New Independent Baptist

[Tennessean]

So, while fundy leader Jeffery Fugate and his cronies are tweeting and posting about how they are rock-ribbed, old-fashioned Baptist who don't want to be associated with these "New" Fundamental Baptists who are obsessed with the Gospel, committed to preaching the Bible.....  Jeffery is on stage for a worship service to honor the new KY gov.  The service had a good portion of "modern" CCM and non-denom pastors challenging the crowd to pray for the governor.

So, Jeffery won't associate with fellow Baptists to share the Gospel, but will associate with baptismal regeneration crowd if he can get on stage?  CCM is bad, unless you can get some accolades by going to the concert?

Does the #OldPaths crowd really have any conviction, or is it just their niche and so they stay in it?  Either way, maybe they should stop telling the world how to have church and start caring for their own flock.

#Hypocrites  #FlipFlop  #OldPathsForNameSake  #Pragmatist

I don't live in KY, but I was wondering when a picture with both Jeff Fugate and Herschel York would surface.

Both of these  preachers have been very instrumental in keeping casino gambling out of the commonwealth. Both played a great part in getting Gov. Bevin elected.

Also on stage,  is the new  president of Kentucky southern Baptists.

Thank the Lord they elected Gov. Bevin.

 

[cpizzle]

I posted this on the other thread, but will copy it here:

I guess when the IFB leadership tweets out their opposition to this blog post by pastor Teis, they are making a public statement that they are:

1.  NOT obsessed with the Gospel.  Apparently they want people to know that the Gospel is not very important to them and you should not expect to hear it at their church.  Instead, you will hear their own rantings about whatever plucked their feathers this morning.

2.  NOT committed to preaching the Bible.  This is evident if you listen to a handful of their sermons.  One brief passage is read during the service, then a rant begins, that normally is not associated with the context of the passage at all.  I guess the IFB leadership wants people to know that they will be preaching, just not preaching the Bible.

3.  ENJOY preaching against other people.  Just so this is clear, the IFB leadership will loudly and frequently criticize other Christians.  They want us to know that they are accusers of the brethren (See Rev 12:10), and gleefully speak evil of God Himself (See James 4:10-11 and Rom 2:1-2 and Rom 14).

4.  ENJOY denominational politics.  So much for being independent.  I guess they are no longer autonomous, which is why I call them the Not-A-Denomination-Denomination.

5.  REJECT fiscal accountability.  This is obvious.  Just look at how well the leadership and his well positioned minions are cared for - the cars they drive, the suits they wear, the vacations they take, the homes they live in - while minor staff are told to just pray for their bills to be met and the hurting in their church are ignored.  Apparently the IFB leadership want all to know that they are not to be trusted with money since they reject fiscal accountability.

6.  are INTENTIONALLY ignorant.  Maybe they can't read or maybe they are afraid of information.  Whatever their reason is, they do not like reading and refuse to educate themselves.  I guess this goes along with all of the phony degrees that are thrown about in their movement.

7.  Just Quitting.  If only they would....

From not a Hacker, just wanted to kinda point out a couple things re Teis article

Here is what I got from it. First of all, it was not "clearly unbiblical" as in Teis advocating completely unscrip[tural stands, it was a very very very subjective article, but it was written in a fashion as though Teis at least is rejecting everything old. "Everything old is bad, I am so glad that finally there is something new here".

Let me give you some examples.
1 - Obsessed with the gospel
Interesting wording. Should we be obsessed with the Gospel. Certainly But, really, stating it the way he did is saying everyone before him and the New Independent Baptists weren't. That's not true at all. Yup, some weren't. They were man focused ministries, yup, they existed. But there are many many many Independent Baptists obsessed with the Gospel. Teis didn't revive gospel preaching, but he is saying "those who taught you weren't, but we are".

2 - Committed to Preaching the Bible
I was taught to read interpret and give the scripture in context. Every single time. Bar none. If I get that wrong, I correct myself. It's happenend once, and I did. From the pulpit, at the next service. Teis is implying that up until now no one has been. Once again, simply not true.

3 - Men of Unity who Despise Hyper - Separationism
Are there hyper-separationists? Sure. Always have been. But unity at all costs is the cry of a different movement. First, doctrine. What is secondary doctrine? With a vague article, anything you want it to be. Mode of Baptism. Church polity. Eternal Security. Secondly. I wear jeans. I have a pair on right now and I'm in my office, at my desk. But jeans and a t shirt for services? No. By the same token, I won't show up to a wedding or a funeral or a business meeting dressed down either. He is obfuscating. When he gets clearer is when he says "we need a wide range.......that are going to look extremely different from each other". But he still wont draw any lines. Anything is acceptable. Thats not true.

4 - Turned off by Denominational Politics
I have never experienced any. None. No pressure from outside about methods or anything. My only requirement to my sending authourity and my supporting churches has been. "Maintain doctrinal, moral and ethical purity". That's it. Now, does it exist. Yes. so, perhaps there is merit to his point

5 - Dedicated to Fiscal Accountability
Once again, this statement presupposes all the Old aren't. Some weren't but most are. Thats' significantly different than effectively saying "I am so glad God has finally raised up a generation who are fiscally responsible".

6 - Well Read
What preacher wasn't taught to read? I don't have time to read every book written, but I read. Allows them to challenge their presupposed views. Interesting wording. Very very very carefully chosen. Say lots, but means little. Pre supposed views on? The blood? Christ's deity? The nature of salvation?

7 - Just Getting Started
All who come to Christ are just getting started. It is in and of itself an admittance of novicehood. Funny thing is, novicehood disqualifies from leadership. 1 Timothy 3:6


Thats perhaps my biggest view. Teis article oozes with pride. A lot of people are looking at us IFB guys saying we ooze with spiritual pride (an oxymoron). Teis article is filled with it from top to bottom, what is troubling is that those young men he speaks about will be drawn to it out of their own youthful pride.

Josh Teis New Independent Baptist is a new name for the old term New Evangelical.

Just my opinion

I share this opinion practically 100% 

Well written, objective, honest, and humble.

As I said many times, the new IB's are not our enemy and I wish them nothing but the best, but they do concern me.  They are to be commended....but not emulated.  I can appreciate them without promoting them.

 

[Binaca Chugger]

From not a Hacker, just wanted to kinda point out a couple things re Teis article

Here is what I got from it. First of all, it was not "clearly unbiblical" as in Teis advocating completely unscrip[tural stands, it was a very very very subjective article, but it was written in a fashion as though Teis at least is rejecting everything old. "Everything old is bad, I am so glad that finally there is something new here".

...

Thats perhaps my biggest view. Teis article oozes with pride. A lot of people are looking at us IFB guys saying we ooze with spiritual pride (an oxymoron). Teis article is filled with it from top to bottom, what is troubling is that those young men he speaks about will be drawn to it out of their own youthful pride.

Josh Teis New Independent Baptist is a new name for the old term New Evangelical.

Just my opinion

I shortened the repost for sake of readability on the forum. 

I think you are approaching this with a defensive outlook.  Many of the IFB in their 50s and 60s still emulate Jack Hyles and are still defending him.  Like most people in their 60s, they don't like change.  They don't like their grandkids playing with iPads instead of playing kick the can.  They don't like anything different.  Anytime they see someone in their 40s or younger who has an idea, they seek to squelch that idea before even hearing it.  After all, if Dr. Hyles didn't think of it, it can't be good.

Like it or not, the Gospel is going to continue in the upcoming generations.  Many of us have grown up in the IFBx world.  We have been subjected to all sorts of heresy and even crimes in the name of ministry.  Many of us want to simply return to letting Christ get the glory in our conferences, churches and homes.  We believe in the sufficiency of the Scripture and have discovered that some non-IFBx authors have given us some tremendous works to help us further understand a proper application of the Scripture.

For this, we are attacked.  For reading non-IFBx-ers, for speaking of the crimes by the leaders, we are banned from churches, mocked in conferences and scorned on social media.

I don't know Josh Teis.  I had never heard of him before this article and I don't know any of his positions. 

Could it be that he simply is stating to the past generation that this is where we stand?  Could it be that he is trying to connect the young to the old by stating to the old guard that we believe the same core doctrines they have proclaimed for generations?  Could it be that "He is just trying to say that I don't do this" is reading into it from a presupposition?

I think it would be an incredible thing for the IFB to drop their silly regulations for being in each other's groups and focus on the Gospel, discipleship, ministerial counseling through the sufficiency of the Scripture and encouraging each other to do likewise.

 

[Binaca Chugger]

So, while fundy leader Jeffery Fugate and his cronies are tweeting and posting about how they are rock-ribbed, old-fashioned Baptist who don't want to be associated with these "New" Fundamental Baptists who are obsessed with the Gospel, committed to preaching the Bible.....  Jeffery is on stage for a worship service to honor the new KY gov.  The service had a good portion of "modern" CCM and non-denom pastors challenging the crowd to pray for the governor.

So, Jeffery won't associate with fellow Baptists to share the Gospel, but will associate with baptismal regeneration crowd if he can get on stage?  CCM is bad, unless you can get some accolades by going to the concert?

Does the #OldPaths crowd really have any conviction, or is it just their niche and so they stay in it?  Either way, maybe they should stop telling the world how to have church and start caring for their own flock.

#Hypocrites  #FlipFlop  #OldPathsForNameSake  #Pragmatist

I don't live in KY, but I was wondering when a picture with both Jeff Fugate and Herschel York would surface.

Both of these  preachers have been very instrumental in keeping casino gambling out of the commonwealth. Both played a great part in getting Gov. Bevin elected.

Also on stage,  is the new  president of Kentucky southern Baptists.

Thank the Lord they elected Gov. Bevin.

Also on stage is the pastor of Southeast Christian Church in Louisville where Bevin is a member.

My point is simply that Fugate and his followers will blast people, pastors and churches for attending such services or joining non-sanctioned IFB churches.  Yet, here is the mog engaged in an Ecumenical movement complete with rock style music. 

#StandardsForSale

 

[Binaca Chugger]

So, while fundy leader Jeffery Fugate and his cronies are tweeting and posting about how they are rock-ribbed, old-fashioned Baptist who don't want to be associated with these "New" Fundamental Baptists who are obsessed with the Gospel, committed to preaching the Bible.....  Jeffery is on stage for a worship service to honor the new KY gov.  The service had a good portion of "modern" CCM and non-denom pastors challenging the crowd to pray for the governor.

So, Jeffery won't associate with fellow Baptists to share the Gospel, but will associate with baptismal regeneration crowd if he can get on stage?  CCM is bad, unless you can get some accolades by going to the concert?

Does the #OldPaths crowd really have any conviction, or is it just their niche and so they stay in it?  Either way, maybe they should stop telling the world how to have church and start caring for their own flock.

#Hypocrites  #FlipFlop  #OldPathsForNameSake  #Pragmatist

I don't live in KY, but I was wondering when a picture with both Jeff Fugate and Herschel York would surface.

Both of these  preachers have been very instrumental in keeping casino gambling out of the commonwealth. Both played a great part in getting Gov. Bevin elected.

Also on stage,  is the new  president of Kentucky southern Baptists.

Thank the Lord they elected Gov. Bevin.

Also on stage is the pastor of Southeast Christian Church in Louisville where Bevin is a member.

My point is simply that Fugate and his followers will blast people, pastors and churches for attending such services or joining non-sanctioned IFB churches.  Yet, here is the mog engaged in an Ecumenical movement complete with rock style music. 

#StandardsForSale

When a California pastor says he is willing to wear jeans to reach some people with the Gospel, there is an enormous backlash of Fundy preachers seeking to admonish him for his error.

Where is the backlash from the same group for Fugate compromising his standards to engage in a political movement?  It's not even for the Gospel's sake!

 

[prophet]

Another argument was popular for quite a while:  "I will have the kind of ministry that Jack Hyles had because I know where it ends.  I don't know where this new stuff will lead me."

I responded to one such leader:  I saw where Jack Hyles' ministry ended.  His son is one of the most disgusting perverts in our society.  His oldest daughter abandoned Christianity.  His son-in-law is in prison; his daughter divorced.  He that careth not for his own is worse than an infidel.  This is not the legacy I want to leave behind.

Of course, the national Fundy leader responded that those are not the fault of the father.  The ministry was great because is it was so large and reached so many people.  I then asked if he was simply a pragmatist - willing to do anything to get a crowd, even if it meant the destruction of his own children.

All 4 of the Hyles children have been divorced.


Earnestly Contend

 

[prophet]

The last thing we need is "leadership" in the NT Church.
It is the foundation of the cult.
Rather, we need to see ourselves from God's perspective, which He offered through His Word.

Anyone who seeks to replace the old leader with themself, is not seeking to undo wrong, but to change social status.

The fundamental change that we need isn't going to produce the "leaders of the next movement".
It is going to produce Brethren equal to one another, in the family of God

Earnestly Contend

 

[patriotic]

My dad was close personal friends with many of his generation of fundamental Baptists who declared themselves to be "new fundamentalists" back in their day (50-60 years ago).

I recall attending youth fellowship Bible quizzing and youth rallies when I was a teenager. At one rally,  someone wanted to be "new" so they could reach more teens,  We were NOT affiliated with IFB at the time, I wore pants; my brother's hair was somewhat bushy and definitely not typical IFB (which are  merely incidental points here.) My parents gave the fellowship most of a year to see where they were heading. It was clear, and we did not return the following year. Do you know what was the first issue my parents saw a sliding down neon evangelical paths? They were allowing us teen girls to wear nice dress slacks to quiz in and boys no longer had to have hair shorter than. Again,  let me remind you we were not IFB.

I have a family member who - three decades ago - decided he was a new fundamentalist.

I guess these new "new' fundamentalists aren't really new is all I'm saying.

 

[Binaca Chugger]

My dad was close personal friends with many of his generation of fundamental Baptists who declared themselves to be "new fundamentalists" back in their day (50-60 years ago).

I recall attending youth fellowship Bible quizzing and youth rallies when I was a teenager. At one rally,  someone wanted to be "new" so they could reach more teens,  We were NOT affiliated with IFB at the time, I wore pants; my brother's hair was somewhat bushy and definitely not typical IFB (which are  merely incidental points here.) My parents gave the fellowship most of a year to see where they were heading. It was clear, and we did not return the following year. Do you know what was the first issue my parents saw a sliding down neon evangelical paths? They were allowing us teen girls to wear nice dress slacks to quiz in and boys no longer had to have hair shorter than. Again,  let me remind you we were not IFB.

I have a family member who - three decades ago - decided he was a new fundamentalist.

I guess these new "new' fundamentalists aren't really new is all I'm saying.

I think I agree with you. 

There seems to be in each generation a group that wants to have a little bit of Jesus and a little bit of carnality.  Of these, I turn away.  There seems to also be a group that wants all of Jesus, but is willing to have different friends and enjoy the learning from various groups within the Fundamentals.  There also seems to be a group that is angry that people aren't just like them and doing things exactly like we always have and attacks.

None of this is really new.  There is nothing new under the sun.

 

[16KJV11]

My dad was close personal friends with many of his generation of fundamental Baptists who declared themselves to be "new fundamentalists" back in their day (50-60 years ago).

I recall attending youth fellowship Bible quizzing and youth rallies when I was a teenager. At one rally,  someone wanted to be "new" so they could reach more teens,  We were NOT affiliated with IFB at the time, I wore pants; my brother's hair was somewhat bushy and definitely not typical IFB (which are  merely incidental points here.) My parents gave the fellowship most of a year to see where they were heading. It was clear, and we did not return the following year. Do you know what was the first issue my parents saw a sliding down neon evangelical paths? They were allowing us teen girls to wear nice dress slacks to quiz in and boys no longer had to have hair shorter than. Again,  let me remind you we were not IFB.

I have a family member who - three decades ago - decided he was a new fundamentalist.

I guess these new "new' fundamentalists aren't really new is all I'm saying.

I think I agree with you. 

There seems to be in each generation a group that wants to have a little bit of Jesus and a little bit of carnality.  Of these, I turn away.  There seems to also be a group that wants all of Jesus, but is willing to have different friends and enjoy the learning from various groups within the Fundamentals.  There also seems to be a group that is angry that people aren't just like them and doing things exactly like we always have and attacks.

None of this is really new.  There is nothing new under the sun.

BINGO!

 

[bgwilkinson]

From not a Hacker, just wanted to kinda point out a couple things re Teis article

Here is what I got from it. First of all, it was not "clearly unbiblical" as in Teis advocating completely unscrip[tural stands, it was a very very very subjective article, but it was written in a fashion as though Teis at least is rejecting everything old. "Everything old is bad, I am so glad that finally there is something new here".

...

Thats perhaps my biggest view. Teis article oozes with pride. A lot of people are looking at us IFB guys saying we ooze with spiritual pride (an oxymoron). Teis article is filled with it from top to bottom, what is troubling is that those young men he speaks about will be drawn to it out of their own youthful pride.

Josh Teis New Independent Baptist is a new name for the old term New Evangelical.

Just my opinion

I shortened the repost for sake of readability on the forum. 

I think you are approaching this with a defensive outlook.  Many of the IFB in their 50s and 60s still emulate Jack Hyles and are still defending him.  Like most people in their 60s, they don't like change.  They don't like their grandkids playing with iPads instead of playing kick the can.  They don't like anything different.  Anytime they see someone in their 40s or younger who has an idea, they seek to squelch that idea before even hearing it.  After all, if Dr. Hyles didn't think of it, it can't be good.

Like it or not, the Gospel is going to continue in the upcoming generations.  Many of us have grown up in the IFBx world.  We have been subjected to all sorts of heresy and even crimes in the name of ministry.  Many of us want to simply return to letting Christ get the glory in our conferences, churches and homes.  We believe in the sufficiency of the Scripture and have discovered that some non-IFBx authors have given us some tremendous works to help us further understand a proper application of the Scripture.

For this, we are attacked.  For reading non-IFBx-ers, for speaking of the crimes by the leaders, we are banned from churches, mocked in conferences and scorned on social media.

I don't know Josh Teis.  I had never heard of him before this article and I don't know any of his positions. 

Could it be that he simply is stating to the past generation that this is where we stand?  Could it be that he is trying to connect the young to the old by stating to the old guard that we believe the same core doctrines they have proclaimed for generations?  Could it be that "He is just trying to say that I don't do this" is reading into it from a presupposition?

I think it would be an incredible thing for the IFB to drop their silly regulations for being in each other's groups and focus on the Gospel, discipleship, ministerial counseling through the sufficiency of the Scripture and encouraging each other to do likewise.

Well written.

What most bothers me is that these new "Old Paths" people would not associate with the original Fundamentalists in the early 1900s. It's the "Old Paths" people who have changed from what originally was called Fundamentalism all the while claiming to be the "Real fundamentalists", they are not.

Their old paths are not old but new deviant paths.

 

[Binaca Chugger]

Well written.

Thanks!

What most bothers me is that these new "Old Paths" people would not associate with the original Fundamentalists in the early 1900s. It's the "Old Paths" people who have changed from what originally was called Fundamentalism all the while claiming to be the "Real fundamentalists", they are not.

Their old paths are not old but new deviant paths.

Exactly.  The ones they herald as the founders of their movement, they would not have in their churches today.  Or, they would have to retract much of what they have written.  This #OldPaths crowd has built a niche for itself by hosting each other and yelling at everyone else.  The sad part is not their attempts to raise their voice on the national scale, but what happens to their membership. 

 

[prophet]

From not a Hacker, just wanted to kinda point out a couple things re Teis article

Here is what I got from it. First of all, it was not "clearly unbiblical" as in Teis advocating completely unscrip[tural stands, it was a very very very subjective article, but it was written in a fashion as though Teis at least is rejecting everything old. "Everything old is bad, I am so glad that finally there is something new here".

...

Thats perhaps my biggest view. Teis article oozes with pride. A lot of people are looking at us IFB guys saying we ooze with spiritual pride (an oxymoron). Teis article is filled with it from top to bottom, what is troubling is that those young men he speaks about will be drawn to it out of their own youthful pride.

Josh Teis New Independent Baptist is a new name for the old term New Evangelical.

Just my opinion

I shortened the repost for sake of readability on the forum. 

I think you are approaching this with a defensive outlook.  Many of the IFB in their 50s and 60s still emulate Jack Hyles and are still defending him.  Like most people in their 60s, they don't like change.  They don't like their grandkids playing with iPads instead of playing kick the can.  They don't like anything different.  Anytime they see someone in their 40s or younger who has an idea, they seek to squelch that idea before even hearing it.  After all, if Dr. Hyles didn't think of it, it can't be good.

Like it or not, the Gospel is going to continue in the upcoming generations.  Many of us have grown up in the IFBx world.  We have been subjected to all sorts of heresy and even crimes in the name of ministry.  Many of us want to simply return to letting Christ get the glory in our conferences, churches and homes.  We believe in the sufficiency of the Scripture and have discovered that some non-IFBx authors have given us some tremendous works to help us further understand a proper application of the Scripture.

For this, we are attacked.  For reading non-IFBx-ers, for speaking of the crimes by the leaders, we are banned from churches, mocked in conferences and scorned on social media.

I don't know Josh Teis.  I had never heard of him before this article and I don't know any of his positions. 

Could it be that he simply is stating to the past generation that this is where we stand?  Could it be that he is trying to connect the young to the old by stating to the old guard that we believe the same core doctrines they have proclaimed for generations?  Could it be that "He is just trying to say that I don't do this" is reading into it from a presupposition?

I think it would be an incredible thing for the IFB to drop their silly regulations for being in each other's groups and focus on the Gospel, discipleship, ministerial counseling through the sufficiency of the Scripture and encouraging each other to do likewise.

Well written.

What most bothers me is that these new "Old Paths" people would not associate with the original Fundamentalists in the early 1900s. It's the "Old Paths" people who have changed from what originally was called Fundamentalism all the while claiming to be the "Real fundamentalists", they are not.

Their old paths are not old but new deviant paths.

You mean like R.A.T  orrey?
A man whose Salvation testimony is the same as Muhammed, and Joseph Smith?

You mean Heretics like Finney?
Darby?
Schofield?

Yeah, no.

They don't get our respect, because they never earned it.

I know you disagree. Fine.  Look at Baptists in the 19th Century vs. After the Advent of the Fundamentalist Movement.  It was their downfall.

We don't need to go back to those recent old paths....they are the great men who've all turned aside.



Earnestly Contend

 

[Binaca Chugger]

Honestly, I don't look to men.  I will read a variety of authors, but call no man lord.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[bgwilkinson]

From not a Hacker, just wanted to kinda point out a couple things re Teis article

Here is what I got from it. First of all, it was not "clearly unbiblical" as in Teis advocating completely unscrip[tural stands, it was a very very very subjective article, but it was written in a fashion as though Teis at least is rejecting everything old. "Everything old is bad, I am so glad that finally there is something new here".

...

Thats perhaps my biggest view. Teis article oozes with pride. A lot of people are looking at us IFB guys saying we ooze with spiritual pride (an oxymoron). Teis article is filled with it from top to bottom, what is troubling is that those young men he speaks about will be drawn to it out of their own youthful pride.

Josh Teis New Independent Baptist is a new name for the old term New Evangelical.

Just my opinion

I shortened the repost for sake of readability on the forum. 

I think you are approaching this with a defensive outlook.  Many of the IFB in their 50s and 60s still emulate Jack Hyles and are still defending him.  Like most people in their 60s, they don't like change.  They don't like their grandkids playing with iPads instead of playing kick the can.  They don't like anything different.  Anytime they see someone in their 40s or younger who has an idea, they seek to squelch that idea before even hearing it.  After all, if Dr. Hyles didn't think of it, it can't be good.

Like it or not, the Gospel is going to continue in the upcoming generations.  Many of us have grown up in the IFBx world.  We have been subjected to all sorts of heresy and even crimes in the name of ministry.  Many of us want to simply return to letting Christ get the glory in our conferences, churches and homes.  We believe in the sufficiency of the Scripture and have discovered that some non-IFBx authors have given us some tremendous works to help us further understand a proper application of the Scripture.

For this, we are attacked.  For reading non-IFBx-ers, for speaking of the crimes by the leaders, we are banned from churches, mocked in conferences and scorned on social media.

I don't know Josh Teis.  I had never heard of him before this article and I don't know any of his positions. 

Could it be that he simply is stating to the past generation that this is where we stand?  Could it be that he is trying to connect the young to the old by stating to the old guard that we believe the same core doctrines they have proclaimed for generations?  Could it be that "He is just trying to say that I don't do this" is reading into it from a presupposition?

I think it would be an incredible thing for the IFB to drop their silly regulations for being in each other's groups and focus on the Gospel, discipleship, ministerial counseling through the sufficiency of the Scripture and encouraging each other to do likewise.

Well written.

What most bothers me is that these new "Old Paths" people would not associate with the original Fundamentalists in the early 1900s. It's the "Old Paths" people who have changed from what originally was called Fundamentalism all the while claiming to be the "Real fundamentalists", they are not.

Their old paths are not old but new deviant paths.

You mean like R.A.T  orrey?
A man whose Salvation testimony is the same as Muhammed, and Joseph Smith?

You mean Heretics like Finney?
Darby?
Schofield?

Yeah, no.

They don't get our respect, because they never earned it.

I know you disagree. Fine.  Look at Baptists in the 19th Century vs. After the Advent of the Fundamentalist Movement.  It was their downfall.

We don't need to go back to those recent old paths....they are the great men who've all turned aside.



Earnestly Contend

These are the authors and the works that they authored. These men are the beginning of the Fundamentalist movement in the early 20th Century.

Perhaps a name other than Fundamentalist should be used if one does not support these works.


    Volume I:
        The Virgin Birth of Christ - James Orr
        The Deity of Christ - Benjamin B. Warfield
        The Purposes of the Incarnation - G. Campbell Morgan
        The Personality and Deity of the Holy Spirit - R. A. Torrey
        The Proof of the Living God - Arthur T. Pierson
        History of the Higher Criticism - Dyson Hague
        A Personal Testimony - Howard A. Kelly
    Volume II:
        The Testimony of the Monuments to the Truth of the Scriptures - George Frederick Wright
        The Recent Testimony of Archaeology to the Scriptures - M. G. Kyle
        Fallacies of the Higher Criticism - Franklin Johnson
        Christ and Criticism - Robert Anderson
        Modern Philosophy - Philip Mauro
        Justification by Faith - H. C. G. Moule
        Tributes to Christ and the Bible by Brainy Men not Known as Active Christians
    Volume III:
        Inspiration of the Bible?Definition, Extent, and Proof - James M. Gray
        The Moral Glory of Jesus Christ a Proof of Inspiration - William G. Moorehead
        God in Christ the Only Revelation of the Fatherhood of God - Robert E. Speer
        The Testimony of Christian Experience - E. Y. Mullins
        Christianity No Fable - Thomas Whitelaw
        My Personal Experience with the Higher Criticism - J. J. Reeve
        The Personal Testimony of Charles T. Studd
    Volume IV:
        The Tabernacle in the Wilderness: Did it Exist? - David Heagle
        The Testimony of Christ to the Old Testament - William Caven
        The Bible and Modern Criticism - F. Bettex
        Science and Christian Faith - James Orr
        A Personal Testimony - Philip Mauro
    Volume V:
        Life in the Word - Philip Mauro
        The Scriptures - A. C. Dixon
        The Certainty and Importance of the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the Dead - R. A. Torrey
        Observations of the Conversion and Apostleship of St. Paul - Lord Lyttleton (analyzed and condensed by J. L. Campbell)
        A Personal Testimony - H. W. Webb-Peploe
    Volume VI:
        The Testimony of Foreign Missions to the Superintending Providence of God - Arthur T. Pierson.
        Is There a God? - Thomas Whitelaw
        Sin and Judgment to Come - Robert Anderson
        The Atonement - Franklin Johnson
        The God-Man - John Stock
        The Early Narratives of Genesis - James Orr
        The Person and Work of Jesus Christ - John L. Nuelsen
        The Hope of the Church - John McNicol
    Volume VII:
        The Passing of Evolution - George Frederick Wright
        Inspiration - L. W. Munhall
        The Testimony of the Scriptures to Themselves - George S. Bishop
        Testimony of the Organic Unity of the Bible to its Inspiration - Arthur T. Pierson
        One Isaiah - George L. Robinson
        The Book of Daniel - Joseph D. Wilson
        Three Peculiarities of the Pentateuch - Andrew Craig Robinson
        Millennial Dawn: A Counterfeit of Christianity - William G. Moorehead
    Volume VIII:
        Old Testament Criticism and New Testament Christianity - W. H. Griffith Thomas
        Evolutionism in the Pulpit - Anonymous
        Decadence of Darwinism - Henry H. Beach
        Paul's Testimony to the Doctrine of Sin - Charles B. Williams
        The Science of Conversion - H. M. Sydenstricker
        The Doctrinal Value of the First Chapters of Genesis - Dyson Hague
        The Knowledge of God - James Burrell
        "Preach the Word" - Howard Crosby
        Mormonism: Its Origin, Characteristics, and Doctrines - R. G. McNiece
    Volume IX:
        The True Church - Bishop Ryle
        The Mosaic Authorship of the Pentateuch - George Frederick Wright
        The Wisdom of this World - A. W. Pitzer
        Holy Scripture and Modern Negations - James Orr
        Salvation by Grace - Thomas Spurgeon
        Divine Efficacy of Prayer - Arthur T. Pierson
        What Christ Teaches Concerning Future Retribution - William C. Procter
        A Message from Missions - Charles A. Bowen
        Eddyism: Commonly Called Christian Science - Maurice E. Wilson
    Volume X:
        Why Save the Lord's Day? - Daniel Hoffman Martin
        The Internal Evidence of the Fourth Gospel - Canon G. Osborne Troop
        The Nature of Regeneration - Thomas Boston
        Regeneration?Conversion?Reformation - George W. Lasher
        Our Lord's Teachings About Money - Arthur T. Pierson
        Satan and His Kingdom - Mrs. Jessie Penn-Lewis
        The Holy Spirit and the Sons of God - W. J. Erdman
        Consecration - Henry W. Frost
        The Apologetic Value of Paul's Epistles - E.J. Stobo
        What the Bible Contains for the Believer - George F. Pentecost
        Modern Spiritualism Briefly Tested by Scripture - Algernon J. Pollock
    Volume XI:
        The Biblical Conception of Sin - Thomas Whitelaw
        At-One-Ment by Propitiation - Dyson Hague
        The Grace of God - C. I. Scofield
        Fulfilled Prophecy A Potent Argument for the Bible - Arno C. Gaebelein
        The Coming of Christ - Charles R. Erdman
        Is Romanism Christianity? - T. W. Medhurst
        Rome, The Antagonist of the Nation - J. M. Foster
    Volume XII:
        Doctrines that Must be Emphasized in Successful Evangelism - L. W. Munhall
        Pastoral and Personal Evangelism, or Winning Men to Christ One-by-One - John Timothy Stone
        The Sunday School's True Evangelism - Charles Gallaudet Trumbull
        Foreign Missions or World-Wide Evangelism - Robert E. Speer
        What Missionary Motives Should Prevail? - Henry W. Frost
        The Place of Prayer in Evangelism - R. A. Torrey
        The Church and Socialism - Charles R. Erdman
       

You mean like R.A.T  orrey?

A man whose Salvation testimony is the same as Muhammed, and Joseph Smith?

Please provide the Salvation testimonies of these three men.
I am unaware that these men all had the same salvation testimony.

You mean Heretics like Finney?
Darby?
Schofield?

Which of the Fundamentals did Finney write?

Which one did Darby write?

C. I. Scofield did write on Grace. Don't know of a Schofield or did you mean C. I. Scofield?

I know you disagree. Fine.  Look at Baptists in the 19th Century vs. After the Advent of the Fundamentalist Movement.  It was their downfall.

We don't need to go back to those recent old paths....they are the great men who've all turned aside.

These men had these published at the beginning of the 20th century and I believe most historians would consider modern Fundamentalism traceable to the The Fundamentals: A Testimony To The Truth.

My parents pastor W. B. Riley was a leader of this turn back to the Fundamentals of the Faith.

These men were not all Baptists, so I will not agree on everything that they have written. They were from a cross section of reformed Protestantism.

R. A. Torrey was a Congregationalist not a Baptist. Of course I would disagree on some things. The whole point of the Fundamentalist movement was to affirm the main points of the Faith as agree on by Christians of many denominations. The Fundamentals. Many people are saved and children of God that do not agree with my Baptist convictions.

Perhaps Fundamentalist and Baptist do not go well together. Fundamental as used in the 20th century was an inclusive word used by many denominations while Baptist is an exclusive word used by a more separatist group of Christians holding to the Baptist Distinctives.

The Fundamentalist movement was ecumenical in scope from its inception. Words have meaning and words matter.

 

[16KJV11]

These men had these published at the beginning of the 20th century and I believe most historians would consider modern Fundamentalism traceable to the The Fundamentals: A Testimony To The Truth.

My parents pastor W. B. Riley was a leader of this turn back to the Fundamentals of the Faith.

These men were not all Baptists, so I will not agree on everything that they have written. They were from a cross section of reformed Protestantism.

R. A. Torrey was a Congregationalist not a Baptist. Of course I would disagree on some things. The whole point of the Fundamentalist movement was to affirm the main points of the Faith as agree on by Christians of many denominations. The Fundamentals. Many people are saved and children of God that do not agree with my Baptist convictions.

Perhaps Fundamentalist and Baptist do not go well together. Fundamental as used in the 20th century was an inclusive word used by many denominations while Baptist is an exclusive word used by a more separatist group of Christians holding to the Baptist Distinctives.

The Fundamentalist movement was ecumenical in scope from its inception. Words have meaning and words matter.

DING DING DING DING DING DING!
WE HAVE A WINNER!
I knew there was something I liked about you.
Epoch post and worthy of adulation.

 

[bgwilkinson]

Here is a link to "The Fundamentals: A Testimony To The Truth"

www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%201.pdf

These are similar to the sets my parents distributed in their church planting work.
There were 12 books and they came in a small box.
We gave away hundreds of these sets compliments of Moody Press.
These were my introduction to Fundamentalism and are that with which I associated the term Fundamentalism.

 

[Binaca Chugger]

It really is a great read.  I loved it. 

 

[prophet]

From not a Hacker, just wanted to kinda point out a couple things re Teis article

Here is what I got from it. First of all, it was not "clearly unbiblical" as in Teis advocating completely unscrip[tural stands, it was a very very very subjective article, but it was written in a fashion as though Teis at least is rejecting everything old. "Everything old is bad, I am so glad that finally there is something new here".

...

Thats perhaps my biggest view. Teis article oozes with pride. A lot of people are looking at us IFB guys saying we ooze with spiritual pride (an oxymoron). Teis article is filled with it from top to bottom, what is troubling is that those young men he speaks about will be drawn to it out of their own youthful pride.

Josh Teis New Independent Baptist is a new name for the old term New Evangelical.

Just my opinion

I shortened the repost for sake of readability on the forum. 

I think you are approaching this with a defensive outlook.  Many of the IFB in their 50s and 60s still emulate Jack Hyles and are still defending him.  Like most people in their 60s, they don't like change.  They don't like their grandkids playing with iPads instead of playing kick the can.  They don't like anything different.  Anytime they see someone in their 40s or younger who has an idea, they seek to squelch that idea before even hearing it.  After all, if Dr. Hyles didn't think of it, it can't be good.

Like it or not, the Gospel is going to continue in the upcoming generations.  Many of us have grown up in the IFBx world.  We have been subjected to all sorts of heresy and even crimes in the name of ministry.  Many of us want to simply return to letting Christ get the glory in our conferences, churches and homes.  We believe in the sufficiency of the Scripture and have discovered that some non-IFBx authors have given us some tremendous works to help us further understand a proper application of the Scripture.

For this, we are attacked.  For reading non-IFBx-ers, for speaking of the crimes by the leaders, we are banned from churches, mocked in conferences and scorned on social media.

I don't know Josh Teis.  I had never heard of him before this article and I don't know any of his positions. 

Could it be that he simply is stating to the past generation that this is where we stand?  Could it be that he is trying to connect the young to the old by stating to the old guard that we believe the same core doctrines they have proclaimed for generations?  Could it be that "He is just trying to say that I don't do this" is reading into it from a presupposition?

I think it would be an incredible thing for the IFB to drop their silly regulations for being in each other's groups and focus on the Gospel, discipleship, ministerial counseling through the sufficiency of the Scripture and encouraging each other to do likewise.

Well written.

What most bothers me is that these new "Old Paths" people would not associate with the original Fundamentalists in the early 1900s. It's the "Old Paths" people who have changed from what originally was called Fundamentalism all the while claiming to be the "Real fundamentalists", they are not.

Their old paths are not old but new deviant paths.

You mean like R.A.T  orrey?
A man whose Salvation testimony is the same as Muhammed, and Joseph Smith?

You mean Heretics like Finney?
Darby?
Schofield?

Yeah, no.

They don't get our respect, because they never earned it.

I know you disagree. Fine.  Look at Baptists in the 19th Century vs. After the Advent of the Fundamentalist Movement.  It was their downfall.

We don't need to go back to those recent old paths....they are the great men who've all turned aside.



Earnestly Contend

These are the authors and the works that they authored. These men are the beginning of the Fundamentalist movement in the early 20th Century.

Perhaps a name other than Fundamentalist should be used if one does not support these works.


    Volume I:
        The Virgin Birth of Christ - James Orr
        The Deity of Christ - Benjamin B. Warfield
        The Purposes of the Incarnation - G. Campbell Morgan
        The Personality and Deity of the Holy Spirit - R. A. Torrey
        The Proof of the Living God - Arthur T. Pierson
        History of the Higher Criticism - Dyson Hague
        A Personal Testimony - Howard A. Kelly
    Volume II:
        The Testimony of the Monuments to the Truth of the Scriptures - George Frederick Wright
        The Recent Testimony of Archaeology to the Scriptures - M. G. Kyle
        Fallacies of the Higher Criticism - Franklin Johnson
        Christ and Criticism - Robert Anderson
        Modern Philosophy - Philip Mauro
        Justification by Faith - H. C. G. Moule
        Tributes to Christ and the Bible by Brainy Men not Known as Active Christians
    Volume III:
        Inspiration of the Bible?Definition, Extent, and Proof - James M. Gray
        The Moral Glory of Jesus Christ a Proof of Inspiration - William G. Moorehead
        God in Christ the Only Revelation of the Fatherhood of God - Robert E. Speer
        The Testimony of Christian Experience - E. Y. Mullins
        Christianity No Fable - Thomas Whitelaw
        My Personal Experience with the Higher Criticism - J. J. Reeve
        The Personal Testimony of Charles T. Studd
    Volume IV:
        The Tabernacle in the Wilderness: Did it Exist? - David Heagle
        The Testimony of Christ to the Old Testament - William Caven
        The Bible and Modern Criticism - F. Bettex
        Science and Christian Faith - James Orr
        A Personal Testimony - Philip Mauro
    Volume V:
        Life in the Word - Philip Mauro
        The Scriptures - A. C. Dixon
        The Certainty and Importance of the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the Dead - R. A. Torrey
        Observations of the Conversion and Apostleship of St. Paul - Lord Lyttleton (analyzed and condensed by J. L. Campbell)
        A Personal Testimony - H. W. Webb-Peploe
    Volume VI:
        The Testimony of Foreign Missions to the Superintending Providence of God - Arthur T. Pierson.
        Is There a God? - Thomas Whitelaw
        Sin and Judgment to Come - Robert Anderson
        The Atonement - Franklin Johnson
        The God-Man - John Stock
        The Early Narratives of Genesis - James Orr
        The Person and Work of Jesus Christ - John L. Nuelsen
        The Hope of the Church - John McNicol
    Volume VII:
        The Passing of Evolution - George Frederick Wright
        Inspiration - L. W. Munhall
        The Testimony of the Scriptures to Themselves - George S. Bishop
        Testimony of the Organic Unity of the Bible to its Inspiration - Arthur T. Pierson
        One Isaiah - George L. Robinson
        The Book of Daniel - Joseph D. Wilson
        Three Peculiarities of the Pentateuch - Andrew Craig Robinson
        Millennial Dawn: A Counterfeit of Christianity - William G. Moorehead
    Volume VIII:
        Old Testament Criticism and New Testament Christianity - W. H. Griffith Thomas
        Evolutionism in the Pulpit - Anonymous
        Decadence of Darwinism - Henry H. Beach
        Paul's Testimony to the Doctrine of Sin - Charles B. Williams
        The Science of Conversion - H. M. Sydenstricker
        The Doctrinal Value of the First Chapters of Genesis - Dyson Hague
        The Knowledge of God - James Burrell
        "Preach the Word" - Howard Crosby
        Mormonism: Its Origin, Characteristics, and Doctrines - R. G. McNiece
    Volume IX:
        The True Church - Bishop Ryle
        The Mosaic Authorship of the Pentateuch - George Frederick Wright
        The Wisdom of this World - A. W. Pitzer
        Holy Scripture and Modern Negations - James Orr
        Salvation by Grace - Thomas Spurgeon
        Divine Efficacy of Prayer - Arthur T. Pierson
        What Christ Teaches Concerning Future Retribution - William C. Procter
        A Message from Missions - Charles A. Bowen
        Eddyism: Commonly Called Christian Science - Maurice E. Wilson
    Volume X:
        Why Save the Lord's Day? - Daniel Hoffman Martin
        The Internal Evidence of the Fourth Gospel - Canon G. Osborne Troop
        The Nature of Regeneration - Thomas Boston
        Regeneration?Conversion?Reformation - George W. Lasher
        Our Lord's Teachings About Money - Arthur T. Pierson
        Satan and His Kingdom - Mrs. Jessie Penn-Lewis
        The Holy Spirit and the Sons of God - W. J. Erdman
        Consecration - Henry W. Frost
        The Apologetic Value of Paul's Epistles - E.J. Stobo
        What the Bible Contains for the Believer - George F. Pentecost
        Modern Spiritualism Briefly Tested by Scripture - Algernon J. Pollock
    Volume XI:
        The Biblical Conception of Sin - Thomas Whitelaw
        At-One-Ment by Propitiation - Dyson Hague
        The Grace of God - C. I. Scofield
        Fulfilled Prophecy A Potent Argument for the Bible - Arno C. Gaebelein
        The Coming of Christ - Charles R. Erdman
        Is Romanism Christianity? - T. W. Medhurst
        Rome, The Antagonist of the Nation - J. M. Foster
    Volume XII:
        Doctrines that Must be Emphasized in Successful Evangelism - L. W. Munhall
        Pastoral and Personal Evangelism, or Winning Men to Christ One-by-One - John Timothy Stone
        The Sunday School's True Evangelism - Charles Gallaudet Trumbull
        Foreign Missions or World-Wide Evangelism - Robert E. Speer
        What Missionary Motives Should Prevail? - Henry W. Frost
        The Place of Prayer in Evangelism - R. A. Torrey
        The Church and Socialism - Charles R. Erdman
       

You mean like R.A.T  orrey?

A man whose Salvation testimony is the same as Muhammed, and Joseph Smith?

Please provide the Salvation testimonies of these three men.
I am unaware that these men all had the same salvation testimony.

You mean Heretics like Finney?
Darby?
Schofield?

Which of the Fundamentals did Finney write?

Which one did Darby write?

C. I. Scofield did write on Grace. Don't know of a Schofield or did you mean C. I. Scofield?

I know you disagree. Fine.  Look at Baptists in the 19th Century vs. After the Advent of the Fundamentalist Movement.  It was their downfall.

We don't need to go back to those recent old paths....they are the great men who've all turned aside.

These men had these published at the beginning of the 20th century and I believe most historians would consider modern Fundamentalism traceable to the The Fundamentals: A Testimony To The Truth.

My parents pastor W. B. Riley was a leader of this turn back to the Fundamentals of the Faith.

These men were not all Baptists, so I will not agree on everything that they have written. They were from a cross section of reformed Protestantism.

R. A. Torrey was a Congregationalist not a Baptist. Of course I would disagree on some things. The whole point of the Fundamentalist movement was to affirm the main points of the Faith as agree on by Christians of many denominations. The Fundamentals. Many people are saved and children of God that do not agree with my Baptist convictions.

Perhaps Fundamentalist and Baptist do not go well together. Fundamental as used in the 20th century was an inclusive word used by many denominations while Baptist is an exclusive word used by a more separatist group of Christians holding to the Baptist Distinctives.

The Fundamentalist movement was ecumenical in scope from its inception. Words have meaning and words matter.

Thank you for helping to make my points.

Earnestly Contend

 

[ItinerantPreacher]

From not a Hacker, just wanted to kinda point out a couple things re Teis article

Here is what I got from it. First of all, it was not "clearly unbiblical" as in Teis advocating completely unscrip[tural stands, it was a very very very subjective article, but it was written in a fashion as though Teis at least is rejecting everything old. "Everything old is bad, I am so glad that finally there is something new here".

...

Thats perhaps my biggest view. Teis article oozes with pride. A lot of people are looking at us IFB guys saying we ooze with spiritual pride (an oxymoron). Teis article is filled with it from top to bottom, what is troubling is that those young men he speaks about will be drawn to it out of their own youthful pride.

Josh Teis New Independent Baptist is a new name for the old term New Evangelical.

Just my opinion

I shortened the repost for sake of readability on the forum. 

I think you are approaching this with a defensive outlook.  Many of the IFB in their 50s and 60s still emulate Jack Hyles and are still defending him.  Like most people in their 60s, they don't like change.  They don't like their grandkids playing with iPads instead of playing kick the can.  They don't like anything different.  Anytime they see someone in their 40s or younger who has an idea, they seek to squelch that idea before even hearing it.  After all, if Dr. Hyles didn't think of it, it can't be good.

Like it or not, the Gospel is going to continue in the upcoming generations.  Many of us have grown up in the IFBx world.  We have been subjected to all sorts of heresy and even crimes in the name of ministry.  Many of us want to simply return to letting Christ get the glory in our conferences, churches and homes.  We believe in the sufficiency of the Scripture and have discovered that some non-IFBx authors have given us some tremendous works to help us further understand a proper application of the Scripture.

For this, we are attacked.  For reading non-IFBx-ers, for speaking of the crimes by the leaders, we are banned from churches, mocked in conferences and scorned on social media.

I don't know Josh Teis.  I had never heard of him before this article and I don't know any of his positions. 

Could it be that he simply is stating to the past generation that this is where we stand?  Could it be that he is trying to connect the young to the old by stating to the old guard that we believe the same core doctrines they have proclaimed for generations?  Could it be that "He is just trying to say that I don't do this" is reading into it from a presupposition?

I think it would be an incredible thing for the IFB to drop their silly regulations for being in each other's groups and focus on the Gospel, discipleship, ministerial counseling through the sufficiency of the Scripture and encouraging each other to do likewise.

Part of my disagreement with Teis Binaca Chugger is that while I realize in part his article was rejecting that man worshipping idea, that in reality defines a very small percentage of IFB churches. While this is the HAC forum, respectfully, all things IFB do not point back to Hammond. They never did for me, they do not for my friends. That is not to say I am ignorant of some of what was going on, but it is to say that I am unaffected by it.

Teis article in my opinion painted a narrow stripe with a broad brush.