How many?

.
Yeah, I'm sorry about the "blind" comment and his being unattractive. Thanks for the insight that women can be attracted to other attributes. I just have a hard time seeing what SO MANY (apparently) saw in him. I guess that was unkind on my part. Sorry.

Anyway, for some reason, I thought it was around 30, not "a handful". I'm glad to know that. That he took "obscene pictures of himself with some of the women . .women that were members of the church" blows my mind. WHAT WERE THEY THINKING!

This is a tragedy no matter how many there were. But as I said in another post, this is MORE a tragedy for a helpless little boy than for all of the others combined, in my opinion.

Once again, I apologize for my comments about his physical appearance. I'm just THANKFUL no one here can see MY appearance (that's why I use a picture of a dog to represent me online).
very true.... . the innocent child that was murdered is the real victim of what dave hyles did at miller road.... ..it can be argued that the adults could have... and should have.. known better than to let themselves be drawn into illicit activity.... but a child is helpless......

and don;t worry about the physical appearance thing.... personally i thought the picture i saw of d hyles was ugly too... ..and i doubt he would lose sleep over that either.... . but being unfaithful in a marriage is even uglier still - regardless of what the other person looks like.... and like someone was saying the atmosphere of hero worship in these churches can cause people of both genders to supress their natural inclinations and also their consciences to go along with what a leader who is a master manipulator and standling on a pedestal tells them...... and even more so when he has been held up as the "man-o-god"....by the church..... . in a way it does blind them...

theres nothing wrong with a dog avatar.. . ..if i had a dog i would probably do that..... :cool:
 
Last edited:

Fascinating article about J. Frank Norris...
the story my dads grandfather told about that was norris claimed chipps threatened to kill him.... ..and that chipps had said as much in a phone call to norris before showing up at the church office.... and that made norris believe chipps might be armed....... turns out he wasn;t armed.... ...but in texas at the time, simply verbalizing an intent to kill was justification for the threatended person to take lethal action..... trouble is - the only witness to chipps saying that was norris himself.... .so there was a mixed reaction among church people and other citizens of fort worth about it.....
 
the story my dads grandfather told about that was norris claimed chipps threatened to kill him.... ..and that chipps had said as much in a phone call to norris before showing up at the church office.... and that made norris believe chipps might be armed....... turns out he wasn;t armed.... ...but in texas at the time, simply verbalizing an intent to kill was justification for the threatended person to take lethal action..... trouble is - the only witness to chipps saying that was norris himself.... .so there was a mixed reaction among church people and other citizens of fort worth about it.....
There was also trial testimony that Chipps was a violent drunk with a long record and was overheard shortly before the shooting actually threatening to kill Norris.
 
IOW there is ample evidence that neither Chipps or Norris had ever paid attention to Proverbs 15:1.
 
very true.... . the innocent child that was murdered is the real victim of what dave hyles did at miller road.... ..it can be argued that the adults could have... and should have.. known better than to let themselves be drawn into illicit activity.... but a child is helpless......

and don;t worry about the physical appearance thing.... personally i thought the picture i saw of d hyles was ugly too... ..and i doubt he would lose sleep over that either.... . but being unfaithful in a marriage is even uglier still - regardless of what the other person looks like.... and like someone was saying the atmosphere of hero worship in these churches can cause people of both genders to supress their natural inclinations and also their consciences to go along with what a leader who is a master manipulator and standling on a pedestal tells them...... and even more so when he has been held up as the "man-o-god"....by the church..... . in a way it does blind them...

theres nothing wrong with a dog avatar.. . ..if i had a dog i would probably do that..... :cool:
Why do you keep saying the child was murdered? It was a tragedy, but the child was run over by his mother in a tragic accident.

I am in no way defending any of Dave Hyles actions. Just the ones we know about are despicable and wicked and to do them while professing to be serving God is even worse. That being said, why do people keep saying the child was murdered when it was clearly a horrible accident? The police found no indication it was intentional, and Dave Hyles was not even present when the tragedy happened.
 
Why do you keep saying the child was murdered? It was a tragedy, but the child was run over by his mother in a tragic accident.

I am in no way defending any of Dave Hyles actions. Just the ones we know about are despicable and wicked and to do them while professing to be serving God is even worse. That being said, why do people keep saying the child was murdered when it was clearly a horrible accident? The police found no indication it was intentional, and Dave Hyles was not even present when the tragedy happened.
why do you and others from hammond remain so confused about this?...... are you aware there were 2 children?..... have you been reading this thread or just skimming over a few posts here and there?.... i thought it would have been easy to understand just based on the history of this case that has been told all over the fff for almost 20 years now.... . let me spell this out as simply as i can.....

i;m not talking about the child belonging to both brenda and dave hyles that was run over... (that childs last name was hyles and was dave hyles natural child)... .. . i;m talking about the first child - brent stevens.... who was from the marriage brenda ran away from when she left her first husband after the scandal at miller road.. and ran away with dave hyles...... .. that childs father was not dave hyles...(his last name was stevens - same as his child). .... and it was well know dave hyles did not like that child and was known to handle him roughly..... ...that child was found dead in his crib with broken bones a few months after brenda took him away from his natural father... . (whose last name - once again - was stevens - same as his child)..... and ran away with hyles.. .... .... this happened a long time before the second child belonging to both brenda and dave was run over....

now do you understand?........ 2 children born to brenda stevens in the early 1980s.... one belonged to dave hyles.. one did not.... both are dead...... got it?......... the second death was ruled an accident.... but the case concerning the first death is still open and has been investigated as a murder/child abuse.....

in my post you objected to i wrote - - "the innocent child that was murdered is the real victim of what dave hyles did at miller road." - key words there being "....what dave hyles did at miller road"... ..the child that died as a result of being run over by his mom did not die as a result of something dave hyles did - was nowhere near or otherwise connected to miller road baptist church... and therefor was not a victim of dave hyles miller road scandal....
 
Last edited:
why do you and others from hammond remain so confused about this?...... are you aware there were 2 children?..... have you been reading this thread or just skimming over a few posts here and there?.... i thought it would have been easy to understand just based on the history of this case that has been told all over the fff for almost 20 years now.... . let me spell this out as simply as i can.....

i;m not talking about the child belonging to both brenda and dave hyles that was run over... (that childs last name was hyles and was dave hyles natural child)... .. . i;m talking about the first child - brent stevens.... who was from the marriage brenda ran away from when she left her first husband after the scandal at miller road.. and ran away with dave hyles...... .. that childs father was not dave hyles...(his last name was stevens - same as his child). .... and it was well know dave hyles did not like that child and was known to handle him roughly..... ...that child was found dead in his crib with broken bones a few months after brenda took him away from his natural father... . (whose last name - once again - was stevens - same as his child)..... and ran away with hyles.. .... .... this happened a long time before the second child belonging to both brenda and dave was run over....

now do you understand?........ 2 children born to brenda stevens in the early 1980s.... one belonged to dave hyles.. one did not.... both are dead...... got it?......... the second death was ruled an accident.... but the case concerning the first death is still open and has been investigated as a murder/child abuse.....

in my post you objected to i wrote - - "the innocent child that was murdered is the real victim of what dave hyles did at miller road." - key words there being "....what dave hyles did at miller road"... ..the child that died as a result of being run over by his mom did not die as a result of something dave hyles did - was nowhere near or otherwise connected to miller road baptist church... and therefor was not a victim of dave hyles miller road scandal....
Very clear. thank you for the detailed info and correction.

What did the police report say and how could they ignore a dead child with broken bones and injuries?

I remember posts about suspicion of child abuse, but not that the child died.

Thank you for the more detailed clarification.
 
Last edited:
The child that had injuries found dead in 1985 was 17 Month old Brent Stevens. Brent was discovered to have eight broken bones, all of them broken at different times. At 15 months he finally received medical care for injuries that had caused him pain for just about all of his brief life. So he was removed from the Bolingbroke household and transferred to the custody of his natural father in Texas. A few months later. the investigator of the alleged abuse, Paul Ciolino, discovered to his dismay that Brent had been returned to the custody of Dave and Brenda. Detective Ciolino warned the Children’s Services authorities that he believed that Brent’s life was in danger in that house. Not long afterward, Brent was found dead in his crib. Dave Hyles had been the only adult in the house with Brent the previous evening, and there was a prescription bottle of Actifed, filled only the day before and now empty, in the house. It was collected as evidence. Inquiries were done but charges were never brought.

The child who fell out of the car in 1999 and run over while Brenda Stevens Hyles was operating the vehicle was 5 year old Jack David Hyles. David Hyles was not present when this occurred.

The Known affairs/abuse in hammond were 2. Could have been more. 1 Teenager who has more recently (last 15 years) brought up her charges from the late 70's early 80s and 1 married lady who repented and stayed married. Both true both clearly documented. The details have become increasingly hyperbolic from the original telling. I knew both. I have stayed in both their homes.

If you think it improbable that women would have sex with David Hyles you never met David Hyles. He was gifted with incredible charisma, charm and ability to influence like very few men I have ever met and yes I knew him and had spoken with him on multiple occasions. Placed into the hands of a Godly man and under the power of the Holy Spirit they could be an incredible tool to bring the lost to Jesus. In the hands of a boy with power too early, unaccountable and privilege it ends in the disaster we have seen play out in front of the world. But Satan plays the long con. He wasn't going after David Hyles. Brother Hyles committed the iniquitous sin of Idolatry by choosing the love for his son over obedience to the word of God. Instead of instructing the church leadership in the disciplining his son, he chose to send him away to Garland to lead another ministry. Satan was setting a time bomb that would keep exploding generation after generation while other ministries employed the same tactic of covering the sin of a ministry leader and sending them off somewhere else in IFB ministry after IFB Ministry as a hack of the "Pastor School/HAC" affiliation. All these who would seek advice on what to do when a leader fails sought advice and much of that advice found its way to a phone call to the CLA where the practice was seemingly codified.

So many want to question the entire doctrines of IFB churches, many who have nothing to do with First Baptist Church of Hammond. Many still want to attack the current Administration at FBC Hammond who also had nothing to do with this practice. While disputed, and we could get into it in another thread, Jack Schaap's situation is when this practice ended for good at FBC Hammond. At some point the results of not following God's word proves itself out and the consequences are too unbearable to again go back to the practice that cause so much pain. Finally with the Disciplining of Jack Schaap which had its spits and starts at its inception until clarity he was correctly rebuked BEFORE ALL and removed with authorities alerted. Some may say it took too long but for the sake of argument from the time of the initial discovery to the removal was 5 days. And subsequent disciplining of many more since give has given me more confidence that the right track has been chosen in dealing with these issue.
 
Last edited:
If you think it improbable that women would have sex with David Hyles you never met David Hyles. He was gifted with incredible charisma, charm and ability to influence like very few men
2 Timothy 3:6 — For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
 
The child that had injuries found dead in 1985 was 17 Month old Brent Stevens. Brent was discovered to have eight broken bones, all of them broken at different times. At 15 months he finally received medical care for injuries that had caused him pain for just about all of his brief life. So he was removed from the Bolingbroke household and transferred to the custody of his natural father in Texas. A few months later. the investigator of the alleged abuse, Paul Ciolino, discovered to his dismay that Brent had been returned to the custody of Dave and Brenda. Detective Ciolino warned the Children’s Services authorities that he believed that Brent’s life was in danger in that house. Not long afterward, Brent was found dead in his crib. Dave Hyles had been the only adult in the house with Brent the previous evening, and there was a prescription bottle of Actifed, filled only the day before and now empty, in the house. It was collected as evidence. Inquiries were done but charges were never brought.

The child who fell out of the car in 1999 and run over while Brenda Stevens Hyles was operating the vehicle was 5 year old Jack David Hyles. David Hyles was not present when this occurred.

The Known affairs/abuse in hammond were 2. Could have been more. 1 Teenager who has more recently (last 15 years) brought up her charges from the late 70's early 80s and 1 married lady who repented and stayed married. Both true both clearly documented. The details have become increasingly hyperbolic from the original telling. I knew both. I have stayed in both their homes.

If you think it improbable that women would have sex with David Hyles you never met David Hyles. He was gifted with incredible charisma, charm and ability to influence like very few men I have ever met and yes I knew him and had spoken with him on multiple occasions. Placed into the hands of a Godly man and under the power of the Holy Spirit they could be an incredible tool to bring the lost to Jesus. In the hands of a boy with power too early, unaccountable and privilege it ends in the disaster we have seen play out in front of the world. But Satan plays the long con. He wasn't going after David Hyles. Brother Hyles committed the iniquitous sin of Idolatry by choosing the love for his son over obedience to the word of God. Instead of instructing the church leadership in the disciplining his son, he chose to send him away to Garland to lead another ministry. Satan was setting a time bomb that would keep exploding generation after generation while other ministries employed the same tactic of covering the sin of a ministry leader and sending them off somewhere else in IFB ministry after IFB Ministry as a hack of the "Pastor School/HAC" affiliation. All these who would seek advice on what to do when a leader fails sought advice and much of that advice found its way to a phone call to the CLA where the practice was seemingly codified.

So many want to question the entire doctrines of IFB churches, many who have nothing to do with First Baptist Church of Hammond. Many still want to attack the current Administration at FBC Hammond who also had nothing to do with this practice. While disputed, and we could get into it in another thread, Jack Schaap's situation is when this practice ended for good at FBC Hammond. At some point the results of not following God's word proves itself out and the consequences are too unbearable to again go back to the practice that cause so much pain. Finally with the Disciplining of Jack Schaap which had its spits and starts at its inception until clarity he was correctly rebuked BEFORE ALL and removed with authorities alerted. Some may say it took too long but for the sake of argument from the time of the initial discovery to the removal was 5 days. And subsequent disciplining of many more since give has given me more confidence that the right track has been chosen in dealing with these issue.

Thanks for your insider's perspective. I'd be interested if you know and could expound on how the "codified" thing with Gibbs worked. I'm assuming that is the key to how the "hack" at Pastor's School/HAC could actually become common knowledge and practice, but flesh that out a bit if you could, because it defies the spiritual mind how supposedly godly men and church leaders could ignore the plain teaching of the Bible on church discipline in favor of what is clearly repugnant and deplorable culpability to unleashing wolves on other flocks.
 
Thanks for your insider's perspective. I'd be interested if you know and could expound on how the "codified" thing with Gibbs worked. I'm assuming that is the key to how the "hack" at Pastor's School/HAC could actually become common knowledge and practice, but flesh that out a bit if you could, because it defies the spiritual mind how supposedly godly men and church leaders could ignore the plain teaching of the Bible on church discipline in favor of what is clearly repugnant and deplorable culpability to unleashing wolves on other flocks.
I have spoken to a key person who was there and was privy to the decisions but did not make them at the time of DHs issues. He told me that the men of that day "Its just the way that generation did things". If a young man was sexually active with a young girl and especially if he got a girl pregnant, they shipped him off to the military or boys home depending on age and the girl was shipped off to a expectant mother's home until the baby was born. The baby many times was adopted out to a babyless couple and the girl would come back to finish her schooling. Not used typically for the pastorate because those men were generally older but shipping them off to another ministry for some sort of restoral and then they many times would end up in a pastorate with or without recommendations.

Why was it done? Well it was always done that way. of course that was before the law became different on the age in which sexual legal age was enforced ann society as a whole began to press a greater legal penalty for such violations. Many years the law looked the other way regardless of religious affiliation. Look at the ages of Pricilla Pressley 14 and Jerry Lee Lewis Cousin Age 13. There are many many more that could be cited.

But how could a christian do this? Lets look at an example of General Robert E. Lee. A devout Born-again believer. Probably his piety would make me look like a wretched skid row bum. His grandson was R.G. Lee President of the Southern Baptist Convention and great preacher in Memphis for many years. The point is that General Lee's faith had passed generation to generation. From the view of the 21st century looking back on The outstanding christian men of the 1800s the question of him would be asked: "How could you defend slavery, how could your enslave another human for their entire lives and then want to keep it so bad you were willing to fight a war over it?" And I suppose an answer would be very much the same. That is how we always have done it. In fact for millenniums that is how it always was done. And now in the same manner that generational timebomb has exploded all over our streets throughout the entire nation.

I am not excusing it. Both are evils. But the rational of why these blind spots exist seems to be quite evident. I think there is some things coming to light about the porn industry that maybe, if Jesus tarries we will see the same societal and church outcry against its use that we have seen in these areas. The amount of women being trafficked in our nation and other is horrific. Maybe someday it will too receive the social backlash it deserves.
 
Let us also remember David, a "man after God's own heart" who committed adultery with the wife of one of his most faithful soldiers then had him murdered in an attempt to cover his sin.

When one of his own sons raped his daughter, he did nothing about it.

As a result, likely because of his dad's inaction, David's son Absalom took the law into his own hands and murdered his rapist brother. Then, later, tried to incite a rebellion to usurp the throne.

I think the parallels between David's story and the Hyles dynasty are too many to be ignored. I'm not excusing anyone and the only reason I can say for certainty that David had a heart for God is because the Word says he did.
 
I have spoken to a key person who was there and was privy to the decisions but did not make them at the time of DHs issues. He told me that the men of that day "Its just the way that generation did things". If a young man was sexually active with a young girl and especially if he got a girl pregnant, they shipped him off to the military or boys home depending on age and the girl was shipped off to a expectant mother's home until the baby was born. The baby many times was adopted out to a babyless couple and the girl would come back to finish her schooling. Not used typically for the pastorate because those men were generally older but shipping them off to another ministry for some sort of restoral and then they many times would end up in a pastorate with or without recommendations.

Why was it done? Well it was always done that way. of course that was before the law became different on the age in which sexual legal age was enforced ann society as a whole began to press a greater legal penalty for such violations. Many years the law looked the other way regardless of religious affiliation. Look at the ages of Pricilla Pressley 14 and Jerry Lee Lewis Cousin Age 13. There are many many more that could be cited.

But how could a christian do this? Lets look at an example of General Robert E. Lee. A devout Born-again believer. Probably his piety would make me look like a wretched skid row bum. His grandson was R.G. Lee President of the Southern Baptist Convention and great preacher in Memphis for many years. The point is that General Lee's faith had passed generation to generation. From the view of the 21st century looking back on The outstanding christian men of the 1800s the question of him would be asked: "How could you defend slavery, how could your enslave another human for their entire lives and then want to keep it so bad you were willing to fight a war over it?" And I suppose an answer would be very much the same. That is how we always have done it. In fact for millenniums that is how it always was done. And now in the same manner that generational timebomb has exploded all over our streets throughout the entire nation.

I am not excusing it. Both are evils. But the rational of why these blind spots exist seems to be quite evident. I think there is some things coming to light about the porn industry that maybe, if Jesus tarries we will see the same societal and church outcry against its use that we have seen in these areas. The amount of women being trafficked in our nation and other is horrific. Maybe someday it will too receive the social backlash it deserves.

I appreciate the response, which is equivalent to the historical descriptor "he/they were a product of their time". Given that qualification, I can understand how one ministry and leader would choose to avoid what the Bible clearly tells us to do in regards to open rebuke of a wayward minister, but to systematize that heinous mistake, and have numerous other like-minded supporters swallow that unBiblical practice is quite damning, and goes to show that the charge of man-worship was indeed a fair characterization, at least in part, of the FBCH/Hyles legacy. Pragmatism ruled the day, because after all, "look at all the good they're doing", rather than "what saith Scripture".
 
I appreciate the response, which is equivalent to the historical descriptor "he/they were a product of their time". Given that qualification, I can understand how one ministry and leader would choose to avoid what the Bible clearly tells us to do in regards to open rebuke of a wayward minister, but to systematize that heinous mistake, and have numerous other like-minded supporters swallow that unBiblical practice is quite damning, and goes to show that the charge of man-worship was indeed a fair characterization, at least in part, of the FBCH/Hyles legacy. Pragmatism ruled the day, because after all, "look at all the good they're doing", rather than "what saith Scripture".
Curtis Huston typified the mindset when he justified the handling of this scandal by not only saying, "look at the good he's done..." but also declaring the name of Fundamentalism must be preserved.
 
Curtis Huston typified the mindset when he justified the handling of this scandal by not only saying, "look at the good he's done..." but also declaring the name of Fundamentalism must be preserved.
I'm certain the 'the-gifts-and-calling-of-God-are-without-repentance' mantra was chanted, too.
 
.
Yeah, I'm sorry about the "blind" comment and his being unattractive. Thanks for the insight that women can be attracted to other attributes. I just have a hard time seeing what SO MANY (apparently) saw in him. I guess that was unkind on my part. Sorry.

Anyway, for some reason, I thought it was around 30, not "a handful". I'm glad to know that. That he took "obscene pictures of himself with some of the women . .women that were members of the church" blows my mind. WHAT WERE THEY THINKING!

This is a tragedy no matter how many there were. But as I said in another post, this is MORE a tragedy for a helpless little boy than for all of the others combined, in my opinion.

Once again, I apologize for my comments about his physical appearance. I'm just THANKFUL no one here can see MY appearance (that's why I use a picture of a dog to represent me online)
In a weird way, I can understand what the ladies are saying here. I always had the opposite problem of being the guy with good looks and little charisma. I sometimes didn’t even have to ask the girl out, but it never seemed to get much farther even when I was interested. However, then I’d later see some dumpy guy who “got the girl” because, unlike me, he made her laugh or touched her emotionally or whatever. Regardless, at least one girl liked me enough to marry me lol. But yes, I can completely see how an unattractive, overweight, bald guy could get a huge number of girls because I definitely witnessed the fact that charisma and personality outweigh good looks.
 
In a weird way, I can understand what the ladies are saying here. I always had the opposite problem of being the guy with good looks and little charisma. I sometimes didn’t even have to ask the girl out, but it never seemed to get much farther even when I was interested. However, then I’d later see some dumpy guy who “got the girl” because, unlike me, he made her laugh or touched her emotionally or whatever. Regardless, at least one girl liked me enough to marry me lol. But yes, I can completely see how an unattractive, overweight, bald guy could get a huge number of girls because I definitely witnessed the fact that charisma and personality outweigh good looks.
So, you're telling us that you are good looking?
 
Top