Jack Hyles Legacy

[rsc2a]

I think the point you try to make is that, Falwell for instance, wasn't sound doctrinally. That is untrue, unless you consider his lack of militant separation and standards doctrine. Do you consider militant standards and separation as doctrine...equal to practicing biblical, morality in one's personal and ministry life?

Falwell was orthodox, but he wasn't a fundamentalist...

Which of the fundamentals did he reject?

Separation from the world and the purity of the local church is huge emphasis on the NT.

"The world" isn't CCM or Bible versions. Galatians provides a pretty good list of what the world looks like which includes things like sexual immorality, enmity, strife, fits of anger, rivalries, jealousy, dissension and division. Go ahead and explain how militant separation fits in here.

I am an independent fundamental Baptist b/c each of those three words stands for important biblical doctrine.

"We are independent which is why we go to the same "colleges" and have the same people speaking at all of our conferences that are really independent and not at all like other denominations' conferences."

"I'm a fundamentalist because standards!"

"I'm a Baptist because I believe in soul liberty just so long as women don't wear pants when they teach."

 

[bgwilkinson]

It seems to me that we are not all on the same page with the term fundamentalist.

Some think it is defined by separation from the world.

Others think it is one who holds to the fundamentals of the faith as in a historic fundamentalist of the early 20th century.

Still others think fundamentalism is represented by separation over personal preferences such as KJVO, Pants on women, to denomination or not to denomination dating from the mid 20th century.

There are even those historic fundamentalists that believe fundamentalism is the coming together of all Christians who hold to the fundamentals, some might call this ecumenism though not in the Catholic sense.

 

[bgwilkinson]

Here are the top 10 Google hits for Jack Hyles, as you read these it becomes clear we must separate from the name and the legacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Hyles

http://www.jackhyles.com/

http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/hyles/testim.htm

http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/hyles/errors.htm

http://www.wayoflife.org/index_files/the_women_who_knew_jack_hyles.html

http://www.blessedquietness.com/journal/housechu/hyles-j.htm

http://www.biblicalevangelist.org/jack_hyles_chapter3.php

http://brucegerencser.net/2015/01/legacy-jack-hyles/

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Great%20Men%20of%20God/pastor_jack_hyles.htm

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2001/april2/11.25.html

No wonder we are losing students at the college.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I think the point you try to make is that, Falwell for instance, wasn't sound doctrinally. That is untrue, unless you consider his lack of militant separation and standards doctrine. Do you consider militant standards and separation as doctrine...equal to practicing biblical, morality in one's personal and ministry life?

Falwell was orthodox, but he wasn't a fundamentalist. I am one for what I think are very good reasons. As I've said a thousand times I commend him for preaching the Gospel and living a life of integrity. But in this thread you have set a straw man skewed to your purposes and then torn him apart with sound and fury.

It isn't a choice between a mindless man-worship of an evil Jack Hyles because he believed women shouldn't wear pants vs a spotless Jerry Falwell who lived and died above reproach but was reasonable in his interactions with the world. Jerry Falwell made a host of absolutely rotten decisions when it comes to associations and emphases. Yes, that means something. Separation from the world and the purity of the local church is huge emphasis on the NT. I am an independent fundamental Baptist b/c each of those three words stands for important biblical doctrine. Falwell started off with all three and ended with just the last one and that one barely. Along the way he took off on a thousand political tangents, swallowed the contemporary Christian music nonsense, and made compromise a core value. And this is just off the top of my head. I guarantee you I could come up with a much more substantial list if I took some time at it.

No, I'm not going to say that Jerry Falwell is my hero. It would be completely contradictory for me to do so. 

...but that's ok. Keep holding up the worst image of JH and comparing him to the best image of JF. It seems to make you feel better.

True dat.

I just shake my head at the 'logic' behind this....
Yet again I say....it seems that having a militant standard is more important than actually practicing the standards that you preach. 

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Here are the top 10 Google hits for Jack Hyles, as you read these it becomes clear we must separate from the name and the legacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Hyles

http://www.jackhyles.com/

http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/hyles/testim.htm

http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/hyles/errors.htm

http://www.wayoflife.org/index_files/the_women_who_knew_jack_hyles.html

http://www.blessedquietness.com/journal/housechu/hyles-j.htm

http://www.biblicalevangelist.org/jack_hyles_chapter3.php

http://brucegerencser.net/2015/01/legacy-jack-hyles/

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Great%20Men%20of%20God/pastor_jack_hyles.htm

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2001/april2/11.25.html

No wonder we are losing students at the college.

Maybe they should take Baptist out of the name....

 

[bgwilkinson]

Here are the top 10 Google hits for Jack Hyles, as you read these it becomes clear we must separate from the name and the legacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Hyles

http://www.jackhyles.com/

http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/hyles/testim.htm

http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/hyles/errors.htm

http://www.wayoflife.org/index_files/the_women_who_knew_jack_hyles.html

http://www.blessedquietness.com/journal/housechu/hyles-j.htm

http://www.biblicalevangelist.org/jack_hyles_chapter3.php

http://brucegerencser.net/2015/01/legacy-jack-hyles/

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Great%20Men%20of%20God/pastor_jack_hyles.htm

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2001/april2/11.25.html

No wonder we are losing students at the college.

Maybe they should take Baptist out of the name....

We have never had Baptist in the name. Which I always thought was kind of strange considering HAC was suppose to be a Baptist college.

 

[Binaca Chugger]

I think the point you try to make is that, Falwell for instance, wasn't sound doctrinally. That is untrue, unless you consider his lack of militant separation and standards doctrine. Do you consider militant standards and separation as doctrine...equal to practicing biblical, morality in one's personal and ministry life?

Falwell was orthodox, but he wasn't a fundamentalist. I am one for what I think are very good reasons. As I've said a thousand times I commend him for preaching the Gospel and living a life of integrity. But in this thread you have set a straw man skewed to your purposes and then torn him apart with sound and fury.

It isn't a choice between a mindless man-worship of an evil Jack Hyles because he believed women shouldn't wear pants vs a spotless Jerry Falwell who lived and died above reproach but was reasonable in his interactions with the world. Jerry Falwell made a host of absolutely rotten decisions when it comes to associations and emphases. Yes, that means something. Separation from the world and the purity of the local church is huge emphasis on the NT. I am an independent fundamental Baptist b/c each of those three words stands for important biblical doctrine. Falwell started off with all three and ended with just the last one and that one barely. Along the way he took off on a thousand political tangents, swallowed the contemporary Christian music nonsense, and made compromise a core value. And this is just off the top of my head. I guarantee you I could come up with a much more substantial list if I took some time at it.

No, I'm not going to say that Jerry Falwell is my hero. It would be completely contradictory for me to do so. 

...but that's ok. Keep holding up the worst image of JH and comparing him to the best image of JF. It seems to make you feel better.

True dat.

I just shake my head at the 'logic' behind this....
Yet again I say....it seems that having a militant standard is more important than actually practicing the standards that you preach. 

I find good logic in it.  I am neither a fan of JH or JF.  They both allowed things that I would not.  JH overlooked immorality of staff because of their talents.  JF overlooked the immorality of entertainers and politicians because of their talents.  Both men compromised a great deal, just in different areas and different ways.  I am not what I am because of these men.  I have chosen to be what I am because of what I believe from my study of the Scripture.

 

[bgwilkinson]

I think the point you try to make is that, Falwell for instance, wasn't sound doctrinally. That is untrue, unless you consider his lack of militant separation and standards doctrine. Do you consider militant standards and separation as doctrine...equal to practicing biblical, morality in one's personal and ministry life?

Falwell was orthodox, but he wasn't a fundamentalist. I am one for what I think are very good reasons. As I've said a thousand times I commend him for preaching the Gospel and living a life of integrity. But in this thread you have set a straw man skewed to your purposes and then torn him apart with sound and fury.

It isn't a choice between a mindless man-worship of an evil Jack Hyles because he believed women shouldn't wear pants vs a spotless Jerry Falwell who lived and died above reproach but was reasonable in his interactions with the world. Jerry Falwell made a host of absolutely rotten decisions when it comes to associations and emphases. Yes, that means something. Separation from the world and the purity of the local church is huge emphasis on the NT. I am an independent fundamental Baptist b/c each of those three words stands for important biblical doctrine. Falwell started off with all three and ended with just the last one and that one barely. Along the way he took off on a thousand political tangents, swallowed the contemporary Christian music nonsense, and made compromise a core value. And this is just off the top of my head. I guarantee you I could come up with a much more substantial list if I took some time at it.

No, I'm not going to say that Jerry Falwell is my hero. It would be completely contradictory for me to do so. 

...but that's ok. Keep holding up the worst image of JH and comparing him to the best image of JF. It seems to make you feel better.

True dat.

I just shake my head at the 'logic' behind this....
Yet again I say....it seems that having a militant standard is more important than actually practicing the standards that you preach. 

I find good logic in it.  I am neither a fan of JH or JF.  They both allowed things that I would not.  JH overlooked immorality of staff because of their talents.  JF overlooked the immorality of entertainers and politicians because of their talents.  Both men compromised a great deal, just in different areas and different ways.  I am not what I am because of these men.  I have chosen to be what I am because of what I believe from my study of the Scripture.

...and that's as it should be.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I think the point you try to make is that, Falwell for instance, wasn't sound doctrinally. That is untrue, unless you consider his lack of militant separation and standards doctrine. Do you consider militant standards and separation as doctrine...equal to practicing biblical, morality in one's personal and ministry life?

Falwell was orthodox, but he wasn't a fundamentalist. I am one for what I think are very good reasons. As I've said a thousand times I commend him for preaching the Gospel and living a life of integrity. But in this thread you have set a straw man skewed to your purposes and then torn him apart with sound and fury.

It isn't a choice between a mindless man-worship of an evil Jack Hyles because he believed women shouldn't wear pants vs a spotless Jerry Falwell who lived and died above reproach but was reasonable in his interactions with the world. Jerry Falwell made a host of absolutely rotten decisions when it comes to associations and emphases. Yes, that means something. Separation from the world and the purity of the local church is huge emphasis on the NT. I am an independent fundamental Baptist b/c each of those three words stands for important biblical doctrine. Falwell started off with all three and ended with just the last one and that one barely. Along the way he took off on a thousand political tangents, swallowed the contemporary Christian music nonsense, and made compromise a core value. And this is just off the top of my head. I guarantee you I could come up with a much more substantial list if I took some time at it.

No, I'm not going to say that Jerry Falwell is my hero. It would be completely contradictory for me to do so. 

...but that's ok. Keep holding up the worst image of JH and comparing him to the best image of JF. It seems to make you feel better.

True dat.

I just shake my head at the 'logic' behind this....
Yet again I say....it seems that having a militant standard is more important than actually practicing the standards that you preach. 

I find good logic in it.  I am neither a fan of JH or JF.  They both allowed things that I would not.  JH overlooked immorality of staff because of their talents.  JF overlooked the immorality of entertainers and politicians because of their talents.  Both men compromised a great deal, just in different areas and different ways.  I am not what I am because of these men.  I have chosen to be what I am because of what I believe from my study of the Scripture.

If you read or re-read my post, you will find that I basically agree with your post. But I ask you, what exactly is the good logic in the double standard that often passes in extreme IFB-ism? That 'logic' gives Dr Hyles a pass but castigates Falwell.

Again, I point out the obvious....Hammond is forced to downplay or run away from Hyles name and the sordid past, in an effort to simply survive. Dr Falwell, for all of his faults, was a balanced man, who tried to lead his ministry into that same balance. I also understand that to many IFB's balance means compromise...but I am thankful that I was influenced by Falwell much, much more than by Hyles. And reading this forum only serves to reinforce that sentiment.

 

[Walt]

I don't think it was calculated, LOL!! Sorry.

But it says volumes.

Yep. In that nearly everything you have heard from Hyles, BJU and other IFBs, about the SBC is prejudiced and wrong.

I've never gone to any other church except an IFB church my entire life, except these past few months.

Anything and everything negative ive heard about the SBC is debunked nearly every service.

The pastor preaches against sin, preaches that we should live separated lives, preaches against sinful tv, preaches against smoking drinking and gambling.

Seriously my mind has been blown.

The difference I do see is that he doesn't preach a whole sermon on any one of the things I've mentioned. Also, he allows room for the Holy Spirit. I've come under conviction nearly every service.

I have never believed that every SBC church has what has been preached about in the IFB world - but some do.  Just like there are some IFB churches that are excellent, there are others that  are cult-like.  There are likely good SBC churches as well as bad ones.

My impression is that the level of separation and standards overall at SBC churches has dropped further at SBC churches than at IFB churches -- for an example, I don't know of any church calling itself IFB that has a woman for a pastor, but there are four SBC churches in Texas that have a woman pastor.

As I said in the first paragraph, I'm sure that there are SBC churches that are far superior to some IFB churches in the things that Jesus said really matters... what was that again: "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have really high standards"?  Or perhaps it was "... if ye have love one for another." 

I came from a church that had really, really high standards.  But there was great strife and what the Scripture calls "emulation" - people trying to outdo one another to gain pastoral favor; trampling over others to beat them in the current "contest".  Arguments over who should get the points for visitor "X" who came forward and was baptized (worth much more in the current contest) - none of this "Apollos planted, and I watered" thinking.

Families wouldn't let their children be around certain people because those people weren't 100% for the pastor, or had some sin that they feared their children would catch.  People working for the church having medical problems related to high stress - a church environment should be the most relaxing place, not one of the worst.

 

[Walt]

To me, it wouldn't be worth it. But any accurate measurement of their life must include both the positive and the negative.

<somebody needs to write a biography of Jack Hyles that actually does that>

I think that would be quite hard to do, as so many were polarized by him.

 

[Walt]

Ok, I respect what you're saying but than men like Binaca Chugger and Prophet that actually knew him from birth and grew up literally in the system there are wrong and Mrs. Hyles is actually spitting in the face of her husband when it comes to the KJVO issue because we all know how he felt about this.

I don't know what Bible version Mrs. Hyles uses.  She still speaks at IFB ladies meetings.  She left FBCH to move to Texas to be with her daughter.  I think she also left to allow Cindy to be the pastor's wife of FBCH.  No, that did not work out well.  I don't know what Mrs. Hyles believed about the KJV while Dr. Hyles was KJVO.  Did she hold onto her previous beliefs and stayed quiet to honor her husband?  I do look at her attending a SBC as strange, but I do not look at it as disrespecting Dr. Hyles.  Perhaps that is where her daughter attended church and she started going with her. 

There are IFB churches in the DFW area that think JH is the greatest Christian of all time; she could have easily moved her membership to one of them.  I know that she visited some of them.  I was told by an IFB pastor that her sister? (sister-in-law?) attends FBCD, and that was the pull to get her there.

But it certainly seems to be a slap to her husband to attend there.

 

[Walt]

Ok, I respect what you're saying but than men like Binaca Chugger and Prophet that actually knew him from birth and grew up literally in the system there are wrong and Mrs. Hyles is actually spitting in the face of her husband when it comes to the KJVO issue because we all know how he felt about this.

I don't know what Bible version Mrs. Hyles uses.  She still speaks at IFB ladies meetings.  She left FBCH to move to Texas to be with her daughter.  I think she also left to allow Cindy to be the pastor's wife of FBCH.  No, that did not work out well.  I don't know what Mrs. Hyles believed about the KJV while Dr. Hyles was KJVO.  Did she hold onto her previous beliefs and stayed quiet to honor her husband?  I do look at her attending a SBC as strange, but I do not look at it as disrespecting Dr. Hyles.  Perhaps that is where her daughter attended church and she started going with her. 

I don't see how it can be viewed any way other than a back-handed rebuke of Dr Hyles. She KNEW what he preached, taught and publicly ridiculed...yet she purposely joined a church that was polar opposite of what he preached, taught and publicly ridiculed.

I don't see how it can be viewed any other way than a calculated move....unless there are NO IFB churches of the Hyles camp anywhere near her.

She could go to Open Door if that were true.

True; (although now it is more of a Vineyard church that Hyles -- if that makes any difference).  There is also Parkside Baptist Church - used to be quite Hyles, I've been told.  They got a new pastor 5 or 6 years ago; my sources of information left a year after he became pastor, so I'm not sure what they are like now.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Does anyone here know if and when Judy Nischik Johnson recanted her allegations? To me, her letter was THE most convincing evidence that there was something to the story reported in the Biblical Evangelist.

 

[bgwilkinson]

I believe she and her brother still maintain them, only more so now.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I believe she and her brother still maintain them, only more so now.

Why would they make those accusations of it were not true?
To destroy their mother?
To destroy Dr Hyles?
To hurt FBCH?

Their allegations, that have not been corrected or re-canted over the years, remain devastating. Put that together with Mrs Hyles actions and the stand of the Hyles children and it makes me think they were telling the truth.

What is the 'true believer' position?
That the children of his secretary are simply lying?

 

[bgwilkinson]

I believe she and her brother still maintain them, only more so now.

Why would they make those accusations of it were not true?
To destroy their mother?
To destroy Dr Hyles?
To hurt FBCH?

Their allegations, that have not been corrected or re-canted over the years, remain devastating. Put that together with Mrs Hyles actions and the stand of the Hyles children and it makes me think they were telling the truth.

What is the 'true believer' position?
That the children of his secretary are simply lying?

As I have mentioned before, the depositions given by Bro. Hyles himself in the JN-VN divorce are conclusive, in my opinion, in proving gross impropriety at the very least, even if you can not wrap your arms around the Scarlet Letter.

In my opinion there is no way a pastor should interpose himself into a divorce.

These depositions are on file at the Lake County Courthouse and are open for public perusal.

They support the veracity of the testimony of VN children.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I believe she and her brother still maintain them, only more so now.

Why would they make those accusations of it were not true?
To destroy their mother?
To destroy Dr Hyles?
To hurt FBCH?

Their allegations, that have not been corrected or re-canted over the years, remain devastating. Put that together with Mrs Hyles actions and the stand of the Hyles children and it makes me think they were telling the truth.

What is the 'true believer' position?
That the children of his secretary are simply lying?

As I have mentioned before, the depositions given by Bro. Hyles himself in the JN-VN divorce are conclusive, in my opinion, in proving gross impropriety at the very least, even if you can not wrap your arms around the Scarlet Letter.

In my opinion there is no way a pastor should interpose himself into a divorce.

These depositions are on file at the Lake County Courthouse and are open for public perusal.

They support the veracity of the testimony of VN children.

Then what exactly was the response of the church family as a whole to the VN children? What was the response of the church leadership to the children?
Were they ignored?
Were they pushed aside as just foolish, naive children?
Or were they declared to be blatant liars?

 

[Norefund]

If memory serves, the most common response was "I didn't read that trash about my preacher. "

I believe she and her brother still maintain them, only more so now.

Why would they make those accusations of it were not true?
To destroy their mother?
To destroy Dr Hyles?
To hurt FBCH?

Their allegations, that have not been corrected or re-canted over the years, remain devastating. Put that together with Mrs Hyles actions and the stand of the Hyles children and it makes me think they were telling the truth.

What is the 'true believer' position?
That the children of his secretary are simply lying?

As I have mentioned before, the depositions given by Bro. Hyles himself in the JN-VN divorce are conclusive, in my opinion, in proving gross impropriety at the very least, even if you can not wrap your arms around the Scarlet Letter.

In my opinion there is no way a pastor should interpose himself into a divorce.

These depositions are on file at the Lake County Courthouse and are open for public perusal.

They support the veracity of the testimony of VN children.

Then what exactly was the response of the church family as a whole to the VN children? What was the response of the church leadership to the children?
Were they ignored?
Were they pushed aside as just foolish, naive children?
Or were they declared to be blatant liars?

 

[TidesofTruth]

As I have mentioned before, the depositions given by Bro. Hyles himself in the JN-VN divorce are conclusive, in my opinion, in proving gross impropriety at the very least, even if you can not wrap your arms around the Scarlet Letter.

This is as far as I let my mind go.  I have no conclusive proof of anything more, nor has anyone else been able to "prove" anything beyond conjecture based on highly inappropriate behavior. 

I have been taught by Bro Hyles and others at FBCH not to do many of the things he admitted or proven he did.  Not sin of transgression, but behaviors that you just don't do as a married man.  I have followed those teachings and found them to be wise.  I wish all our leadership had.