I don't follow the logic.

[Tarheel Baptist]

Very often, when someone online knows learns that I am a Liberty/ Dr Fallwell product, they ridicule the fact that Dr Fallwell was an IFB....and he was most of his life and ministry. Evidently, in IFB circles, to be a 'Falwell Baptist' is something less than desirable. At the same time, a Hyles pedigree is much to be desired.

But, when you compare the legacy of each man and ministry, who should be proud? I don't follow the logic. I'd like an honest, here's our reasoning answer from some of the forum IFB true believers.

You are looking at it from a personal integrity/likeability standpoint. Most IFB's care much more about doctrinal position/practice. (We could certainly debate the merits of those two perspectives.) From that standpoint then many/most IFB's see Falwell as a "compromiser." Bro. Hyles, for all his faults, ended as much of a died in the wool fundamental Baptist as he was in his heydey.

So, what one says they believe and their methodology mean more than actual practice?
Personal integrity is trumped by verbiage and militancy in their public persona?
Moral purity is trumped by... verbiage and militancy in their public persona?

It seems to me that Falwell, while certainly not perfect in any way, shape or form, was much more moral in practice, upstanding in his conduct (the conduct of his family, close personal associates) and his Christian testimony was not questioned.
Sadly, as opposed to Dr Hyles, his family, his associations and his personal testimony.

I am left to conclude that personal standards, whether or not they were actually practiced and a militant stand against 'Bible perverters', pant wearers and separating from compromisers (like Falwell) were the true test of a mighty man of God.

And, I'm using that phraseology because I was taken to task earlier today by someone using these exact words.

In the 80s deacon bus captains could hang out on State Street in Chicago on Saturday nights going from one strip club to another and show up with a filled bus on Sunday morning and it was just fine with Bro. Hyles, after all they were soul-winners. Soul-winning made it alright, soul-winning was everything. Big numbers made everything alright. Soul-winning covered a multitude of sins.

Sexual sin was overlooked and covered up. Service was more important than purity.

It was wicked for a woman to ware pants, but adulterous deacons were covered if they were soul-winners.

This extreme illustration nonetheless leads back to my question:
Is the logic of this thinking simply that militant separation and standards trump personal conduct and integrity?

I know that sounds like a ludicrous question, but that is my perception of their reality. But surely that isn't the case. I was hoping a 'true IFB believer' would offer a response. Raider, Tim, Tom? Not just a rehash of what is believed, but the process that allows that conclusion to be reached.
bgwilkinson, while you obviously don't believe that, you have been in the movement that believes and practices such. Can you offer an explanation?

I am not trying to be argumentative, just sincerely want to know.

 

[Mathew Ward]

Numbers trump everything.

Producers in performance based Christianity are given a pass.

As long as folks are getting saved and baptized all is well, even if we suspect something the leadership will overlook it.

Seperation standards are measurable and therfore the more you perform the greater benefit to the cause you are.

 

[Fresh Air]

Raider, Tim, Tom?

Answered briefly down below.

 

[Gringo]

Very often, when someone online knows learns that I am a Liberty/ Dr Fallwell product, they ridicule the fact that Dr Fallwell was an IFB....and he was most of his life and ministry. Evidently, in IFB circles, to be a 'Falwell Baptist' is something less than desirable. At the same time, a Hyles pedigree is much to be desired.

But, when you compare the legacy of each man and ministry, who should be proud? I don't follow the logic. I'd like an honest, here's our reasoning answer from some of the forum IFB true believers.

Falwell may well have been a "compromiser" in his later years, but he died a man without personal scandal (to my knowledge) whose children call him "blest"

Hyles died a fundamentalist but wracked with scandal and a negative legacy whose own children were divided and one of which went on the circuit denouncing her own father.

To have the respect of those closest to you seems a far better legacy than to have the respect of thousands who know you from afar.

In my opinion.

 

[bgwilkinson]

Very often, when someone online knows learns that I am a Liberty/ Dr Fallwell product, they ridicule the fact that Dr Fallwell was an IFB....and he was most of his life and ministry. Evidently, in IFB circles, to be a 'Falwell Baptist' is something less than desirable. At the same time, a Hyles pedigree is much to be desired.

But, when you compare the legacy of each man and ministry, who should be proud? I don't follow the logic. I'd like an honest, here's our reasoning answer from some of the forum IFB true believers.

Falwell may well have been a "compromiser" in his later years, but he died a man without personal scandal (to my knowledge) whose children call him "blest"

Hyles died a fundamentalist but wracked with scandal and a negative legacy whose own children were divided and one of which went on the circuit denouncing her own father.

To have the respect of those closest to you seems a far better legacy than to have the respect of thousands who know you from afar.

In my opinion.

Yes, It is far easier to fool the multitude than your own family. The family knows when dad is a fake, although they may be afraid to acknowledge it until years later and maybe not even then.

 

[Bruh]

I've heard it said, you are only as good a Christian as your family thinks you are.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Very often, when someone online knows learns that I am a Liberty/ Dr Fallwell product, they ridicule the fact that Dr Fallwell was an IFB....and he was most of his life and ministry. Evidently, in IFB circles, to be a 'Falwell Baptist' is something less than desirable. At the same time, a Hyles pedigree is much to be desired.

But, when you compare the legacy of each man and ministry, who should be proud? I don't follow the logic. I'd like an honest, here's our reasoning answer from some of the forum IFB true believers.

Falwell may well have been a "compromiser" in his later years, but he died a man without personal scandal (to my knowledge) whose children call him "blest"

Hyles died a fundamentalist but wracked with scandal and a negative legacy whose own children were divided and one of which went on the circuit denouncing her own father.

To have the respect of those closest to you seems a far better legacy than to have the respect of thousands who know you from afar.

In my opinion.

Good to 'see you' again, Gringo!
I totally agree and those are some of the thoughts behind my OP.
Some of Dr Hyles defenders still don't concede there was ever adultery between him and his secretary. And that's ok with me....but the testimony of his secretary's daughter in Sumner's paper was pretty convincing and damning to me. And, once again, it was from a family member involved and not a Hyles fan defending from the outside looking in.

Falwell's kids and grandkids do, as you said, call him blessed!

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Raider, Tim, Tom?

Answered briefly down below.

I appreciate the effort Tom, but I just cannot grasp the - what appears to me as convoluted logic. In essence, you/him/they are elevating standards of separation, a militant stand against perceived compromise over moral and ethical purity. Because, when it comes to orthodoxy in doctrine and practice Falwell was as sound as any IFB that I was ever exposed to...including Dr Hyles.

Perhaps it's an example of not wanting to cast pearls before swine, but I just think your explanation has no substance or merit...and I that is very rare for you.

 

[Fresh Air]

Perhaps it's an example of not wanting to cast pearls before swine, but I just think your explanation has no substance or merit...and I that is very rare for you.

I will take that as a backhanded compliment. 

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Perhaps it's an example of not wanting to cast pearls before swine, but I just think your explanation has no substance or merit...and I that is very rare for you.

I will take that as a backhanded compliment. 

It was not meant to be an insult...per se. 

 

[Liberty1]

Very often, when someone online knows learns that I am a Liberty/ Dr Fallwell product, they ridicule the fact that Dr Fallwell was an IFB....and he was most of his life and ministry. Evidently, in IFB circles, to be a 'Falwell Baptist' is something less than desirable. At the same time, a Hyles pedigree is much to be desired.

But, when you compare the legacy of each man and ministry, who should be proud? I don't follow the logic. I'd like an honest, here's our reasoning answer from some of the forum IFB true believers.

After John Rice died, Hyles took IFB's into a rabid direction that Rice would have never taken. If you look at the positions of Falwell and Hyles in the 80's and compare them to John Rice in the 70's - you will find that Falwell was closer to Rice than Hyles was.

There is no "Falwell camp" because Falwell did not think along those lines. Most Liberty grads admire Falwell as a leader while most Hyles followers look to Hyles as the thirteenth apostle - literally.

 

[BALAAM]

Very often, when someone online knows learns that I am a Liberty/ Dr Fallwell product, they ridicule the fact that Dr Fallwell was an IFB....and he was most of his life and ministry. Evidently, in IFB circles, to be a 'Falwell Baptist' is something less than desirable. At the same time, a Hyles pedigree is much to be desired.

But, when you compare the legacy of each man and ministry, who should be proud? I don't follow the logic. I'd like an honest, here's our reasoning answer from some of the forum IFB true believers.

After John Rice died, Hyles took IFB's into a rabid direction that Rice would have never taken. If you look at the positions of Falwell and Hyles in the 80's and compare them to John Rice in the 70's - you will find that Falwell was closer to Rice than Hyles was.

There is no "Falwell camp" because Falwell did not think along those lines. Most Liberty grads admire Falwell as a leader while most Hyles followers look to Hyles as the thirteenth apostle - literally.

I disagree. Most of the rabid Hyles guys think that he is up there giving God advice. And I mean that literally!

 

[BALAAM]

Very often, when someone online knows learns that I am a Liberty/ Dr Fallwell product, they ridicule the fact that Dr Fallwell was an IFB....and he was most of his life and ministry. Evidently, in IFB circles, to be a 'Falwell Baptist' is something less than desirable. At the same time, a Hyles pedigree is much to be desired.

But, when you compare the legacy of each man and ministry, who should be proud? I don't follow the logic. I'd like an honest, here's our reasoning answer from some of the forum IFB true believers.

After John Rice died, Hyles took IFB's into a rabid direction that Rice would have never taken. If you look at the positions of Falwell and Hyles in the 80's and compare them to John Rice in the 70's - you will find that Falwell was closer to Rice than Hyles was.

There is no "Falwell camp" because Falwell did not think along those lines. Most Liberty grads admire Falwell as a leader while most Hyles followers look to Hyles as the thirteenth apostle - literally.

I disagree. Most of the rabid Hyles guys think that he is up there giving God advice. And I mean that literally!

didn;t he say once he thought God would look down on him one day and say ... "I didn;t know I was able to do all that until hyles showed me.."....... or something to that effect?......

I don't recall this but I do not doubt it.

 

[Just John]

Very often, when someone online knows learns that I am a Liberty/ Dr Fallwell product, they ridicule the fact that Dr Fallwell was an IFB....and he was most of his life and ministry. Evidently, in IFB circles, to be a 'Falwell Baptist' is something less than desirable. At the same time, a Hyles pedigree is much to be desired.

But, when you compare the legacy of each man and ministry, who should be proud? I don't follow the logic. I'd like an honest, here's our reasoning answer from some of the forum IFB true believers.

After John Rice died, Hyles took IFB's into a rabid direction that Rice would have never taken. If you look at the positions of Falwell and Hyles in the 80's and compare them to John Rice in the 70's - you will find that Falwell was closer to Rice than Hyles was.

There is no "Falwell camp" because Falwell did not think along those lines. Most Liberty grads admire Falwell as a leader while most Hyles followers look to Hyles as the thirteenth apostle - literally.

Good point. Different from many other IFB's (well-known anyway), Falwell avoided the "camp" mentality because he didn't have the ego and tore down walls instead of building them. Some will say too many walls were tore down. I would probably err on the side of tearing down walls instead of building walls.

Mark 9:38-41  (NLT)

38 John said to Jesus, ?Teacher, we saw someone using your name to cast out demons, but we told him to stop because he wasn?t in our group.?

39 ?Don?t stop him!? Jesus said. ?No one who performs a miracle in my name will soon be able to speak evil of me. 40 Anyone who is not against us is for us. 41 If anyone gives you even a cup of water because you belong to the Messiah, I tell you the truth, that person will surely be rewarded.