it's in Galatians, who withstood who over doctrine?
Jack Hyles preached a false gospel and taught how many to preach that false gospel and what big name in the Hyles side of the IFB has denounced Jack Hyles for this?
Division over doctrine is biblical.
I gotta go back to work I'm already late.

What doctrine do you disagree with him on. What false gospel.
How is assuring someone they will go to heaven if they raise a hand, walk down an aisle or repeat a prayer with no conviction of sin and a Catholic priest assuring someone they will go to heaven by following the sacraments any different?  Which is more tragic?
I have heard him give a clear plan of salvation many times and it is exactly how I was saved almost 50 years ago. I agree the Holy Spirit must convict the person & the person must sincerely repent of their sins and trust Jesus as their savior but it's not complicated like many make it out to be.

I understand you disagree with him on method, preferences & standards but what doctrine do you disagree with him on?

For several years my assurance of salvation rested on the fact that I went down to an altar because the preacher took me by the hand and led me in a prayer.  My heart had never been changed.  I had no compulsion when it came to lying and stealing and certainly had no desire of living for Jesus other than for an outward show.  To me there is nothing worse than giving someone a false assurance concerning eternity for the sake of bragging about how many souls they have led to Christ.  I might add that the greatest assurance of salvation is that Christ has become precious to someone instead of Him being just a fire escape from hell (1 Peter 2:7).

 

[Bruh]

Off the top my head, I believe it's in Galatians, who withstood who over doctrine?
Jack Hyles preached a false gospel and taught how many to preach that false gospel and what big name in the Hyles side of the IFB has denounced Jack Hyles for this?
Division over doctrine is biblical.
I gotta go back to work I'm already late.

What doctrine do you disagree with him on. What false gospel.
How is assuring someone they will go to heaven if they raise a hand, walk down an aisle or repeat a prayer with no conviction of sin and a Catholic priest assuring someone they will go to heaven by following the sacraments any different?  Which is more tragic?
I have heard him give a clear plan of salvation many times and it is exactly how I was saved almost 50 years ago. I agree the Holy Spirit must convict the person & the person must sincerely repent of their sins and trust Jesus as their savior but it's not complicated like many make it out to be.

I understand you disagree with him on method, preferences & standards but what doctrine do you disagree with him on?

For several years my assurance of salvation rested on the fact that I went down to an altar because the preacher took me by the hand and led me in a prayer.  My heart had never been changed.  I had no compulsion when it came to lying and stealing and certainly had no desire of living for Jesus other than for an outward show.  To me there is nothing worse than giving someone a false assurance concerning eternity for the sake of bragging about how many souls they have led to Christ.  I might add that the greatest assurance of salvation is that Christ has become precious to someone instead of Him being just a fire escape from hell (1 Peter 2:7).

Bingo!!!!!

 

[Walt]

To me the biggest doctrinal error of Jack Hyles is his teaching that a head belief is all it takes to be saved.  That is how he got by with his bragging about winning thousands of souls every year by repeating a simple prayer that would have resulted in the entire city of Hammond being "saved." 

This is the same error of Steven Anderson who believes a man can continue being a swindler, liar, cheat, or anything else for the rest of his life with no change of heart and still be saved  just because he believes basic facts about Jesus.  The idea that someone calls for a turning from sin of any kind is a "false gospel" according to Hyles and Anderson.  In short they believe that salvation is simply a head belief in facts about the gospel.
http://www.repentanceblacklist.com/

This is why I NEVER stand at someone's front door and "lead" them to Christ.  If I can't sit down with a person and spend TIME with them, then I leave a tract, thank them and go on my way.

While not true of every encounter, I went with George Godfrey once out door knocking.  He "led" someone to Jesus at the door.  I went with him the next day to follow-up and the person wouldn't even open the door.  He just looked at us out the window.

I also don't enjoy hearing the stories of "20 people got saved at the funeral" by a show of hands.  While possible, mostly that's just rubbish.

Amen!  Exactly!  And why bother doing the counting?  God knows whether they were regenerated or not.

 

[Walt]

To me the biggest doctrinal error of Jack Hyles is his teaching that a head belief is all it takes to be saved.  That is how he got by with his bragging about winning thousands of souls every year by repeating a simple prayer that would have resulted in the entire city of Hammond being "saved." 

This is the same error of Steven Anderson who believes a man can continue being a swindler, liar, cheat, or anything else for the rest of his life with no change of heart and still be saved  just because he believes basic facts about Jesus.  The idea that someone calls for a turning from sin of any kind is a "false gospel" according to Hyles and Anderson.  In short they believe that salvation is simply a head belief in facts about the gospel.
http://www.repentanceblacklist.com/

This is why I NEVER stand at someone's front door and "lead" them to Christ.  If I can't sit down with a person and spend TIME with them, then I leave a tract, thank them and go on my way.

While not true of every encounter, I went with George Godfrey once out door knocking.  He "led" someone to Jesus at the door.  I went with him the next day to follow-up and the person wouldn't even open the door.  He just looked at us out the window.

I also don't enjoy hearing the stories of "20 people got saved at the funeral" by a show of hands.  While possible, mostly that's just rubbish.

I am sure we could all tell our stories here but let me tell you this one. I was in church on a Sunday night reading a book called "Cowboy boots in Darkest Africa". It was by Bill Rice and a trip he made to hold revivals in Africa with thousands and thousands saved every day. Dr. Paulson, who was the missions teacher and a former missionary to Africa, asked me how I liked it. We talked about it a little bit and then he said, "If it is so easy then why do some missionaries go to Africa and spend their entire lives just trying to get a little work or two going? Don't believe everything you hear son."

Exactly.  I don't mean anything against Bill Rice, but it is possible that the "thousands and thousands saved" were merely adding Jesus to their existing list of gods.

 

[sword]

Bruh, BALAAM, Walt:

I agree the Holy spirit must convict a person and they must sincerely accept Jesus as their savior. We all know saying a few words or even walking an isle is not what saves. 

How can one "see another's heart", How can we know they are under conviction, how do you measure if they are sincere or just being polite? I have often witnessed to someone and just left them a track, because they did not seem to have a sincere interest in what I was showing them from the Bible. I did not want them to just repeat some prayer to be kind to me and then have some false idea about salvation. I have also spoke to people for just a few moments, who had been witnessed to before, who instantly displayed a sincere desire to accept Jesus of their savior.

If you were training a new convert or a teenager on how to lead other to Christ, what process would you teach them.

 

[Bruh]

Bruh, BALAAM, Walt:

I agree the Holy spirit must convict a person and they must sincerely accept Jesus as their savior. We all know saying a few words or even walking an isle is not what saves. 

How can one "see another's heart", How can we know they are under conviction, how do you measure if they are sincere or just being polite? I have often witnessed to someone and just left them a track, because they did not seem to have a sincere interest in what I was showing them from the Bible. I did not want them to just repeat some prayer to be kind to me and then have some false idea about salvation. I have also spoke to people for just a few moments, who had been witnessed to before, who instantly displayed a sincere desire to accept Jesus of their savior.

If you were training a new convert or a teenager on how to lead other to Christ, what process would you teach them.

It's not about judging whether or not the person is under conviction, per say.

The point is the presentation of the gospel message. As I pointed out in earlier post. If a person does:

what I said, he taught, ask them to except some basic facts.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

Do you agree with this? Yes ok.

If Jesus would accept you the way you are right now would you be willing to ask Jesus into your heart and take you to heaven one day? Yes ok.


Presenting the message this way..........I can pretty much 9 out of 10 times get someone to pray.


But........if you take your time and allow the other person to control the conversation, this will allow you to discern a few things and answer specific questions.



Sword, does this make sense?

 

[biscuit1953]

Bruh, BALAAM, Walt:

I agree the Holy spirit must convict a person and they must sincerely accept Jesus as their savior. We all know saying a few words or even walking an isle is not what saves. 
I don't know how many times I have heard a preacher imply that "taking that first step" is all it takes to be saved and if they didn't walk down that aisle they were rejecting salvation.  The fact of the matter is that many people do believe that saying a prayer or walking an aisle is necessary for salvation.  There is nothing more abhorrent than giving people a false assurance about eternity.

How can one "see another's heart", How can we know they are under conviction, how do you measure if they are sincere or just being polite? I have often witnessed to someone and just left them a track, because they did not seem to have a sincere interest in what I was showing them from the Bible. I did not want them to just repeat some prayer to be kind to me and then have some false idea about salvation. I have also spoke to people for just a few moments, who had been witnessed to before, who instantly displayed a sincere desire to accept Jesus of their savior.

If you were training a new convert or a teenager on how to lead other to Christ, what process would you teach them.

Modern evangelism 

The Bible tells us that Judas led a ?multitude? to Jesus.  His motive, however, wasn?t to bring them to the Savior for salvation.  Modern evangelism is also bringing ?multitudes? to Jesus.  Their motive may be different from Judas?s, but the end result is the same.  Just as the multitudes that Judas directed to Christ fell back from the Son of God, statistics show that up to 90% of those coming to Christ under the methods of modern evangelism fall away from the faith. Their latter end becomes worse than the first. They openly crucify the Son of God afresh.

In their zeal without knowledge, those who prefer the ease of modern evangelism to biblical evangelism betray the cause of the gospel with a kiss. What may look like love for the sinner?s welfare is in truth eternally detrimental to him. 

Like Peter, our zeal without knowledge is actually cutting off the ears of sinners.  Those we erroneously call ?backsliders? won?t listen to our reasonings.  As far as they are concerned, they have tried it once, and it didn?t work.  What a victory for the prince of darkness, and what an unspeakable tragedy for the Church!  (The Evidence Bible)