Is There Anything Good?

Discussion in 'Fundamental Baptist Forum' started by mrsmel, Jul 28, 2009.

  1. mrsmel

    mrsmel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am reading and learning things which are probably old hat to most of you, but have made my eyes widen as I learn. The only fundamentalism I ever knew of, for years and years (as an observer, not a part-I've not even been in Christian circles for most of my life) was of what I understand is known as the "militant separatist"-would that be "movement"?-fundamentalism. When I "came back", I didn't know where to start, so picked up kind of where I left off-Lester Roloff sermons online, which somehow led to Jack Hyles sermons online. I liked his preaching-though I don't live up to the standards he espouses, he makes me feel like I want to and should.
    Then my reading branches out-ie the Sharper Iron forums-and I discover that far from being the fundamentalist heros that I envisioned them to be, they are rather held in disregard these days by a group I think is called "young fundamentalists" because they didn't practice something called "expository" preaching (can you tell how ignorant I am?), and preached topical, or "springboard" sermons. I then read an article by Jack Hyles outlining how he approaches preparing a sermon, and preparing himself to preach it-it seems pretty impressive to me, but what do I know? All I know is the few sermons I've heard of his from the internet. Also, apparently they are somewhat disdained for the degrees of separation they practiced.

    I don't know-when I heard the preaching, though I was discomfited when I would hear them call an individual out right in the sermon, a person who was right there-actually, a bit shocked by it-I was still impressed by their strong conviction and seeming dedication to what was called "soul-winning"--I suppose that's the militant stand that's out of favor these days. But it also seems that what most-including myself-always recognised as "fundamentalism" was at its peak then, in terms of power and success of results and people at least attempting to truly be holy and separate. There is something grand and impressive about it, something dynamic and vital, moreso than the quieter, more scholarly bent that seems to be the trend now. If what Mr Hyles said in his article about his sermon preparation can be taken as fact, a good bit of scholarship-and prayer and searching of the Scriptures-went into it, he just wasn't much on scholarship for scholarship's sake. And probably even less so Brother Roloff.

    If it sounds like I have a dog in this hunt, I don't, other than possibly a rather nostalgic gratitude to Lester Roloff and the fundamentalist atmosphere that I knew from him. I'd never even heard of Jack Hyles until app a year ago. I've read the articles and threads about the mis-steps of this era of fundamentalism, and they make sense, yet---I'm still somehow impressed with these men and this era, in spite of what I learn.

    Sorry for the rather "stream-of-consciousness" post-I suppose I'm wishing that someone would have at least one good word to say these men and this era, that somehow impresses me in spite of the arguments against it and disdain for it in these days. Probably some kind of validation for my liking it, hoping there must at least one good thing that came from it :)
     
  2. mrsmel

    mrsmel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry all, I just did some searching of the archives and learned that this is a sticky wicket which has been kicked a lot already-didn't mean to stir the anthill (excuse my mixed metaphors:) ) Mods, if you'd like to delete this thread, that's fine. Sorry!
     
  3. Tom Butler

    Tom Butler
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    9,031
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not so fast mrsmel. Let's give the resident IFBs an opportunity to have their say.
     
  4. stilllearning

    stilllearning
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hello mrsmel and welcome

    Thank you for sharing your background.

    You know, I have never even heard, either of these men preach;
    All I know about them, is what I see in there converts.
    And sure enough the converts of Hyles, seem to make a bigger splash; but they have their problems.
    --------------------------------------------------
    But I noticed how you felt after hearing his preaching........
    I think that this was Hyles’ main problem: There was too much of “him” in his ministry.
    (If this had been the Holy Spirit, convicting you of these things, than you would not have been able to shrug them off, as easily as you did.)
    The Lord protected you from being ensnared by his legalism.

    The converts of Hyles, that I have come in contact with, all have the same problem.
    (They had been taught to labor in the flesh:)
    And although this may have some nice short-term results, in eternity it’s worthless.

    For me, "fundamentalism" is simply sticking to “the fundamentals of the Faith”, regardless of what others may be doing.
    --------------------------------------------------
    Now don’t get me wrong; Jack Hyles, probably preached the right Gospel, and I am not going to besmirch his memory in that area.

    But legalism is dangerous, in that it stunts people’s Spiritual growth.
     
  5. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jack Hyles has more problems than a typical 15th century Roman Catholic priest in my opinion.
    He was very legalistic, very stuck on himself.
    I have seen people almost worship him.

    As for fundamentalism, the term no longer connotes it's dictionary definition.

    What started as a reaction to liberalism has become an extremists movement of making mountains out of molehills.

    For instance, what started as taking the bible literally and believing in the infallibility of the Bible has led to King James Only doctrine.
    Many early fundamentalists would be appalled by the likes of Hyles, Gipp and others.
     
  6. kyredneck

    kyredneck
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    10,569
    Likes Received:
    276
    "There is nothing new under the sun, what has been will be." Solomon

    Names, faces, places topics may change, but what you just decribed has happened within the church many many times in the past.
     
  7. stilllearning

    stilllearning
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi Dale-c

    You said.........
    What may seem like a “molehill” to some people, is actually a “mountain”.
    And it needs to be dealt with.
     
  8. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Of course that is true in theory.

    Name a few of these mountains that people think of as molehills?
     
  9. stilllearning

    stilllearning
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi Dale-c

    You asked........
    Well by far, the most important one, are those attacks upon God’s Word.
    (Most of the people here, consider them molehills, when they are really mountains.)
    --------------------------------------------------
    Here is a good example;
    Years ago(1986), when I first went into the ministry, everyone told me, “you have to get a Scofield Reference Bible”, so I went and got one.

    And I was sure, to choose the “Old Scofield” edition, that weighed about 10lbs., and started using it, as my study Bible.
    But to my surprise, I kept finding “attacks” upon God’s Word, all over it.

    On almost every page, I would find footnotes that read, “This verse isn’t found in the best Greek manuscripts”.
    Now what is a person, suppose to do, with that information;
    Should I take my pocket knife, and remove that verse from my Bible, or simply “doubt it”.

    This is the exact same attack, that Satan used with Eve........
    Genesis 3:1
    “Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?”


    “hath God said?” Did God really say that?
    --------------------------------------------------
    After a few weeks, of allowing my faith in God’s Word to be attacked, by Scofield’s attempt to sound scholarly, I put his Bible away, and got me one, with no study helps at all.(This is the kind I still use today.)

    I still have that Bible, on a shelf in my study, but I never use it.
    --------------------------------------------------
    Now most people would say, that I was making a mountain out of a molehill;
    But the question, that they should be asking, is “by who’s authority, are those older manuscripts, declared to be the best?” “And if indeed they are the best, than why don’t they agree with each other?”

    Now I have asked these questions, and I was shocked by the answers.
    But in the same way, that no liberals watch FOX news, and are content to be lied to by the other networks.
    Most progressive Christians, refuse to give their ear, to the truth about these attacks upon God’s word.
    --------------------------------------------------
    One more thing;

    Earlier you made the statement......
    I fully agree with you, about the foolishness of the “King James Only doctrine”, but I wish that you would start calling it what it really is; (The double inspiration doctrine).

    Because those of us, who exclusively use the KJV, are being tossed into the same pile, as those nuts who lift it up as a fresh revelation.
     
  10. mrsmel

    mrsmel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0

    Hmm, that's food for thought-a preference for the he KJV as opposed to considering it as doubly-inspired (I know I likely didn't word that correctly, but I know what you meant). That's an interesting thought. Though all these arguments are waaayyy over my head! IE, Calvinism, vs Arminianism--whatever those are!!! But they're all very interesting. There's a lot of smart cookies on this board.
     
  11. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Still learning, you have a few problems with your logic. You say these are attacks against the bible yet you deny secondary inspiration of the KJV.
    If the KJV was shown to have verses that were not in the original text, would that not make the KJV translators bible attackers using your logic? Now I am not saying they were. I believe it is fine to prefer the KJV. I believe it is even ok if you prefer the TR. But when you make the translarion the standard rather than the original language then we have a problem.
     
  12. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's not really why these men are rejected. They are rejected for different reasons, depending on who they were. Hyles, for instance, was a megalomaniac who at the end of his life was very close to apostasy, if not actually an apostate. If you read 2 PEter and Jude, and you compare Hyles' life to it, you will see a great similarity.

    Many of these men were decent men, but some were very political, very controllling, and not fundamentalist at all.

    All fundamentalists today would be appalled by these men. They, by definition, were not longer fundamentalists when they abandoned the biblical doctrine of Scripture for the view that they espouse(d). Fundamentalism has it warts to be sure, but no more than any other group does.

    I am a fundamentalist because I believe the Bible. I reject Hyles, Gipp, and the like because they are false teachers in many cases. Fundamentalism per se isn't extreme really. It is in some sense because the comparison is so weak. In other words, the other side has gotten so extreme that many fundamentalists look extreme, when they are in fact not extreme at all. Then you have the Hyles, Bob Gray, Sam Gipp, Fairhaven, HAC, types that bear no resemblance to real fundamentalism. We repudiate them.
     
  13. mrsmel

    mrsmel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    I did rather simplify it, and I didn't want to get into the personal matters, as I don't know anything about them except what I've now read on forums, and that's too far removed from me to know what to make of it.

    What did they preach that was apostate? The KJVO stuff? Don't we draw the line on that to some extent-isn't there a version called "The Message" (which I've read about but never read) that really is supposed to be apostate?

    I think that strictly from hearing them preach online, I may have been getting a bad case of hero worship, but they seemed so commonsense in most things, to me, even when I don't know what to make of the standards. Half of me agrees with the logic that some of the standards could be, I won't say legalistic, as I understand that's when people preach their standards as a requirement of salvation, but standards that seem to tend to keep one's mind focussed on being holy and separate. Like a sermon Mr Hyles preached about not waiting until you are right next to sin, but putting guards against it , to keep you far from sin. Half of me wonders where the lines really are, and how far something like that could go. All of me wonders if I'm trying to wriggle out from doing or not doing things that I know I should or shouldn't do, and I just don't want to admit it.
     
  14. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh, yes. None of us here would advocate than anything goes with Bible translations.
    THe message is not even a translation, it is a paraphrase.
    See a translation is where you take the original Greek and Hebrew into another language such as English.

    In the case of the Message, it is one man or a group taking an English bible like the NIV and making a paraphrase of it. So it is not really even a Bible but more of a commentary.

    The problem with the KJVO doctrine is that it has the wrong standard.
    The King James is not the standard we judge other new translation by.
    A good translation is good if it agrees with the original language manuscripts.

    The KJVO people will compare the NASB for instance to the KJV. THe KJV is their standard.
    That is the problem. My pastor preached a good sermon tonight. But I don't judge other sermons based on his sermon, I judge other sermons based on the Bible.
    So, we base the NASB on its accuracy to the original language manuscripts, not to another translation.

    By the way, the same Gospel message is in the KJV that is in the NASB and the NIV etc.
     
  15. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh, by the way, KJVO stuff is not necessarily apostate. In fact only the most extreme forms are.

    I would be careful with calling fundamentalists apostate.
    Sure some were but most did not go that far.
    The biggest problem is that fundamentalism has been splintered 1000 ways.
    It is impossible to broad brush the movement anymore.
     
  16. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    There were a lot of doctrinal issues with these men: KJVO is a severe doctrinal issue in some of its forms since it denies the biblical doctrine of inspiration. Hyles became more corrupt in his later years claiming at times that people could be saved only from the KJV. These men had a faulty doctrine of salvation, completely omitting any need for biblical understanding of the gospel, the need for repentance, etc. They just wanted to get people baptized on Sunday. Their doctrine of biblical authority was wrong. Hyles had some doctrinal teachings that cannot even be mentioned in mixed company.

    There were also severe moral issues. Hyles was widely known to be an adulterer. He never stood up to his son in his son's improprieties. Bob Gray was a child molester. Others were abusers. Many allegations of abuse have been made against Roloff. Other instances could be cited.

    Even now, Jack Schaap of FBC Hammond was there for many of the years of Hyles and never took a biblical stand to demand that Hyles step down. He never tried to influence the church to take a stand for righteousness. He was as guilty as Hyles.

    That is not to tar all people, but many of them were shameful men who perhaps had no part in the salvation of Christ.

    There are many fundamentalists whose loyalty is with the Scriptures, not with men.
     
  17. Thinkingstuff

    Thinkingstuff
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,169
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah. Solomon was KJO....wait he didn't speak english...
     
  18. Pipedude

    Pipedude
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, he wasn't. It does appear that he had a long friendship with a woman who was "in love" with him, but there is no evidence or testimony that he ever laid a hand on her.

    Improper, yes. Adultery, no.

    Bearing false witness is a serious matter, even if it's against somebody like Hyles.
     
  19. Ledlak

    Ledlak
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    Disgusted

    It is unbelievable how some of you can claim to be believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, call yourselves Pastor and such, and spread rumors about men of God whom ye know not. What, did you hear about Jack Hyles from someone else? Do you know for a fact that he was involved in adultery? If you do not, why do you temp God's chastisement by spreading such information? There is much strong admonition in Scripture against accusing a brother. Were you there to witness anything amiss concerning Brother Roloff? How do you know of his abuses? Were you there? Did you witness such things? Do you think that you are better than they? You obviously do by your openness in condemning them. Did you know that the State of Texas Welfare Department was on a crusade to shut down his home for kids in Corpus and did just about everything they could to defame that decent man? Are you going to go to the law against a brother? To a corrupt State and believe them over a man like Roloff. This thread contains more disgusting backbiting and "cursing of men" you wouldn't find in the worst brothel. Shame on you! And it is not just on this thread, it is all over this board. Any admin reading this, I would appreciate it if you would remove my login from this board.
     
  20. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well, Ledlak, looks like you'll be better off not coming to this board. This IS a Baptist Board, after all, and stuff like you've read have been with Baptists since that well-meaning mother asked the Lord to please put her two sons in positions of authority in His kingdom.
    Remember how they misquoted Jesus about the disciple John, too ? How Jesus said "what's it to you if I will that he tarry till I come" ? And they spread the tale that Jesus said that disciple will not die ?
    I myself am still not used to that so when I feel the air getting a little too "thick" I don't come for a few weeks.
    Unfortunately, in this board, once you're a member, you're a member, and the administrators either refuse to remove you, or don't have that function in the programs.
    I heard of Jack Hyles when I was a new convert, thirty some years ago, and he sounded pretty decent then.
    Memorized the Bible forward and backwards, but i've heard a lot of negatives on him since.
    but, hey, he's a fallen creature, just like everybody else on this board, myself and yourself included, right ?
     

Share This Page

Loading...