As Baptist?????????????

Sometimes both.
For example you may call a translation preference, and in many cases it is. I am not KJVO, but early on in my Christian life I visited a "Baptist" church where they all used "the Living Bible" (paraphrase). That is not even a translation. It is a paraphrase--one man's opinion of what the Bible says. Today I would not have fellowship with a church that uses a paraphrase and encourages their members to do the same.

Most of the time it is doctrine. John pointed out the Charismatic movement. I agree. That is doctrinal error. And those that associate themselves with it are also in error.

 

Okay, DHK, how far do you seperate? By not allowing their preacher to fill your pulpit? By not filling theirs? By not cooperating in community issues that you do agree on? (a soup kitchen or food pantry or such)

Or do you turn your back on them entirely? And if so how does mesh with Christ's command to "love one another"? (John 13:35) Is it so easy to say that church who uses the Living Bible isn't "one of us" so that command doesn't apply?

And then there is the question of how you came about the idea that God can't preserve His word in a paraphrase? While I agree its not the wisest choice for scripture out there, if the doctrines taught by its use agree with one's own, I can't see it as an issue to seperate over. (*Just so you know: I'm having a great deal of difficulty with the issue of seperation altogether and have been for quite some time.)

 

How do you define "like faith and order"?
The ifbs around here take this to mean ONLY other IFBS..

One coming from a Southern Baptist Church even must be baptized again to join the IFBS.

Do you accept alien baptism from outside your camp of IFBS?

 

DHK posted...

Oh my. :tonofbricks:

Unbelieveably sad. Sad beyond comprehension

How it must grieve Christ. :tear:

 

DHK...

It stops with....

* Heresy
* Blasphemy
* Cultic groups
* Etc etc etc.

But NOT with disfelloshipping from BROTHERS and SISTERS who have different convictions than you do regarding non-foundational matters.

 

I do believe the OP has found their answer about fundamentalists.

 

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. (Romans 16:17)

I believe you are the one causing divisions and offences here.
It is contrary to the doctrine which I have learned.
I am not sure if you would be welcome or not in our church.

 

DHK....

And how exactly am I doing that, when I am advocating for peace, and brotherly love, as opposed to you're message of division and seperatism?

That doesnt surprise me.

Sorry to hear that. ALL are welcome at my church

 

I ao so sorry you are so bitter....but you are WRONG. I was Southern Baptist, and when I left and went to the IFB, my baptism was accepted.

Debbie Mc

 

Go back and examine your post once again. It was a veiled personal attack. Personal attacks are divisive. The Bible commands to stay away from divisive people. You are the one that went straight on the attack here. I was only beginning to explain my position when you went for the throat. You attacked. Those are the kind that we stay away from--divisiveness.
Scornfully you write, "That doesn't surprise me."
You have not come to learn. You have come to be divisive. That is the type of person that Paul said to stay away from. Do you understand my point now.

 

DHK...

I went back and checked.

I believe the 1st post that I posted directly to you was post #44 of this thread. And all I did was express my sadness regarding the tact you were taking with your posts.

Is that the one you are thinking of?

I apologize if it came across as hostile. I didnt mean it in a hostile way.

 

Apology accepted.
Perhaps now we can return to the subject why an IFB church would separate with other Christians, and why?

 

First of all, the tongues doctrine is very divisive, causing trouble and church splits every time it is brought into other churches. I remember hearing about a Presbyterian church in Japan where the tongues people came in and led away every single believer from the faithful missionary who had led them to the Lord. I've had members leave my church twice because of tongues speakers. The other time I was able to head off the trouble.

Tongues speakers (1) consider it the true sign of the fullness/baptism of the Spirit, meaning that you aren't spiritual if you don't speak in tongues. This creates a spiritual elite, and hinders the work of Christ (the true reason for the fullness). (2) Since it is the true sign of the fullness to them, they may evangelize to get people to speak in tongues more than to lead them to Christ. (I've been approached in this way.)

Other heretical Charismatic doctrines that can destroy a church: the "health and wealth gospel" (causing havoc on third world mission fields), the "manifest sons of God" doctrine, Charismatic ecumenicalism, healing as a "ministry" rather then just answer to prayer (there are no "healing ministries" in the Bible), etc.

The Charismatic movement per se began in main line churches back in the '60's and proceeded to split many of those churches. This is dead wrong. We are to start churches, not split them. But they still split churches.

 

Folks, there are so many misconceptions about us fundamentalists out there. And you folk who are criticizing us for separation need to understand something.

It was in 1957 when the big break came between fundamentalism and the rest of evangelicalism. (I know I will now be excoriated for bringing this up.) Why? It was all based on the fact that in his New York Crusade that year, Billy Graham deliberately rejected sponsorship by fundamentalists (led by Jack Wyrtzen), and accepted sponsorship by a group which had noted liberals in it. (And I don't mean people who didn't think women should wear slacks.)

Because of the fact that fundamentalists stood up against cooperation with liberals, we were viciously attacked by the rest of evangelicalism. Billy Graham resigned from the board of my grandfather's paper (he was not fired as some have said) because he could no longer agree with the masthead, "opposes modernism." If you want to know how we were attacked, here is one of my very first threads on the Baptist Board, where I was attacked simply for giving the facts of history: http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=4309
(Oh, and by the way, let's not go back and resurrect that thread. Okay?)

Note the facts I gave in that thread (post #81) about one liberal Billy Graham preferred to fundamentalists:

From that split in 1957 has come the animosity that exists toward us "narrow minded" fundamentalists. It has been passed down to some of you here on the BB, who would rather attack us for believing in standing up for the truth of God's Word, rather than understand why we do it. (And I don't deny animosity on the side of fundamentalists.)

 

I don't want to get sidetracked on baptism, but we accept most evangelical baptisms. If you are saved and from a Baptist church or from most other evangelical churches (CMA, Brethren, etc.) and have been baptized by immersion we would accept it.
1. If you were not saved we would not accept it.
2. If you were not baptized by immersion we would not accept it.
3. If you were baptized by a cult we would not accept it (i.e. Church of Christ)
4. We would re-baptize a believer coming out of the Charismatic movement simply for the reason that he may know in his mind that he is making a clear break from all the error that he is leaving now leaving behind. He is making a new start.

 

Think that one needs to do a "case by base" on this though!

talking to an Assemblies of God pastor MUCH different than on in the WoF Movement!

Ditto, Dr wayne grudem MUCH better than say a Dr benny hinn!

 

One CANNOT htough make a "broad brush' against ALL those within Charasmatic/pentacostal groups!

JUST as varied as among baptists groups....

The ones holding to aberrant/heretical doctrines like in WoF/health and wealth etc ARE indeed to be exposed as errors within the Church at large, BUT there are those groupd likeAssemblies of God pretty much mainstream groupds, and teachers like a DR Gorden Fee/wayne grudem...

So need to sepertate the 'wheat from the chaff!"

 

One can, and one does. We are a local church. It is our local church that makes the policy. If you don't like what our constitution says, or what our policies are then you don't have to join. I told you where we draw the line. And that line is final.

 

just thankful that Jesus decides these issues on who to seperate from here on earth, as you and I will be fellowshipping with those who were labeles Catholics/baptists/methodist/Charasmatic etc for eternity!

Why not get used to it though here and now?