Should Independent Fundamental Baptists be Considered Stupid?

About this debate, I believe...

  • Christundivided won

    Votes: 2 10.0%
  • Green Beret won

    Votes: 11 55.0%
  • Neither... too hard to follow

    Votes: 5 25.0%
  • Christundivided had the best defense

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Green Beret had the best defense

    Votes: 2 10.0%

  • Total voters
    20

FSSL

Well-known member
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
7,075
Reaction score
86
Points
48
Christundivided started a firestorm on FFF with his thread entitled: "Why Independant Fundamental Baptist are Stupid."

The thread obviously created a flurry of debate. Many points were lost in the debate. Green Beret "dropped out of the skies" with a large number of 30-round capacity magazines strapped to his body.

So... here we are... one of FFF's finest moments! Good thing this is beginning on a Saturday night! I am sure we have some pastors looking for good Sunday morning sermon material! :D

Ground Rules
1) No judges... we will set up a public poll at the end of the debate. How can anyone really judge this?
2) When Christundivided and Green Beret have composed a 500 word or less defense of their positions, they will pm me a copy of their positions and then post them. I don't want one to have an advantage over the other in comparing their initial post with the other person.
3) I did a coin toss and Green Beret will have the initial response.
4) Each side gets a total of 5 replies
5) After the debate, all are invited to post their critiques.

Green Beret's initial post is in.
Christundivided is facing some family medical issues at the moment. He will post as soon as it is appropriate.
 

Green Beret

New member
Registered
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Messages
333
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The original premise of the protagonist, christundivided (CU), in this debate was that he had the evidence to prove “Why Independant Fundamental Baptist are Stupid” (leaving the original misspelling and subject verb disagreement intact for emphasis). His OP was quickly recognized, by the vast majority of those who replied, to be what it is - a sweeping generalization or stereotyping. Mind you, I am not speaking of his evidence or arguments but his base premise. It cannot be proven. It is an invalid premise and therefore cannot be logically debated. However, more than few times, he challenged others to formally debate him on the topic. I accepted knowing it was a logical fallacy. He tried to change the subject completely to "The value of being a (sic) Independent Fundamental Baptist". That is what is known as intellectual dishonesty. Admin stepped in and revised the debate subject to "Should Independent Fundamental Baptists be Considered Stupid?" and here we are.

So, should Independent Fundamental Baptists be considered stupid? My answer is no. There are certainly some stupid people who are IFB. I have met some in my 38 years of being in IFB churches. I am guilty of having acted stupidly at times myself while being a part of an IFB ministry. However, this question is universal in its structure and scope. Therefore, it begs the following question.

How can anyone assess the mental capacity (like stupidity) of a large group of believers (some credible sources estimate that there 8,500 - 10,000+ IFB churches in the US alone) by their denominational nomenclature?  Unless someone forms something like “The Church of the People who Jump off of Really Tall Buildings onto Sharp, Hard Rocks Below....without Parachutes”, stereotypically labeling a group of believers as mentally slow, ignorant or idiots just by their descriptive nomenclature is, well, stupid. I hope my satire is taken in the way it is offered, to amplify how illogical it would be to answer the question in the affirmative.

If CU had crafted an unflawed premise and then offered his points as evidence, there may have been some degree of merit in his arguments that could be debated. In this context, it cannot be logically done. I will however, offer a short summary of each which I’m sure will be discussed in the rebuttals.

1. IFBs take pride in living a "separated" life when in fact, they really don't. I have never and I mean never met one IFB that lived the separated life they demand of anyone else. Not one. This is a subjective argument from limited experience.

2.  When someone messes up, it’s not because of the IFB system of beliefs. It’s just a very small exception and it’s ALL that individual's fault. This point actually has some merit outside of the flawed premise under which it is offered.

3. They've taken the "name" of a slave. Do you actually believe Baptists are named after John and not for their practice of biblical immersion of believers?
 
C

christundivided

Guest
Col 2:8  Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Brothers, the message is clear. The message is pure. The message is complete. Christ is the head of all things. The sole focus of the Gospel. The sole focus of our affections. The sole focus of our faith. The center point of evidence for such beliefs is found in the Scriptures. The Scriptures either confirm or deny our faith. Every one of us begins our journey of "faith" with our wondrous union with Christ Jesus. Yet, we are children. Our eyes that were once blind do not understand everything they see. Nor do our ears that were once deaf understand everything they hear. In our infancy, we're often vulnerable and easily influenced by uncertain philosophies and traditions of men. We cling to things that have long been common among us, the carnal things of this world. Things we think we understand, familiar things. Paul alludes to this fact in the verse above when he speaks of the "rudiments of this world" expressed in the "traditions of men". Such things are not of Christ.  It’s easy to remain a child. It’s convenient to hold to the earthly things from our former life. The familiar parts of our carnal nature; it’s all we've ever known.

This problem isn't something new. Seemingly endless examples of this are found throughout the Scriptures. Our own Master, Jesus Christ, dealt with much of this during His earthly ministry. The problem survived the apostolic age, and made its way through time to this very day. Though the names have changed, the problem remains the same. Independent Fundamental Baptists, while not alone, are certainly part of the problem. These issues can generally be broken down into three categories.

Pride, Hypocrisy and Loss of Focus.
John 8:33  They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?
John 8:34  Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.

1. Pride. (The IFB way)
IFBs take extraordinary pride in claiming to be "distinctly" different. They revel in their supposed accomplishments and heritage. It is witnessed in their silly claims of origins. Much like the people referenced above. Jesus wasn't a Baptist. IFBs do not have a unbroken, unadulterated connection to an unspoiled heritage. These “Jews" were so blinded by their pride, they ignored their present condition. They filtered everything through the lens of "heritage".

2. Hypocrisy.
Laced within the IFB heritage is a long line of failure. A systematic failure to live lives claimed by their heritage. When a “hero” of the “Baptist” faith falls, it’s never considered to be an indication of a systematic failure.

3. Loss of Focus.
Blinded by their pride and hypocrisy, IFBs label themselves after earthly men, slaves and servants, not their own Master
 

Green Beret

New member
Registered
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Messages
333
Reaction score
0
Points
0
christundivided said:
Col 2:8  Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Brothers, the message is clear. The message is pure. The message is complete. Christ is the head of all things. The sole focus of the Gospel. The sole focus of our affections. The sole focus of our faith. The center point of evidence for such beliefs is found in the Scriptures. The Scriptures either confirm or deny our faith. Every one of us begins our journey of "faith" with our wondrous union with Christ Jesus. Yet, we are children. Our eyes that were once blind do not understand everything they see. Nor do our ears that were once deaf understand everything they hear. In our infancy, we're often vulnerable and easily influenced by uncertain philosophies and traditions of men. We cling to things that have long been common among us, the carnal things of this world. Things we think we understand, familiar things. Paul alludes to this fact in the verse above when he speaks of the "rudiments of this world" expressed in the "traditions of men". Such things are not of Christ.  It’s easy to remain a child. It’s convenient to hold to the earthly things from our former life. The familiar parts of our carnal nature; it’s all we've ever known.
That is a very well written opening paragraph and I agree with its premise as long as it is applied biblically. The historical context is that the young church at Colosse was battling the proto-Gnostic “Asian” Jews who were teaching “their philosophy” and not the Word of God. That empty, deceitful philosophy was patterned after the traditions of the rabbinical Jews and after the base elements of this world. It went against the gospel message and was not of Christ. If anything, the IFB that I have known and been around the past 38 years have proclaimed His gospel. They have not formed a Gnostic type philosophy that is contained in creeds or institutes that only the initiated understand. They preach Christ, Him crucified and risen again as our Lord and Savior. And, BTW, this doesn't give any weight to the argument that IFBs should be considered stupid.

christundivided said:
This problem isn't something new. Seemingly endless examples of this are found throughout the Scriptures. Our own Master, Jesus Christ, dealt with much of this during His earthly ministry. The problem survived the apostolic age, and made its way through time to this very day. Though the names have changed, the problem remains the same. Independent Fundamental Baptists, while not alone, are certainly part of the problem. These issues can generally be broken down into three categories.
I would counter that, while certain IFB pastors, churches and even schools can certainly be some part of a problem within the body of Christ, they do not wholly (see “stereotype”) constitute the particular problem that is addressed by Paul in Colossians chapter two. Again, there is nothing here that argues to the point of IFBs being considered stupid.

christundivided said:
Pride, Hypocrisy and Loss of Focus.
John 8:33  They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?
John 8:34  Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.

1. Pride. (The IFB way)
IFBs take extraordinary pride in claiming to be "distinctly" different. They revel in their supposed accomplishments and heritage. It is witnessed in their silly claims of origins. Much like the people referenced above. Jesus wasn't a Baptist. IFBs do not have a unbroken, unadulterated connection to an unspoiled heritage. These “Jews" were so blinded by their pride, they ignored their present condition. They filtered everything through the lens of "heritage".
Again, this is a stereotype. Not all IFBs are stuck looking through the “lens of heritage”. There are certainly some, but I would say nowhere near a majority. Yes, there are some Landmarkers and Baptist Briders still out there but they are becoming increasingly rare at least in my neck of the woods. Making an educated estimate, I’d say less than 20% would fit that cookie cutter you have.

As an IFB pastor, I do not believe, teach or preach that we have an unbroken, unadulterated connection back to the first century or that Jesus was a Baptist. However, I do believe, teach and preach that there have always been believers of like doctrine and practice since the beginning of the body of Christ on this earth, that Jesus was baptized (fully immersed in the water) and that He commanded us to do the same with those that believe upon Him and follow His teachings (Matt. 28:19). And, ditto, no proof arguments about the stupidity thing.

christundivided said:
2. Hypocrisy.
Laced within the IFB heritage is a long line of failure. A systematic failure to live lives claimed by their heritage. When a “hero” of the “Baptist” faith falls, it’s never considered to be an indication of a systematic failure.
This is almost pure rhetoric. Now I realize you only had 500 words and were pressed for space but now you need to define failure and prove it is systematic. The burden of proof is on you, friend. I know it won’t be easy seeing there are somewhere between 8-10K IFB churches in the U.S. and we don’t have centralized records like a true denomination. That’s not a defensive or debating tactic per se, it is an observation of your poorly worded statement.

If you wish to argue this point, we will have to debate the definition of “systematic failure” and then I will be forced to type a real life example of one. Like my professional experience with the M247 Sgt. York DIVAD system in the 80’s. Please don’t make me bore the FFF readers with that, they beg you.

christundivided said:
When a “hero” of the “Baptist” faith falls, it’s never considered to be an indication of a systematic failure.
That’s because it is not one. However, again, that is not a defense. It is quite the opposite. This point actually has some merit outside of the flawed premise under which it is offered. There is a form of cancer in our part of the Body of Christ. Please bear with me, I am not trying to split hairs but there is a distinction between systematic and systemic.

This particular form of spiritual cancer seems to be systemic to certain circles within the IFB movement. The reason I first came to the JH.net/FFF in 1999 was to confront David P. Douglass. He was a “missionary” from HAC that got a 16 year old girl pregnant here in the U.S. and was pastoring a local church while supporting David Hyles at Pinellas Park Baptist Temple. He came to the FFF trying to support his position. We stopped him and he fled out of the area.

What we don’t need is chemotherapy to treat this cancer since that kills both the good and the bad. We need to better practice biblical church discipline as a whole and be diligent to cut out the teaching and teachers that cause these types of situations. If we don’t do that, it doesn't make us stupid. It makes us something far worse.

christundivided said:
3. Loss of Focus.
Blinded by their pride and hypocrisy, IFBs label themselves after earthly men, slaves and servants, not their own Master
Honestly, I think this point is a hobby horse. Baptists (IFB and others) are named for the practice of biblical immersion of believers. We are not named after John the Baptist, so we have not “replaced the name of our master with a servant”. It was a name given by others to those who practiced the biblical immersion of believers and not paedobaptism. Anyone who even casually studies church history knows that. At our church, we understand that the label IFB doesn’t define us as much as it describes us. This topic has also been discussed in the forums ad-nauseam so we really don’t need to chase that rabbit. And for your information, we also teach that you should be careful when referring to yourself as a Christian since it is far better to follow Christ and have others call you one (Acts 11:26). We also realize living that way does make us appear stupid but only in the eyes of those without Christ (1 Cor. 1:19-31).

 
C

christundivided

Guest
Green Beret said:
That is a very well written opening paragraph and I agree with its premise as long as it is applied biblically. The historical context is that the young church at Colosse was battling the proto-Gnostic “Asian” Jews who were teaching “their philosophy” and not the Word of God. That empty, deceitful philosophy was patterned after the traditions of the rabbinical Jews and after the base elements of this world. It went against the gospel message and was not of Christ. If anything, the IFB that I have known and been around the past 38 years have proclaimed His gospel. They have not formed a Gnostic type philosophy that is contained in creeds or institutes that only the initiated understand. They preach Christ, Him crucified and risen again as our Lord and Savior. And, BTW, this doesn't give any weight to the argument that IFBs should be considered stupid.
I admit. I'm surprised at your method of defense. Are you really saying that Col 2:8 has only a direct application on those who preach a "proto-Gnostic" philosophy? Really? Then I must insist you never appeal to this verse again. Your methods have rendered its application "mute" and useless. Maybe I should appeal to your senses and mention the Biblical Hermeneutical view "Theological Analysis". Colossians 2:8 and its teachings, extend through the writings of Paul and find their roots in the teachings of our Lord. They span various different groups of people and a rather broad set of teachings. To make such an argument is rather silly. 

Green Beret said:
I would counter that, while certain IFB pastors, churches and even schools can certainly be some part of a problem within the body of Christ, they do not wholly (see “stereotype”) constitute the particular problem that is addressed by Paul in Colossians chapter two. Again, there is nothing here that argues to the point of IFBs being considered stupid.
In typical "IFB" fashion, you conflate the two terms. "IFB" and "Body of Christ". While "IFBs" generally admit their ranks are full of unregenerate souls, they must, at all cost, keep up the pretense that they are the only true "disciples" of Christ. Why do you readily admit there "is some part of a problem" , yet seek to conflate such with the "Body of Christ". Sorry. I believe that "body of Christ" fits perfectly together. You have a rather poor opinion of God's divine work. For your reference...

Eph 4:16  From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

So much for your attempt at conflating the terms.

Again, this is a stereotype. Not all IFBs are stuck looking through the “lens of heritage”. There are certainly some, but I would say nowhere near a majority. Yes, there are some Landmarkers and Baptist Briders still out there but they are becoming increasingly rare at least in my neck of the woods. Making an educated estimate, I’d say less than 20% would fit that cookie cutter you have.
So, you find no value in being a "brider"? May I ask.... why do you tolerate them? Will you wait till they comprise 51 percent of your group? As a young preacher, I attended a well known camp meeting in Kentucky. If I named the town, I am certain some of you would know exactly where I'm referencing. I personally knew the moderator and he was a good friend of my pastor at the time. My pastor, with 30 years of IFB experience, told me the moderator was going to call me to preach the last night of the camp meeting. My pastor warned me not to preach against brider doctrine. There were many attending and they were considered good friends of the hosting church. I must admit, I had struggled all day with whether or not to heed the words of my pastor. I was also told to stay away from any talk of "Election". Thank God a storm came up that afternoon and damaged most of the camp meeting grounds. Like a good IFB at the time, I was too "stupid" to stand for the truth. I was always seeking to advance myself in the "IFB cause". Truth be known, I think this was a turning point in my life. A time when I came face to face with my own pride and hypocrisy.

To borrow a phrase.... "The silent majority is always irrelevant".

Green Beret said:
As an IFB pastor, I do not believe, teach or preach that we have an unbroken, unadulterated connection back to the first century or that Jesus was a Baptist. However, I do believe, teach and preach that there have always been believers of like doctrine and practice since the beginning of the body of Christ on this earth, that Jesus was baptized (fully immersed in the water) and that He commanded us to do the same with those that believe upon Him and follow His teachings (Matt. 28:19). And, ditto, no proof arguments about the stupidity thing.
So why use the term "Baptist". Can you elaborate? Are you willing hold to such a term solely based on the fact Jesus was fully immersed in water?

I hope you do realize that there are many groups that believe the same thing. Groups that have never felt the need to call themselves "IFB".

Green Beret said:
This is almost pure rhetoric. Now I realize you only had 500 words and were pressed for space but now you need to define failure and prove it is systematic. The burden of proof is on you, friend. I know it won’t be easy seeing there are somewhere between 8-10K IFB churches in the U.S. and we don’t have centralized records like a true denomination. That’s not a defensive or debating tactic per se, it is an observation of your poorly worded statement.

If you wish to argue this point, we will have to debate the definition of “systematic failure” and then I will be forced to type a real life example of one. Like my professional experience with the M247 Sgt. York DIVAD system in the 80’s. Please don’t make me bore the FFF readers with that, they beg you.
Yes. I only had 500 words. I used 498 of them. Allow me to elaborate.

I said "systematic failure". I did not say "systemic failure". You're argument warranties a "systemic" view of failure within IFBdom. I reject such nonsense. While I do believe that failure among the "elite heroes" of the "IFB faith" is proof of innate problems within the group, its the core values of IFBdom that I'm focused upon. These core values exude "hypocrisy".

Hypocrisy is at the core of the IFB system.

For now, lets just focus on one prime example. Its my experience that IFBdom pastors readily judge the sin of others, while ignoring their own similar actions. While I personally believe that Christ is our Sabbath.... I can remember hearing sermons on "grass mowers" most of my life. It seems like when any "IFB" pastor drove by someone mowing on the "Sabbath", they would have a "hissy fit" that would find its way into that mornings sermon. Those same "pastors" would drive down to the local restaurant to eat their "Sabbath meal". All the while oblivious to the fact those servicing them..... were just as guilty as the "grass mowers" they had just preached about.

You know what I learned from this? I learned that it was okay to work on the Sabbath, as long as the pastor was being served by it. In a way, this is comical. In a way, its entirely stupid. Yet, this is the exactly mentality exhibited among the IFB elite... time and time again. I could list more, but lets just start there.

Such teachings result in systematic failures within IFBdom. Sure. Some of you are still chugging along. Some of you are even flourishing. However, there will come a day in which all men will face God with how they've preached Christ. Now or later, you'll see the results of such teachings.

Green Beret said:
This particular form of spiritual cancer seems to be systemic to certain circles within the IFB movement. The reason I first came to the JH.net/FFF in 1999 was to confront David P. Douglass. He was a “missionary” from HAC that got a 16 year old girl pregnant here in the U.S. and was pastoring a local church while supporting David Hyles at Pinellas Park Baptist Temple. He came to the FFF trying to support his position. We stopped him and he fled out of the area.

What we don’t need is chemotherapy to treat this cancer since that kills both the good and the bad. We need to better practice biblical church discipline as a whole and be diligent to cut out the teaching and teachers that cause these types of situations. If we don’t do that, it doesn't make us stupid. It makes us something far worse.
With all due respect.... you've got a rather low standard of intervention. I've said this before in the forum and it'll repeat it here.

"You people" don't get mad about what's going on among you unless someone screws your daughters or steals your money. Its really pitiful. You let your teenage daughters be alone with the "pastor" because he's your King.... and the "King" would never do anything wrong. He's "God's man" after all. You give your monies week in and week out..... building up nice little nest eggs that the pastor and deacons can spend on a whim. Sure, you'll take a "vote" on some things. Yet, who is going to say no to "god". You do this by perverting the teaching of the tithe. Its no wonder you find yourselves on the wrong end of someone's carnal desires.

Honestly, I think this point is a hobby horse. Baptists (IFB and others) are named for the practice of biblical immersion of believers. We are not named after John the Baptist, so we have not “replaced the name of our master with a servant”. It was a name given by others to those who practiced the biblical immersion of believers and not paedobaptism. Anyone who even casually studies church history knows that. At our church, we understand that the label IFB doesn’t define us as much as it describes us. This topic has also been discussed in the forums ad-nauseam so we really don’t need to chase that rabbit. And for your information, we also teach that you should be careful when referring to yourself as a Christian since it is far better to follow Christ and have others call you one (Acts 11:26). We also realize living that way does make us appear stupid but only in the eyes of those without Christ (1 Cor. 1:19-31).
While I am relieved that you don't believe you have roots in John The Baptist, the problem still remains.

The last time I looked, you're the ones willing choosing to call yourselves "Baptist". Its been a rather long time since "baby baptizers" took to calling you "re-baptizers". The fact is.... you've taken "pride" in such a label. When I ride by your churches, its on the sign. When I attend your services, I hear about the privileges of being "baptist". We aren't listening to the "name calling" of others. We are listening to YOU. I would like to point out, that all such things are evidence to a "Loss of Focus".

1Co 3:4  For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?
1Co 3:5  Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
1Co 3:6  I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.

I would also like to point out that there are many who practice "biblical baptism" who haven't taken to call themselves after a man or a people or a practice. They call themselves after their Master. A honor. A privilege. A witness to Christ. A witness to our allegiance and affection. You've lost your focus and you've conflated your own position to be equal to Him. I call this nonsense. I call this stupidity. I've been where you are. I didn't stay there. I abandoned my "baptist faith" to embrace Christ in all His glory. You should do the same.
 

Green Beret

New member
Registered
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Messages
333
Reaction score
0
Points
0
christundivided said:
I admit. I'm surprised at your method of defense. Are you really saying that Col 2:8 has only a direct application on those who preach a "proto-Gnostic" philosophy? Really? Then I must insist you never appeal to this verse again. Your methods have rendered its application "mute" and useless. Maybe I should appeal to your senses and mention the Biblical Hermeneutical view "Theological Analysis". Colossians 2:8 and its teachings, extend through the writings of Paul and find their roots in the teachings of our Lord. They span various different groups of people and a rather broad set of teachings. To make such an argument is rather silly.
I admit that I'm not surprised that you didn't respond with anything on topic. Your position is so weak that you must try to shift the focus to some contrived misunderstanding of the passage that I believe you were subtly trying to twist for your purpose. Go read some sound, conservative commentaries and gain some understanding. Paul is addressing those that are teaching philosophies of men rooted in the base elements of this world and not Christ. I'll repeat it again so you can get it (and I'm the one that is supposed to be stupid). We (all the IFBs I know) preach Christ. We proclaim His gospel. We have not formed a Gnostic type philosophy that is contained in creeds or institutes that only the initiated understand. We preach Christ, Him crucified and risen again as our Lord and Savior. Name one real IFB that doesn't. To try to argue anything else out of this point is, well, stupid.

christundivided said:
In typical "IFB" fashion, you conflate the two terms. "IFB" and "Body of Christ". While "IFBs" generally admit their ranks are full of unregenerate souls, they must, at all cost, keep up the pretense that they are the only true "disciples" of Christ. Why do you readily admit there "is some part of a problem" , yet seek to conflate such with the "Body of Christ". Sorry. I believe that "body of Christ" fits perfectly together. You have a rather poor opinion of God's divine work. For your reference...

Eph 4:16  From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

So much for your attempt at conflating the terms.
Come on, you are making this too easy. A love affair with the term "conflate" is the best you can do? I thought you were trying to argue for the affirmative of the debate's premise? Instead, you fabricate an error. I did not combine the two terms (IFB and the Body of Christ) into one. Read it carefully before you waste valuable time posting. I said, "certain IFB pastors, churches and even schools can certainly be some part of a problem within the body of Christ". No conflating there. Now, are you trying to say that IFBs are not within the Body of Christ or, to that the Body of Christ is sinless, without problems in this world? Those are the only two choices I see in your response. Again, no points for your affirmative position in this debate that I can see. In fact, quite the opposite.   

christundivided said:
So, you find no value in being a "brider"? May I ask.... why do you tolerate them? Will you wait till they comprise 51 percent of your group? As a young preacher, I attended a well known camp meeting in Kentucky. If I named the town, I am certain some of you would know exactly where I'm referencing. I personally knew the moderator and he was a good friend of my pastor at the time. My pastor, with 30 years of IFB experience, told me the moderator was going to call me to preach the last night of the camp meeting. My pastor warned me not to preach against brider doctrine. There were many attending and they were considered good friends of the hosting church. I must admit, I had struggled all day with whether or not to heed the words of my pastor. I was also told to stay away from any talk of "Election". Thank God a storm came up that afternoon and damaged most of the camp meeting grounds. Like a good IFB at the time, I was too "stupid" to stand for the truth. I was always seeking to advance myself in the "IFB cause". Truth be known, I think this was a turning point in my life. A time when I came face to face with my own pride and hypocrisy.

To borrow a phrase.... "The silent majority is always irrelevant".
How do you know what I tolerate? Your personal example is just that, a subjective personal experience. There are literally hundreds of camp meetings and fellowships across the country in which various IFB churches have participated. You seem to be missing a key word in the course of the debate here - Independent. We don't police our group. IFB churches are not a denomination in the strict sense of the term. Regardless, it does not change the accepted fact that "Landmarkers" and "Briders" are a small minority within the IFB movement. If you want to do the heavy lifting and try to prove otherwise, knock yourself out. The burden of proof is on you. Until then, your point remains what it is - irrelevant.   

christundivided said:
So why use the term "Baptist". Can you elaborate? Are you willing hold to such a term solely based on the fact Jesus was fully immersed in water?

I hope you do realize that there are many groups that believe the same thing. Groups that have never felt the need to call themselves "IFB".
OK, I'll bite. Why do you call yourself American? I hope you realize that there are other people that occupy the same space that have never felt the need to call themselves Americans.

The words Independent Fundamental Baptist mean something when it is explained in its historical sense without malice, guile, hate and lies. In the historical sense of the that meaning, we stand. In a very strong, parallel sense, it's pretty much like being a "real American". 

christundivided said:
I said "systematic failure". I did not say "systemic failure". You're argument warranties a "systemic" view of failure within IFBdom. I reject such nonsense. While I do believe that failure among the "elite heroes" of the "IFB faith" is proof of innate problems within the group, its the core values of IFBdom that I'm focused upon. These core values exude "hypocrisy".

Hypocrisy is at the core of the IFB system.
I call you on the point. Prove it. I don't think your understanding is clear. I think it is marred and warped by subjective, personal experience. Define the "core values" of the "IFB system" that cause "systematic failure" (using the strict definition of the term). I'll spare you my M247 example since you don't want to understand the term. You just want to be right on everything but the debate premise. What pride. I haven't seen the likes of it since Peter Ruckman , David Hyles or David Douglass. What you speak of is systemic to those in which it occurs (like those in the list I just gave). You share the same cancer.

I have no "heroes of the faith" except those who have finished the race well. Those that hold to open sin, bad doctrine or lack biblical principles, I withstand to their face. I practice biblical church discipline and do everything in my power to shine the light into their darkness. Just ask the Farris brothers. They know.

What have you done to address it? You generalize, bloviate and use really weak subjective personal experiences to support your arrogance. That's considered obnoxious and, when you don't see it as such, stupid. You are doing more here to prove that Independent Fundamental Baptist should not be considered stupid than I ever could. 

christundivided said:
With all due respect.... you've got a rather low standard of intervention. I've said this before in the forum and it'll repeat it here.

"You people" don't get mad about what's going on among you unless someone screws your daughters or steals your money. Its really pitiful.
Spare me your disingenuous "respect". You obviously have no clue about my, or many of my IFB brethren's, level of intervention.

I'll tell you what is pitiful. Your words above are. Without knowledge, you make such a pathetic, low-life statement. And, yes, you repeat it on the forum. That is stupid. That is pathetic. And, the more I witness it, I believe pathological.
 
christundivided said:
While I am relieved that you don't believe you have roots in John The Baptist, the problem still remains.
Yes, but only in your head.

christundivided said:
The last time I looked, you're the ones willing choosing to call yourselves "Baptist". Its been a rather long time since "baby baptizers" took to calling you "re-baptizers". The fact is.... you've taken "pride" in such a label.
There you go again, Jimmy. You're are making over-generalized "you people" statements that don't apply to anywhere near the majority. Are there some that still do it, I'm sure. It is apparent to all reading this on the FFF that you were reared in it. We're not and don't see it that way. Your point is moot. 

christundivided said:
1Co 3:4  For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?
1Co 3:5  Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
1Co 3:6  I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
Tell you what, you find me the Church of Jack Hyles or the Congregation of John R. Rice and I'll accept your application of this passage to the point here. We are talking about the term baptist as used in IFB, not the "camp" mentality that was rampant in a goodly portion of the IFB movement some decades ago. Even David Cloud recognizes that is finally over (well, mostly). 

christundivided said:
I would also like to point out that there are many who practice "biblical baptism" who haven't taken to call themselves after a man or a people or a practice. They call themselves after their Master. A honor. A privilege. A witness to Christ. A witness to our allegiance and affection. You've lost your focus and you've conflated your own position to be equal to Him. I call this nonsense. I call this stupidity. I've been where you are. I didn't stay there. I abandoned my "baptist faith" to embrace Christ in all His glory. You should do the same.
You said conflated again. To quote Inigo Montoya, "I don't think that word means what you think it means". It makes you sound stupid when you use it the way you have and that is contrary to your position. You are like a wrestler who is losing the match and is desperately grasping to use any hold he can, even dumb ones. 

I would like to point out that we have always placed Christ above all else. In the fullness of His glory and by His grace we strive to live our lives in a way which will honor Him. We don't just blithely "call ourselves by our Master's name " but understand and believe that His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through the knowledge of Him who called us (read the rest of 2 Peter 1). To that end, we give Him the glory when someone calls us "of Christ" or a Christian. Christian is not a title or badge to wear, it is a life to live and, by His grace, we strive to do so.

You need to leave your pride and do the same. All your arguments to the contrary are stupid.
 
C

christundivided

Guest
Green Beret said:
I admit that I'm not surprised that you didn't respond with anything on topic. Your position is so weak that you must try to shift the focus to some contrived misunderstanding of the passage that I believe you were subtly trying to twist for your purpose. Go read some sound, conservative commentaries and gain some understanding. Paul is addressing those that are teaching philosophies of men rooted in the base elements of this world and not Christ. I'll repeat it again so you can get it (and I'm the one that is supposed to be stupid). We (all the IFBs I know) preach Christ. We proclaim His gospel. We have not formed a Gnostic type philosophy that is contained in creeds or institutes that only the initiated understand. We preach Christ, Him crucified and risen again as our Lord and Savior. Name one real IFB that doesn't. To try to argue anything else out of this point is, well, stupid.
You ignored half of what I wrote. I gave a clear theological basis for my view. Its not my fault you're having problems addressing it You preach a Christ "wrapped" in all things "IFB".  A Christ beholden to your own carnal doctrine. This is exactly what is addressed in Col 2:8. Exactly. You attempted to exclude the application of Col 2:8 by claiming it only has an application toward

"the proto-Gnostic “Asian” Jews who were teaching “their philosophy” and not the Word of God"

Eat your own words.

Green Beret said:
Come on, you are making this too easy. A love affair with the term "conflate" is the best you can do? I thought you were trying to argue for the affirmative of the debate's premise? Instead, you fabricate an error. I did not combine the two terms (IFB and the Body of Christ) into one. Read it carefully before you waste valuable time posting. I said, "certain IFB pastors, churches and even schools can certainly be some part of a problem within the body of Christ". No conflating there. Now, are you trying to say that IFBs are not within the Body of Christ or, to that the Body of Christ is sinless, without problems in this world? Those are the only two choices I see in your response. Again, no points for your affirmative position in this debate that I can see. In fact, quite the opposite
The word "within" changes nothing in application. I have chosen my words wisely. You're the one using the term "IFB" and "body of Christ" interchangeably as if there are no differences in the two. I did not say you combined anything. I used the word "conflate". There is a difference between "combining terms" and "intermixing terms".

You're also justifying bad behavior by point at other bad behavior. You sound like a little child that says.... "but daddy. They do it too."

Green Beret said:
How do you know what I tolerate? Your personal example is just that, a subjective personal experience. There are literally hundreds of camp meetings and fellowships across the country in which various IFB churches have participated. You seem to be missing a key word in the course of the debate here - Independent. We don't police our group. IFB churches are not a denomination in the strict sense of the term. Regardless, it does not change the accepted fact that "Landmarkers" and "Briders" are a small minority within the IFB movement. If you want to do the heavy lifting and try to prove otherwise, knock yourself out. The burden of proof is on you. Until then, your point remains what it is - irrelevant.
You don't police your group? Really? Isn't it so very convenient to embrace them at every hand in your defense and then claim the word "independent" allows you to distance yourself from them whenever you choose. Are you defending IFBdom or are you just defending your church?

You're the one that gave a 20 percent estimate. I wouldn't call 20 percent a "small minority". You know you tolerate them. You know you fellowship among them. You willingly remain silent while they deceive others. Typical. Have you ever preached against "briders" in any of these camp meetings?

Green Beret said:
OK, I'll bite. Why do you call yourself American? I hope you realize that there are other people that occupy the same space that have never felt the need to call themselves Americans.
At last, you embrace Citadel's argument.... I call myself an American because I am a US citizen. I assume you were born a IFB? Were you washed in the blood of many baptist before you? Can I expect "American Independent Fundamental Baptist" to show up on your church sign very soon?
The words Independent Fundamental Baptist mean something when it is explained in its historical sense without malice, guile, hate and lies. In the historical sense of the that meaning, we stand. In a very strong, parallel sense, it's pretty much like being a "real American". 
Okay.... I knew it would come out sooner or later. Its obvious that your pride in IFBdom rivals the pride in your American citizenship. I can see IFBs everywhere rising to salute IFBdom. Of course, we're only talking about the truly pure "IFBdom". Don't worry about all those pretenders. They've hijacked and tainted the term long enough.

Green Beret said:
I call you on the point. Prove it. I don't think your understanding is clear. I think it is marred and warped by subjective, personal experience. Define the "core values" of the "IFB system" that cause "systematic failure" (using the strict definition of the term). I'll spare you my M247 example since you don't want to understand the term. You just want to be right on everything but the debate premise. What pride. I haven't seen the likes of it since Peter Ruckman , David Hyles or David Douglass. What you speak of is systemic to those in which it occurs (like those in the list I just gave). You share the same cancer.

I have no "heroes of the faith" except those who have finished the race well. Those that hold to open sin, bad doctrine or lack biblical principles, I withstand to their face. I practice biblical church discipline and do everything in my power to shine the light into their darkness. Just ask the Farris brothers. They know.
No heroes? How can you claim a tradition without holding to "heroes" of that tradition? In the good Christian tradition, I claim heroes in Paul, Peter, John, Apollos, and etc. I do not call myself after my heroes. They are fellow laborers. Fellow servants. Fellow slaves.

Green Beret said:
What have you done to address it? You generalize, bloviate and use really weak subjective personal experiences to support your arrogance. That's considered obnoxious and, when you don't see it as such, stupid. You are doing more here to prove that Independent Fundamental Baptist should not be considered stupid than I ever could. 
There are many that have shared in what you call my "subjective personal experience". Mine isn't an isolated example. If I had witnessed to what others had said, you'd say I'm going on "second hand" information. If I witness to personal experience, you say its subjective and isolated. So predictable. It reminds me of ....

Luk 7:33  For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine; and ye say, He hath a devil.
Luk 7:34  The Son of man is come eating and drinking; and ye say, Behold a gluttonous man, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners!
Luk 7:35  But wisdom is justified of all her children

Green Beret said:
Spare me your disingenuous "respect". You obviously have no clue about my, or many of my IFB brethren's, level of intervention.

I'll tell you what is pitiful. Your words above are. Without knowledge, you make such a pathetic, low-life statement. And, yes, you repeat it on the forum. That is stupid. That is pathetic. And, the more I witness it, I believe pathological.
Did I hit a nerve? Why does all these failures keep rising among you? I'm sorry brother, you know you're living like "kings". God warned Israel when they desired a "king".... and He let them have exactly what they wanted.

"Absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Green Beret said:
Tell you what, you find me the Church of Jack Hyles or the Congregation of John R. Rice and I'll accept your application of this passage to the point here. We are talking about the term baptist as used in IFB, not the "camp" mentality that was rampant in a goodly portion of the IFB movement some decades ago. Even David Cloud recognizes that is finally over (well, mostly).
So, let me get this straight. You claim you're descendants of those who were called Baptist. Somehow, you then claim you are not following those that were called "Baptist"? How does that work exactly? I never said one thing about Hyles or Rice. Not one thing. You're missing the forest for the trees.

Green Beret said:
I would like to point out that we have always placed Christ above all else. In the fullness of His glory and by His grace we strive to live our lives in a way which will honor Him. We don't just blithely "call ourselves by our Master's name " but understand and believe that His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through the knowledge of Him who called us (read the rest of 2 Peter 1). To that end, we give Him the glory when someone calls us "of Christ" or a Christian. Christian is not a title or badge to wear, it is a life to live and, by His grace, we strive to do so.
Oh but it is a title. It is a badge to wear. Peter under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost wrote,
1Pe 4:16  Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.
Sorry. Peter didn't say.
1Pe 4:16  Yet if any man suffer as a Baptist, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.

I read "baptist" on your signs. I hear about "baptist" in your services. You form "baptist fellowships". You filter everything through the "lens" of being baptist. Everything. Even when you preach "Christ".... you preach it the "baptist way".

Also, Why did you ignore my "Sabbath" example? Did it hit home? Do you preach against the grass mowers and then go out on Sunday and fill your belly at the local restaurant?

1. Pride
2. Hypocrisy
3. Loss of Focus.

I believe the evidence is mounting. Make your own judgement.





 

Green Beret

New member
Registered
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Messages
333
Reaction score
0
Points
0
christundivided said:
You ignored half of what I wrote. I gave a clear theological basis for my view. Its not my fault you're having problems addressing it You preach a Christ "wrapped" in all things "IFB".  A Christ beholden to your own carnal doctrine. This is exactly what is addressed in Col 2:8. Exactly. You attempted to exclude the application of Col 2:8 by claiming it only has an application toward
"the proto-Gnostic “Asian” Jews who were teaching “their philosophy” and not the Word of God"
Eat your own words.
No, I didn't ignore half of what you said. I ignored more than half because it is a terrible exegesis. I stand on the facts that Paul was addressing. I didn’t say it could only be applied to the proto-Gnostic “Asian” Jews who were teaching “their philosophy” and not the Word of God. I said that is what Paul was addressing so we should be careful to understand it in its historic context, to whom it was written and why. Again I implore you, go do some studying. However, I don't think you will since it seems you are so steeped in your pride. I'll offer just one of the commentaries on the passage:

JFB: “Beware (literally, ‘Look’ well) lest there shall be (as I fear there is: the Greek indicative expresses this) any man (pointing to some known emissary of evil, Gal_1:7) leading you away as his spoil (not merely gaining spoil out of you, but making yourselves his spoil) through (by means of) his philosophy,” etc. The apostle does not condemn all philosophy, but “the philosophy” (so Greek) of the Judaic-oriental heretics at Colosse, which afterwards was developed into Gnosticism. You, who may have “the riches of full assurance” and “the treasures of wisdom,” should not suffer yourselves to be led away as a spoil by empty, deceitful philosophy: “riches” are contrasted with spoil; “full” with “vain,” or empty (Col_2:2, Col_2:3, Col_2:9).

The philosophy of which the church at Colosse was “the philosophy” (so Greek) of the Judaic-oriental heretics at Colosse, which afterwards was developed into Gnosticism. This philosophy was not according to Christ. I do not believe that it would be a stretch to say that the said philosophy conflicted with the doctrines of Christ. Especially those having to do with salvation since Judiazers taught keeping the law for salvation.

I’ll treat this point is closed since I am looking at it from a let scripture interpret scripture view point while you are using it as a spring board for your three point demagoguery.

christundivided said:
The word "within" changes nothing in application. I have chosen my words wisely. You're the one using the term "IFB" and "body of Christ" interchangeably as if there are no differences in the two. I did not say you combined anything. I used the word "conflate". There is a difference between "combining terms" and "intermixing terms".
Really? Let’s see who’s right.

Merriam-Webster Definition:
Conflate - (transitive verb)
1. a. to bring together fuse b.:  confuse
2:  to combine (as two readings of a text) into a composite whole

Who’s right? Yeah, I thought so. Me. You lose another point.

christundivided said:
You're also justifying bad behavior by point at other bad behavior. You sound like a little child that says.... "but daddy. They do it too."
Am not!  :p  Desperate grasping of a pinned wrestler, indeed.

christundivided said:
You don't police your group? Really? Isn't it so very convenient to embrace them at every hand in your defense and then claim the word "independent" allows you to distance yourself from them whenever you choose. Are you defending IFBdom or are you just defending your church?
I’ll point out to you what every other poster here has on your whacked-out original thread - we believe and practice a church polity that is independent. The local, called out assembly biblically polices itself. When it doesn’t, we point out the error and we don’t run and hide.
 
christundivided said:
You're the one that gave a 20 percent estimate. I wouldn't call 20 percent a "small minority".
I, unlike you it seems, was being honest. That percentage is based on an accurate estimate of my area. I don’t twist or, worse yet, refuse to provide numbers. I would also reasonably assume that the ratio is lower in some areas and slightly higher in others.

christundivided said:
You know you tolerate them. You know you fellowship among them. You willingly remain silent while they deceive others. Typical. Have you ever preached against "briders" in any of these camp meetings?
There’s a whole lot of “you” going on in that section. When a person makes blanket statements and accusations about another’s actions without knowledge of the same, especially when the actions of the accused are the exact opposite, it is considered....wait for it....stupid. Thanks for, again, doing a great deal to prove my position in this debate.

Now, for your education, I have addressed three pastors of which two are college presidents on the topics of “Landmarkism” and “Baptist Bride” teachings. I explained my position and why I did not believe their positions were correct. Even though we agreed to disagree on subject, we continued to be friendly with one another but I have not been invited to preach at any of their meetings. Since this topic is not a fundamental of the faith, so there is no need for separation.

christundivided said:
At last, you embrace Citadel's argument.... I call myself an American because I am a US citizen. I assume you were born a IFB?
It is not just Citadel’s argument. It is a valid example if it is taken in by a rational mind that is not twisted with hatred. The analogy is that we are born into the Body of Christ much like the human race. You didn’t pick were you were born again did you? We believers are all in Him but have different affiliations and doctrinal leanings. Yes, I happen to believe that being identified as an American is the best of all human conditions on the planet. You can disagree and leave if you wish. Yes, I believe that being an IFB, as defined and practiced historically, is a very good place to be. You didn’t and left.

Seriously, what church do you attend? You sound like Church of Christ. You know, that group started by Campbell, a Baptist pastor who decided that the church needed to be unified under his vision of the restored ....oh, never mind.

christundivided said:
No heroes? How can you claim a tradition without holding to "heroes" of that tradition? In the good Christian tradition, I claim heroes in Paul, Peter, John, Apollos, and etc.
I know this is getting hard to follow but I didn’t say I no heroes. I said “I have no ‘heroes of the faith’ except those who have finished the race well”. That would include Paul, Peter, John (both of them), Apollos, and etc. I think that our “etc.” are more alike than you would care to admit.

christundivided said:
There are many that have shared in what you call my "subjective personal experience". Mine isn't an isolated example. If I had witnessed to what others had said, you'd say I'm going on "second hand" information. If I witness to personal experience, you say its subjective and isolated. So predictable. It reminds me of ....
Many is a relative term. You are the one making broad generalizations and casting stereotypes about a large group within the Body of Christ. You are also telling me what I would say before I say it. What I am asking for, and what you are not giving, is proof or substantial evidence of validity. It is clear that you certainly can’t prove that all IFBs should be considered stupid so you have run off on tangents trying to prove they are “systematic failures” while producing no credible argument of such. Since you won’t produce any data, I will give mine.

I have been in close to 300 of the 8,500 - 10,000+ IFB churches in the US in the past 38 years. My direct knowledge only covers less than 3% of all IFBs. Of that 3%, I can say that I have solid knowledge of about 50 of those churches. Of that amount, I would say maybe 25% could be, somehow at some remote level, placed in your cookie cutter. Extrapolate those figures across of all the IFB movement if you wish. And as small as my sample is, yours, I understand, is much smaller.

I’m saying that there are far more good than bad (in the broadest spectrum of the word) within the IFBs. There is a commonly accepted truth that bad news gets more publicity than the good news. Since it is convenient for your position, no matter how weak it is, that is all you care to hear.

christundivided said:
Did I hit a nerve? Why does all these failures keep rising among you? I'm sorry brother, you know you're living like "kings". God warned Israel when they desired a "king".... and He let them have exactly what they wanted. "Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
No, you just keep sinking to that low-life level thinking that repeating it over and over makes it true (ad nausea) and that particular subject does anger me.  If you really don’t see yourself broad brushing and stereotyping then your condition may indeed be pathological.

I, and all those I know within the IFB movement here in my area, do not live as “kings”. We have a congregational polity with church constitutions and bylaws that prevent abuses. I have no idea of who gives what to our church because I do not see the giving records. I cannot sign a church check without someone else’s approval. I have elders who serve as deacons and trustees that keep everything decent and in order. We do background checks on those who teach and supervise minors. We have an unrelenting operational policy that mandates two people (at least one adult that is background checked) be in the room to supervise minors at all times. And, to be clear, most of this was in place before I came here 11 years ago.

We do this for the reason I came to this forum in the first place - accountability. It is clear you very little about how the majority of IFBs operate.

christundivided said:
Green Beret said:
Tell you what, you find me the Church of Jack Hyles or the Congregation of John R. Rice and I'll accept your application of this passage to the point here. We are talking about the term baptist as used in IFB, not the "camp" mentality that was rampant in a goodly portion of the IFB movement some decades ago. Even David Cloud recognizes that is finally over (well, mostly).
So, let me get this straight. You claim you're descendants of those who were called Baptist. Somehow, you then claim you are not following those that were called "Baptist"? How does that work exactly? I never said one thing about Hyles or Rice. Not one thing. You're missing the forest for the trees.
Well, you should have said something about Hyles because Matthew Ward found this and let me know about it:

http://hylesbaptist.com/

There are some in every part of the body of Christ. Ours may have a few more than others in this department but it is still very much the exception and not the rule. We are believers in Christ that strive to follow Him. We were called Christians by unbelievers and Baptist by our detractors. While we should not be considered stupid as a whole, there are certainly some in our ranks who are (see example in the link above).

christundivided said:
Oh but it is a title. It is a badge to wear. Peter under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost wrote,
1Pe 4:16  Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.
No, it is not just a title or badge that we wear. It is something that those call us who live our live following Christ. Are you a Christian because you call yourself one and wear the title? And all God’s people said, “No!” Let me repeat for emphasis since your favorite debate tactic, next to arguing from the specific to the general, is ad nauseam:

“We have always placed Christ above all else. In the fullness of His glory and by His grace we strive to live our lives in a way which will honor Him. We don't just blithely "call ourselves by our Master's name" but understand and believe that His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through the knowledge of Him who called us (read the rest of 2 Peter 1). To that end, we give Him the glory when someone calls us "of Christ" or a Christian. Christian is not a title or badge to wear, it is a life to live and, by His grace, we strive to do so.”

christundivided said:
Sorry. Peter didn't say.
1Pe 4:16  Yet if any man suffer as a Baptist, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.
Are you saying Baptists, as a whole due to doctrine or practice, are not Christians?

christundivided said:
I read "baptist" on your signs. I hear about "baptist" in your services. You form "baptist fellowships". You filter everything through the "lens" of being baptist. Everything. Even when you preach "Christ".... you preach it the "baptist way".
To quote Dr. Davis, the EVP of my college, “You sir, are a keen observer of the obvious.”

Such build up. Such drama. Yes, and we have Baptist bathrooms and it is even rumored that we have a Baptist Cave where our dynamic duo fight apostasy (in their off hours) using their caped crusader costumes - “Quick Street Preacher, to the Baptist Mobile!” Give me a break.

Does that somehow make us non-believers?
 
We are Independent Fundamental Baptist. The Presbyterians, Methodist, Southern Baptist, Assembly of God, Church of God, etc. all have their versions of the same. Now why should that observation be considered in a debate asking the pointed question “Should Independent Fundamental Baptist be Considered Stupid?” That’s right. It shouldn’t. Now, with your twisted logic, you think it proves some perceived “lack of focus” when in reality, it does the exact opposite in the minds of those who can think clearly and understand simple church history.

In case you are counting, that’s another point against you.

christundivided said:
Also, Why did you ignore my "Sabbath" example? Did it hit home? Do you preach against the grass mowers and then go out on Sunday and fill your belly at the local restaurant?
No. I ignored it because it was.....wait for it.....stupid. Here, let me try to sound like you:

Why you didn’t ask me about my M247 Sgt. York DIVAD example? Did it hit home in proving your misuse of the term systematic? Man, you sound like a seventh grader.

But, since you insist, let me nail you to the floor, again. You really make it easy because you take your limited, specific experience and try to apply it to everyone in the population of an entire spectrum of believers.

First, in my 38 years as a member of IFB churches, I have never once heard a pastor or evangelist preach or teach (got to cover all the bases lest you waste time majoring on the minors) against grass mowers on the Sabbath, Bless Gawd! Maybe you went to a closet 7th Day Baptist Church that claimed to be IFB that wanted to protect the Sabbath (we had one of those down here once) or perhaps a Two Seed in the Spirit Predestinarian Baptist that was constantly trying to prove they were more separated from the world than Bob Jones University. Who knows, in North Carolina, it could happen. I can’t answer to your specific example because I never experienced it.

Second, every pastor I have ever had taught the exact same thing in regards to church attendance. Unless you were gainfully employed, every believer should gather themselves together to exhort one another as often as possible and even more so as they saw the Lord’s return was near, unlike those who do not (Heb. 10:25). Have I ever heard a pastor preach or teach in the defense of that principle? Absolutely. The vast majority of the time it was from a positive perspective. Sorry your experience wasn’t the same.

christundivided said:
1. Pride
2. Hypocrisy
3. Loss of Focus.
I believe the evidence is mounting. Make your own judgement.
Yes, the evidence is mounting that you have nothing substantial to support the positive position to the premise of this debate. As to making a judgement (sic) in regards to your three point demagoguery, I offer the following:

Pride - you have cornered the market on it. You are right and everyone else is wrong. The very spirit you condemn is spewing out of you like a fire hose. You have the same attitude you condemn in the IFBs you “left”. And, strangely enough, that spirit you thought you left behind didn’t leave you. You are so short sighted that you can’t see it. That’s a loss of focus. You suffer from such a severe form of spiritual myopia that you spend large amounts of your time on an Internet forum trying to argue your way to credibility with anonymous people. Hypocrisy - the one point that could have yielded a constructive debate, even though it would be very hard to connect to the scope of the original premise, you messed up by stereotyping.

No, brother, the vast majority of Independent Fundamental Baptists aren’t stupid. Soon we will take a poll on it and see what the forum says but I think in your heart you know I’m right. That’s why you tried to change the debate’s subject before we even started.

Just because we, as a whole, are not stupid doesn’t mean that there aren’t things we need to change or improve. There are things to which we need to pay close attention and make sure we are walking in the Lord’s power with the guidance of His Word and Spirit. The area where God has blessed me to serve, we have seen most of these things addressed over the last 24 years but there is always room for improvement and stretching.

Since I have only two replies left, and I think the antagonist point of view has been sufficiently defended, I will spend my next two posts explaining my personal perspective and summarizing my position instead of taking up so much time going tit for tat with you.
 
C

christundivided

Guest
Green Beret said:
No, I didn't ignore half of what you said. I ignored more than half because it is a terrible exegesis. I stand on the facts that Paul was addressing. I didn’t say it could only be applied to the proto-Gnostic “Asian” Jews who were teaching “their philosophy” and not the Word of God. I said that is what Paul was addressing so we should be careful to understand it in its historic context, to whom it was written and why. Again I implore you, go do some studying. However, I don't think you will since it seems you are so steeped in your pride. I'll offer just one of the commentaries on the passage:
Here is the rest of your quote. I'll let other judge your dishonesty. You excluded the verse from consideration.

If anything, the IFB that I have known and been around the past 38 years have proclaimed His gospel. They have not formed a Gnostic type philosophy that is contained in creeds or institutes that only the initiated understand.

Green Beret said:
Really? Let’s see who’s right.

Merriam-Webster Definition:
Conflate - (transitive verb)
1. a. to bring together fuse b.:  confuse
2:  to combine (as two readings of a text) into a composite whole

Who’s right? Yeah, I thought so. Me. You lose another point.
No. You lose. I term is properly understood within our formal debate setting. Your definition is inadequate.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflation

Green Beret said:
I’ll point out to you what every other poster here has on your whacked-out original thread - we believe and practice a church polity that is independent. The local, called out assembly biblically polices itself. When it doesn’t, we point out the error and we don’t run and hide.
Sure you do. You're trying to police me. You're trying to "police" this topic. You're being entirely dishonest.

Green Beret said:
I, unlike you it seems, was being honest. That percentage is based on an accurate estimate of my area. I don’t twist or, worse yet, refuse to provide numbers. I would also reasonably assume that the ratio is lower in some areas and slightly higher in others.
You quoted 20 percent. You said it was a small minority. You then proceed to talk about your honesty without once dealing with the facts I called you on. 20 percent isn't a small minority.  Deal with the logical positions of the debate.

Green Beret said:
There’s a whole lot of “you” going on in that section. When a person makes blanket statements and accusations about another’s actions without knowledge of the same, especially when the actions of the accused are the exact opposite, it is considered....wait for it....stupid. Thanks for, again, doing a great deal to prove my position in this debate.

Now, for your education, I have addressed three pastors of which two are college presidents on the topics of “Landmarkism” and “Baptist Bride” teachings. I explained my position and why I did not believe their positions were correct. Even though we agreed to disagree on subject, we continued to be friendly with one another but I have not been invited to preach at any of their meetings. Since this topic is not a fundamental of the faith, so there is no need for separation.
I asked about camp meetings? Can you read? Sure, you might have discussions about it behind closed doors. Yet, its another thing entirely to actually challenge the issue publicly. Sir. You are a coward. A coward to say its not a "fundamental of the faith". No lie is of the Truth. A lie that promotes one believer in Christ above another believer in Christ. This is a "fundamental of the faith". Just because you're a coward, doesn't mean everyone should be like you "pastor".

1Ti 5:21  I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.

Green Beret said:
It is not just Citadel’s argument. It is a valid example if it is taken in by a rational mind that is not twisted with hatred. The analogy is that we are born into the Body of Christ much like the human race. You didn’t pick were you were born again did you? We believers are all in Him but have different affiliations and doctrinal leanings. Yes, I happen to believe that being identified as an American is the best of all human conditions on the planet. You can disagree and leave if you wish. Yes, I believe that being an IFB, as defined and practiced historically, is a very good place to be. You didn’t and left.
Funny.... You take a snippet of what I wrote and pretend you're answering my charge.....

The issue is not just what you choose for yourself. Its what you choose for others. Its what you teach. You believe your choice is the right choice... not just for you... but everyone. Its not a preference. Its a doctrine to you. A doctrine that is at the core of everything you teach and believe.

Green Beret said:
Seriously, what church do you attend? You sound like Church of Christ. You know, that group started by Campbell, a Baptist pastor who decided that the church needed to be unified under his vision of the restored ....oh, never mind.
I haven't tried to restore anything. I'm just calling a nut on his own stupidity. I've got nothing to sell. No crowd to please. No offering to collect. No people to make "merchandise of."

Green Beret said:
I know this is getting hard to follow but I didn’t say I no heroes. I said “I have no ‘heroes of the faith’ except those who have finished the race well”. That would include Paul, Peter, John (both of them), Apollos, and etc. I think that our “etc.” are more alike than you would care to admit.
We are not the same....I claim no modern heroes. None. The apostasy of the early church has left the landscape... BARREN. Continue your list with all your nice IFB heroes who haven't fallen.

Green Beret said:
Many is a relative term. You are the one making broad generalizations and casting stereotypes about a large group within the Body of Christ. You are also telling me what I would say before I say it. What I am asking for, and what you are not giving, is proof or substantial evidence of validity. It is clear that you certainly can’t prove that all IFBs should be considered stupid so you have run off on tangents trying to prove they are “systematic failures” while producing no credible argument of such. Since you won’t produce any data, I will give mine.
Dishonest..... I've went by your own numbers. I haven't introduced any numbers. Your sole defense is based on an argument that I haven't even made. My arguments are based on your beliefs. They are self evident. Self identifying.

Green Beret said:
I have been in close to 300 of the 8,500 - 10,000+ IFB churches in the US in the past 38 years. My direct knowledge only covers less than 3% of all IFBs. Of that 3%, I can say that I have solid knowledge of about 50 of those churches. Of that amount, I would say maybe 25% could be, somehow at some remote level, placed in your cookie cutter. Extrapolate those figures across of all the IFB movement if you wish. And as small as my sample is, yours, I understand, is much smaller.
You don't know the hearts of men nor do you know how the very nature of a particular teachings affects a particular person. I could care less if it ACTUALLY, NEGATIVELY affects 10 percent or 90 percent of those who believe the teaching. I have a problem with the teaching itself. Most of those you reference aren't doing anything but standing on the side lines taking their marching orders from someone else. Overall percentages are skewed by those in power.

Green Beret said:
I’m saying that there are far more good than bad (in the broadest spectrum of the word) within the IFBs. There is a commonly accepted truth that bad news gets more publicity than the good news. Since it is convenient for your position, no matter how weak it is, that is all you care to hear.
I never judge the truth by some groups acceptance of said truth. Nor do I judge right and wrong by the overall good done by others. I'm certain Jesus has a higher standard.

Green Beret said:
I, and all those I know within the IFB movement here in my area, do not live as “kings”. We have a congregational polity with church constitutions and bylaws that prevent abuses. I have no idea of who gives what to our church because I do not see the giving records. I cannot sign a church check without someone else’s approval. I have elders who serve as deacons and trustees that keep everything decent and in order. We do background checks on those who teach and supervise minors. We have an unrelenting operational policy that mandates two people (at least one adult that is background checked) be in the room to supervise minors at all times. And, to be clear, most of this was in place before I came here 11 years ago.
All fine and good. When was the last time you didn't get your way? Check and balances mean nothing when no one will stand against the other. IFB churches are full of "yes men". I could tell you many stories of such abuse. They all claimed to have checks and balances in place. Speak up "king". When was the last time you didn't get something your way?

I've heard deacon after deacon say... " I don't care if he is wrong. I'm with him".

Green Beret said:
We do this for the reason I came to this forum in the first place - accountability. It is clear you very little about how the majority of IFBs operate.
I don't know who you're talking about. You claim you're all independent and so much different than one another.... and then turn around and claim you're all alike. My head is spinning. You want to claim what you see as good about your "group" (well. One minute its a group and the next it really isn't) and not take any responsibility for when its bad. Typical IFB.

Green Beret said:
Well, you should have said something about Hyles because Matthew Ward found this and let me know about it:

http://hylesbaptist.com/

There are some in every part of the body of Christ. Ours may have a few more than others in this department but it is still very much the exception and not the rule. We are believers in Christ that strive to follow Him. We were called Christians by unbelievers and Baptist by our detractors. While we should not be considered stupid as a whole, there are certainly some in our ranks who are (see example in the link above).
Conflation. Logical fallacy. You have predetermined that Baptist and Christian can be intermixed as to lose any meaningful distinction between the two entirely different terms.

Also, No "distractor" is calling you a Baptist. You are calling yourself one. I have mentioned this multiple times and you refuse to give any meaningful answer to the charge.

Green Beret said:
“We have always placed Christ above all else. In the fullness of His glory and by His grace we strive to live our lives in a way which will honor Him. We don't just blithely "call ourselves by our Master's name" but understand and believe that His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through the knowledge of Him who called us (read the rest of 2 Peter 1). To that end, we give Him the glory when someone calls us "of Christ" or a Christian. Christian is not a title or badge to wear, it is a life to live and, by His grace, we strive to do so.”
Just for sake of argument. Forget "Christ Above" for a minute. How about "Christ Alone? Do you preach "Christ Alone"? Do you think Christ enjoys being preached right along side being "IFB"?

Does He share His glory with another?

Green Beret said:
To quote Dr. Davis, the EVP of my college, “You sir, are a keen observer of the obvious.”

Such build up. Such drama. Yes, and we have Baptist bathrooms and it is even rumored that we have a Baptist Cave where our dynamic duo fight apostasy (in their off hours) using their caped crusader costumes - “Quick Street Preacher, to the Baptist Mobile!” Give me a break.
I know its a joke to you. Answer my charge. You say Christ is above everything. Well... He certainly isn't on your signs. You certainly don't have a "why I'm a Christian" doctrinal statements. You should amend your statement.
 
Green Beret said:
We are Independent Fundamental Baptist. The Presbyterians, Methodist, Southern Baptist, Assembly of God, Church of God, etc. all have their versions of the same.
What a mistake. You actually used the term "version". Please don't tell me you're going to treat a "version" like the "real thing". I know you people have done such for years with the good old KJV. May I say you're all pretty stupid for what you believe in KJVOism.

Green Beret said:
Now why should that observation be considered in a debate asking the pointed question “Should Independent Fundamental Baptist be Considered Stupid?” That’s right. It shouldn’t. Now, with your twisted logic, you think it proves some perceived “lack of focus” when in reality, it does the exact opposite in the minds of those who can think clearly and understand simple church history.
Lets review.

1. You make no claims of Baptist origin in John The Baptist.
2. You finally say you have a version of Christianity just like many others.
3. You claim your enemies called you Baptist in the early 1600
4. You think because someone called you "baptist", that you should keep calling yourselves "baptist".
5. You now call yourselves "Baptist" and you're "proud" of it.

Sounds perfectly logical. A simple understanding of church history has told the tale.

Can I go to the adult playground now? I'm tired of this "merry go round...."

Green Beret said:
But, since you insist, let me nail you to the floor, again. You really make it easy because you take your limited, specific experience and try to apply it to everyone in the population of an entire spectrum of believers.

First, in my 38 years as a member of IFB churches, I have never once heard a pastor or evangelist preach or teach (got to cover all the bases lest you waste time majoring on the minors) against grass mowers on the Sabbath, Bless Gawd! Maybe you went to a closet 7th Day Baptist Church that claimed to be IFB that wanted to protect the Sabbath (we had one of those down here once) or perhaps a Two Seed in the Spirit Predestinarian Baptist that was constantly trying to prove they were more separated from the world than Bob Jones University. Who knows, in North Carolina, it could happen. I can’t answer to your specific example because I never experienced it.
You must have grown up under a rock. I could post many quotes from IFBs about working on "Sunday"....but I'll let other judge whether its part of old time IFB doctrine or not. ( I had several quotes from IFBs ready concerning "Sabbath" keeping.... .but I think they deserve their own post.

Green Beret said:
 
Second, every pastor I have ever had taught the exact same thing in regards to church attendance. Unless you were gainfully employed, every believer should gather themselves together to exhort one another as often as possible and even more so as they saw the Lord’s return was near, unlike those who do not (Heb. 10:25). Have I ever heard a pastor preach or teach in the defense of that principle? Absolutely. The vast majority of the time it was from a positive perspective. Sorry your experience wasn’t the same.
Sure you have. I applaud your spin. Barack would be proud.

Green Beret said:
Pride - you have cornered the market on it. You are right and everyone else is wrong. The very spirit you condemn is spewing out of you like a fire hose. You have the same attitude you condemn in the IFBs you “left”. And, strangely enough, that spirit you thought you left behind didn’t leave you. You are so short sighted that you can’t see it. That’s a loss of focus. You suffer from such a severe form of spiritual myopia that you spend large amounts of your time on an Internet forum trying to argue your way to credibility with anonymous people. Hypocrisy - the one point that could have yielded a constructive debate, even though it would be very hard to connect to the scope of the original premise, you messed up by stereotyping.
Do you think you're right about me? Do you think you're right about this subject?

Doesn't this mean you think you're right and I'm wrong about it??? Geez.....Such arguments are empty and self serving. Not to the mention the fact its exhibits the classic logical fallacy of "Argumentum ad populum".

Green Beret said:
No, brother, the vast majority of Independent Fundamental Baptists aren’t stupid. Soon we will take a poll on it and see what the forum says but I think in your heart you know I’m right. That’s why you tried to change the debate’s subject before we even started.

Just because we, as a whole, are not stupid doesn’t mean that there aren’t things we need to change or improve. There are things to which we need to pay close attention and make sure we are walking in the Lord’s power with the guidance of His Word and Spirit. The area where God has blessed me to serve, we have seen most of these things addressed over the last 24 years but there is always room for improvement and stretching.
"Fallacy of Self-Exclusion".

Green Beret said:
Since I have only two replies left, and I think the antagonist point of view has been sufficiently defended, I will spend my next two posts explaining my personal perspective and summarizing my position instead of taking up so much time going tit for tat with you.
Do what you want to do. I think I'll provide more evidence.
 

Green Beret

New member
Registered
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Messages
333
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Sorry for the lag in the response, but, unlike others, I actually have things to do in the real world.

Now, let’s sum up for those who glanced over your absurd last response and, had they the opportunity to do so, would have no doubt typed “tl;dr” as their response.

Summary:

You deny every point with no facts or data to support said denials.
You deny the clear definition of a term you have misused.
You still can’t understand simple church history.
You desperately misuse debate terms trying to....I don’t know, sound knowledgeable? Sad.
You confuse this exchange with a real, formal debate (which makes me laugh in your general direction).
You don’t understand real courage so you have to yell coward to cover your own lack of it.
You misapply scripture with the seeming skill and dull intellect of a Jehovah’s Witness.
You vainly promise to “provide more evidence” were you have offered no solid form of it yet.

You chose to open this debate entitled “Should Independent Fundamental Baptists be Considered Stupid?” with a simplistic three point outline that provided no substance for the premise of the debate. Instead, it was used just as intended - a spring board for demagoguery and subjective rhetoric. Let me repeat my responses on the “Big Three” you mostly ignored:

Pride - you have cornered the market on it. You are right and everyone else is wrong. The very spirit you condemn is spewing out of you like a fire hose. You have the same attitude you condemn in the IFBs you “left”. And, strangely enough, that spirit you thought you left behind didn’t leave you. And, to make this as clear to you as possible since you have chosen to be obtuse, pride does not necessarily make you stupid, it does, the vast majority of the time, make you look stupid.

Hypocrisy - the one point that may have been substantive to the debate’s premise you wasted with stereotyping. Trying to argue something from the specific to the general and say that the failures of the “IFB heroes” (whoever they are) are systematic. Answer me CU, if you dare, when leaders fall in any part of the Body of Christ, is that a sign of systematic failure?

In the past 20 years here in my area of Florida, Eight pastors or executive ministry leaders were removed from this Christian church group for adultery, theft, violation of the RICO act and child molestation. Five pastors and assistant pastors have been removed from the ministry of this Christian church group due to adultery, child pornography, insurance fraud or child molestation. Four or five ministers from this Christian church group for adultery, child molestation, embezzlement and homosexuality (that’s why there is an ‘or’ in this category because the homosexuality is being contested within their group). Two pastors were removed from this Christian church group for improper conduct that included solicitation of a prostitute and improper use of funds of a 501-C-3 organization. Just some solid statistics of which I have personal knowledge for you to contemplate since you provide none of your own. BTW, all of these groups are officially recognized as Christian by the State of Florida Division of Corporations as stated in their constitutions or by laws. Any sweeping generalizations you would like to make?

Loss of Focus - which seems to mean to you that any group of believers who go by any nomenclature other than what you think is appropriate is anathema, Maranatha. You have been so thoroughly beaten on this point that even your straw men are making straw men. You should really stop but, because I know your pathological mind won’t let you, I’ll ask the following:

What about the Church of Christ?
What about the Disciples of Christ?
What about the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints?
What about the church you attend. What is it called? Are you afraid to say?

So, to wrap up the summary, I’ll repeat my position statement which you have ignored completely:

Your original premise for this debate was that you had the evidence to prove “Why Independant Fundamental Baptist are Stupid” (leaving the original misspelling and subject verb disagreement intact for emphasis).

Your OP was quickly recognized, by the vast majority of those who replied, to be what it is - a sweeping generalization or stereotyping. Mind you, I am not speaking of your evidence or arguments but your base premise. It cannot be proven. It is an invalid premise and therefore cannot be logically debated.

However, more than few times, you challenged others to formally debate you on that topic. I accepted knowing it was a logical fallacy. You tried to change the subject completely to "The value of being a (sic) Independent Fundamental Baptist".

That is what is known as intellectual dishonesty. You are intellectually dishonest. You cannot prove the premise. You have not tried to prove the premise. You rattle about on any tangent you think will allow you to verbalize your twisted opinions but, just like a slimy politician, you won’t address the topic.

My last reply will amplify my antagonist position that you made so easy to prove. I don't think anyone reading this is willing to hold their breath waiting for your "evidence".
 
C

christundivided

Guest
Sorry for the long lag in responding, I figured I'd be like others.... and actually wait for while to respond

I don't know why you think this isn't part of the "real world". If this isn't part of the real world..... then why are you here? In typical IFB fashion... you've created a supposed distinction between those who participate and those who participle. Obviously, you're in the "group" that's most pleasing to God. Whichever group... that might be.

Green Beret said:
Pride - you have cornered the market on it. You are right and everyone else is wrong. The very spirit you condemn is spewing out of you like a fire hose. You have the same attitude you condemn in the IFBs you “left”. And, strangely enough, that spirit you thought you left behind didn’t leave you. And, to make this as clear to you as possible since you have chosen to be obtuse, pride does not necessarily make you stupid, it does, the vast majority of the time, make you look stupid.
It really get tiring when someone makes such a silly argument. Yes. I think IFBs are very PROUD. I suppose I am thus PROUD, because I pointed it out... .and think I'm right about it. Geez.....

Green Beret said:
Hypocrisy - the one point that may have been substantive to the debate’s premise you wasted with stereotyping. Trying to argue something from the specific to the general and say that the failures of the “IFB heroes” (whoever they are) are systematic. Answer me CU, if you dare, when leaders fall in any part of the Body of Christ, is that a sign of systematic failure?
You ignored most of what I've said concerning the issue. I said none of you live lives that you demand of others. This has nothing to do with a certain percentage of those who fall.

How many fell in the Body of Christ detailed in the NT? How does this compare to IFBdom today? This called apostasy. You're not immune and I never said that you were alone. Again. You're justifying bad behavior by pointing at other... bad behavior. Argumentum ad populum

Green Beret said:
In the past 20 years here in my area of Florida, Eight pastors or executive ministry leaders were removed from this Christian church group for adultery, theft, violation of the RICO act and child molestation. Five pastors and assistant pastors have been removed from the ministry of this Christian church group due to adultery, child pornography, insurance fraud or child molestation. Four or five ministers from this Christian church group for adultery, child molestation, embezzlement and homosexuality (that’s why there is an ‘or’ in this category because the homosexuality is being contested within their group). Two pastors were removed from this Christian church group for improper conduct that included solicitation of a prostitute and improper use of funds of a 501-C-3 organization. Just some solid statistics of which I have personal knowledge for you to contemplate since you provide none of your own. BTW, all of these groups are officially recognized as Christian by the State of Florida Division of Corporations as stated in their constitutions or by laws. Any sweeping generalizations you would like to make?
When I appeal to "Christianity", my appeal isn't dependent on how some "Christians" act today. My appeal is to historical "Christianity" witnessed in the Scriptures. Much like you appeal to the historic "Baptist faith". You're just aiming LOW. Right into ground.

Green Beret said:
Loss of Focus - which seems to mean to you that any group of believers who go by any nomenclature other than what you think is appropriate is anathema, Maranatha. You have been so thoroughly beaten on this point that even your straw men are making straw men. You should really stop but, because I know your pathological mind won’t let you, I’ll ask the following:

What about the Church of Christ?
What about the Disciples of Christ?
What about the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints?
What about the church you attend. What is it called? Are you afraid to say?
I attend various churches. I haven't been a particular member of a particular church for many years. Its been so long, I don't really remember exactly. I'd say it been over 20 years. I haven't said one thing about "anathema, Maranatha". God knows His own. I don't.

Green Beret said:
My last reply will amplify my antagonist position that you made so easy to prove. I don't think anyone reading this is willing to hold their breath waiting for your "evidence".
I've dealt with your beliefs. You've attempted to make it about "percentages" of this and "percentages" of that. I've dealt with beliefs that are common among you.... or beliefs that you tolerate and refuse to deal with publicly for fear of reprisal.

I'll wait for your last reply. It was and it still remains my intent to provoke IFBs to reconsider your positions.
 

Green Beret

New member
Registered
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Messages
333
Reaction score
0
Points
0
christundivided said:
I don't know why you think this isn't part of the "real world".
Well, since you don’t even recognize the premise that you originally postulated for a debate, I don’t think I’ll have much success getting you to understand why participation on an Internet forum as an anonymous poster is considered virtual as opposed to real.

christundivided said:
You ignored most of what I've said concerning the issue. I said none of you live lives that you demand of others. This has nothing to do with a certain percentage of those who fall.
Says who? Where’s your proof that “we demand”, as a whole (your premise, not mine), any such thing? Verifiable facts have everything to do with refuting absurd, sweeping generalizations. That’s why you don’t have any. Of course, just like in every one of your responses thus far, your stereotyping had nothing to do with the debate topic so I just want to point out (again) that it’s off topic.

christundivided said:
How many fell in the Body of Christ detailed in the NT? How does this compare to IFBdom today? This called apostasy. You're not immune and I never said that you were alone. Again. You're justifying bad behavior by pointing at other... bad behavior. Argumentum ad populum
Again I quote Inigo Montoya (because with you it is easy and fun), "I don't think that word means what you think it means". Explain exactly what bad behavior I am justifying by “pointing at other... bad behavior”?  Don’t bother, you can’t. I am not justifying bad behavior at all. I stand against it. If anything, I am attempting to get you to recognize an objective truth that all IFBs are not as you say. Not even close. It seems you are the one jumping on the bandwagon saying that IFBs (as a whole or majority) are stupid, defective, bad or wrong in some way. You argue from the specific to the general, stereotype and can’t even use basic debate terms correctly. And it was you that postulated that IFBs are stupid.

christundivided said:
When I appeal to "Christianity", my appeal isn't dependent on how some "Christians" act today. My appeal is to historical "Christianity" witnessed in the Scriptures. Much like you appeal to the historic "Baptist faith". You're just aiming LOW. Right into ground.
There you go again, Jimmy, making assertions and assumptions. Your “appeal”, as you so quaintly call it, was to try to label an entire group of believers as stupid. I accepted your call to debate your premise and you have unceasingly engaged in intellectual dishonesty. My response to your red herrings and straw men has been much more substantial than it should have been. So, once again, I’ll bite a little bit to prove that point.

Show me where I have appealed to my “Baptist faith”. You can’t. I have said time and again that we are sinners saved by grace. We serve our risen Savior and do not elevate other saved sinners above him - whether they are from the 21st or the 1st century.

christundivided said:
I attend various churches. I haven't been a particular member of a particular church for many years. Its been so long, I don't really remember exactly. I'd say it been over 20 years. I haven't said one thing about "anathema, Maranatha". God knows His own. I don't.
You may not have used that specific term but your actions of berating and condemning brothers and sisters in Christ speaks volumes.

christundivided said:
I've dealt with your beliefs. You've attempted to make it about "percentages" of this and "percentages" of that. I've dealt with beliefs that are common among you.... or beliefs that you tolerate and refuse to deal with publicly for fear of reprisal.
I’m going to be forced to use the term because it is the only one that fits. You are lying. You have not dealt with one of my beliefs nor have you dealt with any beliefs that are common among us. You have done nothing but acted just like the very people you say you disdain this entire exchange.

christundivided said:
I'll wait for your last reply. It was and it still remains my intent to provoke IFBs to reconsider your positions.
That’s convenient. To say that your intent somehow disconnects you from your statements and actions is the refuge of a dishonest, socialist liberal. Something I know you say you aren't.

No, Sir. You made sweeping generalizations, bloviated and got pegged. THE END.

To close out my argument for the antagonist position of this debate, that is that the answer to the question, “Should Independent Fundamental Baptists be Considered Stupid?” is no, I offer my personal testimony and experience. It is only fair since that is all my opponent has offered during this debate.

As a young man growing up with a father who was an atheist that hated organized religion and a mother that was a self proclaimed “Hard Shell Southern Baptist”, I was confused to say the least. My father worked hard to imprint his value system on us while my mother was mostly passive. She didn’t attend church that often, smoked cigarettes, drank a variety of alcoholic beverages to excess and could more than hold her own in a vulgarity contest with my father (who, for context, was a Marine who fought in WWII and Korea). She did however convince dad to enforce a family policy that declared we had to attend church, at least when she went, until we were 12. After that, we were allowed to choose which path to take in regards to religion and my parents promised to honor it. It doesn’t take too much imagination as to which path we chose. Like my older brother and sister before me, I went the path of the “intellectual atheists”.

By the second semester of my freshman year in high school, I was the modern dichotomy of an enlightened teenager as defined by the 70’s culture. I was taking advanced courses, on the chess team, expert marksman on the JROTC rifle team and was a member of the debate club. During the weekend, and any other time possible, I hung out with my friends and abused as many controlled substances that we could get our hands on. While I was not a drug addict, I did abuse illegal drugs and alcohol on more than a few occasions. It was during this time that I clashed with my biology teacher, Mr. Jefferson Powell, in the preparation for a debate. I was given the unsavory role of having to oppose “the fact” of evolution by the debate club sponsor who was a history and economics teacher. He knew it would be torture for me but he stressed that any good debater could argue both sides of a logical premise. He also knew Mr. Powell was a Christian because they would argue now and then about religion and politics.

Instead of being the boring and dreadful assignment I thought it would be, it became a journey that would lead me in directions I had never imagined. Mr. Powell did not give me the quick facts and silver bullets that I wanted for the debate. When I asked questions, he would answer with questions. When I couldn't answer the questions, he would give me material to read and told me to come back and discuss it with him before or after school. One of the items he gave me was “Speculations and Experiments Related to Theories on the Origins of Life: A Critique”. It was written by Duane T. Gish, Ph.D (a fundamental Baptist) in 1972 and it opened my eyes to a whole new world of information. I still have it today.

One of my dad’s favorite movies was Inherit the Wind. He made sure we watched it more than once for effect. He constantly drilled us so we would adopt that movie’s caricaturized view of those weak minded, Bible thumpers. It worked. That is how I saw Christians. They were superstitious and ignorant fools that were being used as tools by those that wished to manipulate them for their money. But, in a short period of time, that started to change. I was now reading material that actually made sense. It was well written, researched and could not be honestly dismissed. I prepped well and the debate was a draw.

However, that information was tearing apart my worldview’s foundation that was constructed based on material produced by “respected authors” such as Sagan, Clarke, Heinlein, Asimov and a host of others whose writings I vociferously read. This soon made me a rebel looking for a cause since it shifted my opinion of evolution from being a fact to being some type of conspiracy fabricated by “the man” to keep the truth about our alien, perhaps even theistic, origins a secret. It wasn’t until I had a near death experience that I started to consider one of the seeming constant invitations to go to church given by a girl I knew since the first grade. She was attending a church that sent buses into my neighborhood to pick up kids and take them to church. They seemed to be an odd group of happy people. You could hear singing on those buses while they made their way through the streets of Birmingham’s West End.

I rode one of those buses on a Sunday morning to the Glen Iris Baptist Church. I expected to shock the crowd and disrupt the status quo because I had long hair and wore an army jacket with patches on it that included a hand shooting the bird, a peace sign that was indecent and several marijuana references. Instead of finding judgmental morons, I discovered people who were intelligent and genuinely cared for my soul. I felt welcomed. I decided to go back. They seemed to have something I did not. Over a period of six months, I asked questions and received reasoned answers. I heard the Gospel preached and came to a saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as my Savior just before entering the tenth grade.

In the next few years at GIB, I heard Dr. Henry Morris speak, John R. Rice preach, Ray Hart sing as well as experiencing many other blessings. My journey in Christ began with a great group of believers. I was taught to never quit learning and that you didn’t have to check your brain at the door when you exercised the faith that was given by grace.

As I continued to learn over the years, adjustments had to be made as maturity was gained. For example, there was a time that I followed Peter Ruckman’s teachings - after all, he has an earned doctorate from BJU. Through the grace of God being lived in the lives of those around me, I withdrew from Ruckman’s grasp even though it took me some time to get his poison out of my spiritual veins. The process began as I was mentored by the president of the Christian high school where I taught chemistry, biology and physics for three years. He held an earned Doctorate from Princeton Theological Seminary and, yes, he was a fundamentalist. He wasn’t when he entered but he was when he left. His doctoral thesis was on the Verbal Plenary Inspiration of Scripture. He earned an A on it.

Some years after that, when confronted with a situation involving a local pastor that was supporting David Hyles and all the baggage that went with it, I considered moving to another denomination. However, after learning all I could about them (doctrine, polity, philosophy of ministry, etc.), I made the decision to turn towards historic fundamentalism. I found many IFBs, as well as other groups, who were already there and a few more have come this way as well over the years. We are far from perfect down here where we serve but we do our very best to follow Christ and let Him work in and through us.

In my life, I have rubbed elbows with some very intelligent people in various collegiate settings, U.S. Army Special Forces, the education sector and the IT-Telecom industry. I can honestly say that the people with whom I have had the pleasure to know over the years in the IFB churches were I have been are among the best of the lot.

While it may not have been your particular experience, it has been mine and I don’t think I am in the minority.
 

Green Beret

New member
Registered
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Messages
333
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Well, CU abandoned ship without posting his last reply. It kind of feels like when the kid from down the street decided to quit before losing the game by taking his ball and running home without saying anything. Eventually, you'd run into that kid on the sidewalk or the lunch room at school where he would say something like, "We never finished the game so there wasn't a winner". Oh well, since there are no sidewalks or lunch rooms on the FFF (at least none of which I am aware), I'll settle for the posted opinions.

Ciao.
 

TimbauxRioux

Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
106
Reaction score
0
Points
16
I was the first person to vote.

In a debate, the loser can still come out looking pretty good by being respectful and not trying to pull any stunts. CU tangled with a smarter man, someone with no agenda other than to present the truth.

From the beginning....of course CU cluld not possibly have won with the point of the debate being what it was. He simply have no chance of proving his thesis.



Accusing the opponent of saying something he didn't, and claiming small victories that he did not actually win....CU not only lost the debate, he looked bad losing.

Now he is gone? Its a shame. ...but he will be back. Maybe a different name...but he will be back
 

HeDied4U

Active member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
2,561
Reaction score
9
Points
38
Age
56
Not saying this is what CU did, but it appears as if he tucked tail and ran. Too bad. While I didn't think he was winning the debate, it still would have been interesting to see his "closing arguments."
 

Green Beret

New member
Registered
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Messages
333
Reaction score
0
Points
0
HeDied4U said:
Not saying this is what CU did, but it appears as if he tucked tail and ran. Too bad. While I didn't think he was winning the debate, it still would have been interesting to see his "closing arguments."
Yeah, I was kind of wondering if he was sand bagging but, as the owl said in the tootsie pop commercial, "the world may never know".
 

16KJV11

Active member
Doctor
Joined
Jan 26, 2012
Messages
5,190
Reaction score
2
Points
38
CU has retreated to the 'other' FFF...
http://www.fundamentalforums.com/showthread.php?t=115505&p=2136531#post2136531

"I'd like to set a few things straight.

Yes. I deleted my account. Its rather long story as to why. In the end, I remembered something I've known for a long time. I have a very low tolerance for false doctrine. I imagine I will never actually be able to tolerate "Baptists" or "Calvinists" again. I've enjoyed interaction with many of you over the years and I'm a better person for it. Yet, I need to focus my time and efforts on other things. I know most of you will not care nor give it another thought. Enjoy your lives. May Christ's best be your pleasure.

To GB and the others that question why I did this before the end of the debate.... it had nothing to do with running away or realizing I had a losing hand. I never expected a single "Baptist" to vote for me nor did I really consider such. I wanted to provoke some of you to respond. I'm glad you did. I thought it might give pause to some of you. Yet, all it did was cause you to double down. To close the debate, I was going to do a short review in Galatians 5:8,9 and 2 Timothy 2:20-21

Gal 5:8 This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.
Gal 5:9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

2Ti 2:20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour.
2Ti 2:21 If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.

We all need to head these words. None of us "have arrived". Its the little "wrongs" in our lives...... that define us. Paul spoke of the things found in any "great house". Even the "best". Even the "grandest" house....... needs tending. We all can do better. We all can aim higher. We can all stop accepting the "clutter" in "our house". One of the best places to start..... is put Christ first. First in our doctrine. First in our affections. When we put Christ first...... I believe it it won't be long till our message is "Christ Alone"."
 

Green Beret

New member
Registered
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Messages
333
Reaction score
0
Points
0
16KJV11 said:
CU has retreated to the 'other' FFF...
http://www.fundamentalforums.com/showthread.php?t=115505&p=2136531#post2136531

"I'd like to set a few things straight.

Yes. I deleted my account. Its rather long story as to why. In the end, I remembered something I've known for a long time. I have a very low tolerance for false doctrine. I imagine I will never actually be able to tolerate "Baptists" or "Calvinists" again. I've enjoyed interaction with many of you over the years and I'm a better person for it. Yet, I need to focus my time and efforts on other things. I know most of you will not care nor give it another thought. Enjoy your lives. May Christ's best be your pleasure.

To GB and the others that question why I did this before the end of the debate.... it had nothing to do with running away or realizing I had a losing hand. I never expected a single "Baptist" to vote for me nor did I really consider such. I wanted to provoke some of you to respond. I'm glad you did. I thought it might give pause to some of you. Yet, all it did was cause you to double down. To close the debate, I was going to do a short review in Galatians 5:8,9 and 2 Timothy 2:20-21

Gal 5:8 This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.
Gal 5:9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

2Ti 2:20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour.
2Ti 2:21 If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.

We all need to head these words. None of us "have arrived". Its the little "wrongs" in our lives...... that define us. Paul spoke of the things found in any "great house". Even the "best". Even the "grandest" house....... needs tending. We all can do better. We all can aim higher. We can all stop accepting the "clutter" in "our house". One of the best places to start..... is put Christ first. First in our doctrine. First in our affections. When we put Christ first...... I believe it it won't be long till our message is "Christ Alone"."
Thanks for the update. Yeah, advancing to the rear is not a new tactic.

CU obviously had some issues that shaped his opinions and life. I'm not saying that all of his points were without merit. His approach and lack of intellectual integrity in addressing them defeated any purpose he may have had.

In the above post on the "flea bag forum" he states, "Its the little "wrongs" in our lives...... that define us". I say, yes, if you let them. It is much better not to live under the circumstances but above them by letting the power of Christ work effectually in you (II Peter 1:3). You do not have to be a perpetual victim but are the victor if you let that power work in and through you. Romans eight is a wonderful chapter of scripture and it is not just merely prose but it is power (Romans 8:34-37).

Too bad so many people have been negatively affected by the modern consumer oriented, commercial Christianity. It makes fleeing and finding fault the norm. It has been my experience that those that do such things usually become caustic critics with no answers to the cause of the problems. It is easy to sit around and piously watch for the next failure, revel in its occurrence, bombastically condemn everyone remotely connected to it and then conveniently say, when called to task, that you have no answers nor do you hold yourself up as an example to help solve the cause of the problem.

Ultimately, that's why posters like CU are not taken seriously. People are smart enough (yes, even IFBs) to see them for who they are and classify them as ineffectual, chronic whiners that want to ride their hobby horse and rage at the world passing them by. Most of the time, even they recognize the colossal waste of time they cause and move on.
 
T

.tim

Guest
Ultimately, that's why posters like CU are not taken seriously. People are smart enough (yes, even IFBs) to see them for who they are and classify them as ineffectual, chronic whiners that want to ride their hobby horse and rage at the world passing them by. Most of the time, even they recognize the colossal waste of time they cause and move on.

If not taken seriously ... CU did the right thing leaving.
 
Top