Attitutudinal Issues

Thanks for the compliment, Sir. I will take it to heart! I only hope I am living up to it! SEMPER FI!

 

Thanks for your interesting comments, jarhed.
I would question that real preaching must be strident. Maybe you and I are seeing the term differently.

For example, it is my understanding that Jonathan Edwards read his sermon, "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God", in a monotone. And yet, look at that sermon's influence.

Karen

 

That is a good point Karen, however, keep in mind that often these folks would finish planting in the spring and attend revival every night for weeks, being under Godly preaching literally for months at a time. The same thing might happen then post harvest and pre-planting, depending on the weather. It was also a different time...a time when men generally acknowledged his need of God in this country. There are so many factors that it is hard to judge that sermon as stand alone. BUT, your point is still a good one, as the LANGUAGE was extremely strident, and the voice inflection, they say of any kind, was simply not there. Well taken.

 

I think most people agree that "sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" was a sermon that God used mightily on that occasion. I do not think that it is then to be taken as the model STYLE (as in the way it was presented) for all sermons henceforward.

Jarhed,

you are most certainly my kind of preacher.....just remember, most people here are more used to the more "theological seminary" type of preaching, and they take our type as being offensive in style. Plus there are different kinds of churches, different kinds of people who have different style preferences, and I think there's room for all that.

I don't take what you say as meaning constant yelling.....I too have heard that type of preacher, absolutely no inflection but its because they are "top of the lung" the entire time. I can't stand it, and I usually have to wind up tuning him out just to be able to sit there the whole time. And Im striving to be open to God's leading.

But Im pretty sure I know what you are talking about, and that I agree. Not necessarily constantly strident, but confrontational and convicting when need be.

 

I find it funny how you would classify biblical preahcing that is fair to the Scriptures and is God-centered and seeks to bring Him glory rather that produce a desicion as "theological seminary type preaching".

The style Jarhead is speaking of is not preaching, but distorts the Scriptures blinds men to truth and is extremely man-centered, God is not maginifyed by descion driven Finnyesque poppycock preaching!

I have heard enough of it in my short life time to realize that God is not in it.

 

4His glory,

how do you know its not preaching? My preaching preaches basically as he's described every single service, and there is growth in our church, (as in spiritual growth) AND there are people being saved.

My description of "theological seminary" preaching was not a criticism of it. Why would you take it that way?

 

Because I have seen the kind of preaching described and I know that though "descisions" are made, they for the most part do not last. I can not speak for your church because I have never been there nor heard your preacher, but I do know what many consider biblical preaching is not even close to what God desires.

Granted God can even work through the worst of preaching to accomplish His will and He no doubt has done that at times.

Here is how I see the difference between man centered and God centered preaching:

If it is God centered than it will seek to magnify Him and exult Him.

If it is God centered then it is done so solicit a response rather than letting God produce the results in the hearers.

 

well 4His glory,

you are assuming first of all, that you know the motives of the preachers. Unless the man says as much, how in the world do you know that their preaching is only geared to elicit a response rather than letting God produce the results?

And isn't ALL speech geared to elicit some sort of response? I ask you a question here in this forum and I do so in order to get a response from you. How is that wrong?

Although I believe you are thinking more of the type of preaching that is only trying to get EMOTIONS stirred in order to provide huge NUMBERS for the preacher's ego. I don't know that I have ever heard anyone preaching with that intent. I wouldn't know, because I don't know the preacher's heart. Im pretty sure you don't either.

There's nothing wrong with the style that Jarhed and I are talking about.

As I said in my previous post, a constant yelling style is not a very good approach, and frankly Ive only heard it from very young preacher-boys who are either looking forward to Bible college, or who are just getting into Bible college. By the time they get a few years on them they have tempered and learned that just shouting at people is not effective.

Personally, the style of preaching that you, 4Hisglory, refer to as "man-centered" I have seen only from such as Benny Hinn and other TVangelists. Very emotional and spooky.

Confronting people with their sin, seeking to impart some Holy Spirit convicting by letting inflection into your voice, there's nothing man-centered about that.

 

Let me add, too.

This thread was started to legitimately discuss the "attitude" that many seem to think fundies have.

As Ive said before, I was raised outside of IFB, in quite a few other Baptistic circles. I heard all sorts of stuff about "those IFBs". And I don't know that any of it was all that nice. This was coming from people who were proclaiming themselves to be far less judgemental than those fundies. They were the ones claiming to be showing the love of Christ, and to be preaching in a way that God would really prefer. Let me say, too, half of those churches were just downright dead. Hardly any new people coming in, certainly not new people from the lower "dregs of society". You very rarely saw anyone struggling with drugs or alcohol, or see anyone dressed in anything other than very nice clothing. My, if a lady had come in immodest clothing and covered in tattoos I think she might have been asked to leave! Not that that ever happened, but the people would have been mortified if someone like that had actually walked in their doors on a Sunday AM.

THEN, I started going to IFB. They are nothing like what I heard in those other circles. There is the occasional overzealous young person....even the occasional overzealous old person. So what? They learn. Don't we all?

We see all types of people walk in our doors. Those struggling with drugs...those who aren't actually struggling with the drugs because they are still enjoying the drugs. Those who are covered in tattoos, and don't care who sees them. There are people wearing all sorts of things, and in the summer, not always enough of those things. And there's people who make a good amount of money, too. People with nice families, good kids, a nice house.

People are being changed, because they are hearing what they need to do. But people change as God leads them, the preaching is just a part of that leading that God can use to convict and convert.

And ya know? The IFBs I know hardly ever talk about you who are NOT IFB. You really are not all that prominent on our "radar", except as other Christians doing what you feel you need to do. We really are for the most part more concerned with those who need to hear the gospel and repent and believe, and then be conformed to God's Word. I hardly ever (if at all) hear the same sort of judgements about NON-IFBs that I heard from the "other" side about IFBs.

 

jarhed, thanks for the clarification.

 

bapmom,

If what you say is true, we definitely attended different type IFB churches. My experience growing up on those circles was the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you describe earlier.

The focus was on outward appearance, preferences that passed for "convictions", what three letters graced the side of the Bible you carried, certain music from a certain era, "soulwinning" techniques with little concern for developing followers of Jesus Christ, outscreaming one another from the pulpit, and separating from anything or anyone who acted or believed differently than I did.

For churches that claimed to champion grace we sure did a lot of man-centered things to try and earn God's favor.

I am glad this is not the type church you claim to be involved in, but I think you will still find multitudes who suffered (or suffer) under the same type of tyrannical, legalistic Pharisaism that I endured before God set us free.

I still have flashbacks of girls snow skiing in coulottes ... God have mercy.

 

AAG,

There are all kinds of IFB churches, just like there are all kinds of SBC churches. Don't patronize us with your "if what you say is true" crap.

We're sorry for your terrible experiences in an IFB church. Get over it and quit worrying about us stupid fundies.

 

and All About Grace,

again.....you cannot claim "easy-believism" AND "legalism" about the same group of people!

Either they didn't care at all how people acted (easy-believism) OR they cared TOO MUCH about how people acted (legalism). You can't have BOTH in the same person. It is not logically consistent.

Frankly what you said sounds like "spin." It sounds that way from many people I hear, so Im not claiming you are alone. I could take that same exact group of people and describe them as.....

1)discipling people to be conformed to God's Word (what you called being focused on outward appearance)

2)strong convictions based on what they sincerely believe is TAUGHT in the Bible (what you called personal preferences because you don't agree with them)

3) having sincere convictions about which Bible version we use (caring about what 3 letters are on the cover)

4) a belief that music has a morality, there can be good and bad music. ("certain music from a certain area" you say, because you disagree with their approach. This does not make them legalists)

5)trying to see souls saved by actually TELLING them the truth about the gospel
(don't know how you think you can say they don't care about discipling converts when you have also described all the things they try and teach people in growing spiritually)

6)"outscreaming one another from the pulpit" of course I cannot answer to, because your particular church may well have been one that did alot of screaming. I know there's some. This is not representative of IFB as a whole. It is representative of that particular church, only. MOST IFB preaching can have moments where it is louder than some might like, but most of it is not loud constantly. Confrontation can and is often quiet and pleading, AS WELL AS louder at times.

and your final point....

7)being separated in church organization with those who do not agree with us in doctrine is quite Biblical. Being separated from those with different standards need only apply to official church functions, and is really mainly for the sake of those younger ones we are trying to teach.
If your church taught that your PERSONAL associations should only be with those who had exactly the same standards as the church did, than that is another aberration which I have only heard of one other place within IFB.
On the other hand, why would we want to associate with churches full of people who don't like us, speak ill of us to other Christians, and judge us so harshly without even getting to know us personally?

Your points present your own view. Like I said, there is a spin to it. You say it in your way and its negative. That does not mean that it was really as you chose to saw it. I say it my way and its positive. Why not give people the benefit of the doubt instead of assuming the worst?

BTW, Ive gone skiing in culottes, whats the big deal? Long leggings underneath and its no less warm than a pair of sweats. And the young man I was with didn't even bother to wear a jacket, he just had a flannel shirt on. I couldn't figure out how he stayed warm, but I was perfectly fine.

Lived in Milwaukee now for almost 5 years, wore a skirt all winter long. Come on, we aren't talking thin flimsy material here, and theres things to wear underneath to keep ya warm. And Ive never gotten pneumonia from it, and neither has anyone else I know. We use whats called "common sense." Its not about legalism. Its about what I and others see as modesty.

 

I agree there are all kinds of IFB & SBC churches. I agree there are some good IFB churches that do not practice what I experienced.

What I was responding to was the suggestion that the picture painted about many IFB churches is inaccurate. In some instances, that is true, yet I can refer you to multitudes of IFB churches that continue to exhibit the type of extremism I described above (and worse).

I have no desire to patronize anyone. I simply shared what I experienced in my pre-grace days.

I am over it. Thank God for grace.

I am not "worried" in any way about the fundies. I stopped worrying about them the moment my previous youth pastor turned church planter wrote me a letter and told me I had stepped outside of God's will because I joined a SBC church.

I do find it entertaining to read about what is happening among the extreme fundies in IFB circles (HAC, Longview, Baptist Contender, etc.). The fun never stops.

 

You don't really buy into this theory do you? Often the "1-2-3-pray after me" type soulwinners are the same ones who look down on a fellow believer b/c the woman wears pants or listens to a certain type of music.

They do co-exist and often feed off one another. You cannot truly be this nieve.

What you have to say in the remainder of your posts simply reinforces my point.

I am not questioning the sincerity of the people. They are extremely sincere. Legalism is often cloaked in spiritual terms and pure motives. That is not the issue.

We will simply agree to disagree. You can argue it is not reality, but sorry ... I lived it. I experienced it. I was delivered out of it. And it was not just a single church ... it was an entire movement (and still is).

And just for the record ... making a girl wear coullotes over her ski bibs in the name of "modesty" is not only legalistic ... it is just plain STUPID.

 

All About Grace.


I was not MADE to wear anything that I wore.

Why assume that we are MAKING the girls do things? Why not be open to the idea that we girls can actually have convictions which are not based upon what someone is "making" us do?

you just pretty much emphasized my point. It is only legalistic to you because you do not agree with it.

Not everything you disagree with is "legalistic." By reacting this way you make yourself the litmus test of what is legalism and what is NOT legalism. If it is a standard which you do not agree with you call it legalism. Why not just realize you don't agree with it, and let us have our standards without calling us names for it?

Let me point out, too....I did not call YOU any names.....

I even went out of my way to edit my post so that a few words I used did not come across as unnecessarily harsh. Yet then you call my standards more than just legalistic (which I take umbrage over) but you go further and call it STUPID. How is that your business? ANd how is it gracious and kind? ANd how is it showing God's love to a fellow Christian? Ive never been rude or nasty to you. In many other areas we've agreed, and Im sure we will again in the future.
Yet you've come in here to declare that IFBs are the mean ones. You've been far more unkind to me than any IFB has been on this thread towards anyone else.

 

I didn't call you stupid. I said making girls wear coullotes over their ski bibs in the name of "modesty" is stupid. I stand by my words.

And yes girls were "made" to do this ... unless they wanted to stay home from the ski trip.

You are right. I am not the standard for what is legalism and what is not. The Bible is. And I would be happy to discuss how any of the things you or I described above (regardless of the spin either of us employed) are biblical principles and do not qualify as "legalism".

You have every right to embrace whatever standards you desire. That is your Christian freedom and liberty. I could care less. That is not the problem. The legalism occurs when your standards (or anyone else's for that matter) suddenly become essential for my way of living. Again we are talking intepretive standards and not essential beliefs.

Why are you so defensive about being tied to legalism? I can have a tendency to display legalism in my life as well -- not in the areas described above but in other areas. There is a natural tendency among many IFB churches to adhere to legalistic outward standards. This is common knowledge. It is nothing to hide or be ashamed of. Again it is your choice to adhere to such standards. It is your liberty. But don't get defensive when the spade is called a spade. Stick to your guns but recognize things for what they are.

 

I get defensive because the term "legalism" is used as a beatstick to slam IFBs over the head all the time. It is a term which is thrown around constantly to describe people (ANY people) who have higher standards than the one talking.

You did indeed imply that my standards are stupid. You implied that everyone I know is legalistic, after declaring our form of preaching is not of God, but is of man.

You tell me not to get defensive when a spade is called a spade, but isn't that your exact problem with our "style" of preaching.

We do nothing more than point out what is wrong with the world these days, and we get called names for it. Not by the world, but by other Christians, by other BAPTISTS no less.

This is why we are defensive, because Id dare to say that many of the other IFBs who post here are also very often feeling as if we are PUT on the defensive.

Its more daunting for us to "fellowship" on places like this board than it is to hang out with many unsaved people we know. And that is because we find ourselves judged, talked about condescendingly, called things like "meathead" and "stupid" and told that we are things that we are not.

As to the dress standards for women, this IS a Bible principle which I stand by. It is not one that I think is must my personal preference, although there are those types as well. But that doesn't mean I don't speak to ladies who are in pants. And it doesn't mean we send girls home if they aren't wearing a skirt. It means it is what I teach my little girls at home, and if asked it is what I'd defend as modest, based on the verses about what a woman should be wearing....

Since this thread is not about that issue, I absolutely will not go there, because then OTHERS get real defensive and I don't want that, either. There's an entire thread on it back in General Discussions on the older pages.

Some standards ARE just personal preference....but alot of IFBs standards are there because we believe we see them as a truth taught in the Bible. THAT is why we incorporate them into things like standards for our enrolled Christian school kids.

 

And you declare that your standards are "higher" ... another tactic utilized in certain circles to make groups feel spiritually superior to those who have "lesser" standards.

Jesus actually had a lot to say about the idea of "higher" standards.

Is there a post on my name on it that I missed? I never said "everyone" you know is legalistic nor did I refer to your form of preaching as "not of God". I simply related my own experience of being in circles that tried to outscream one another from the pulpit.

If the shoe fits ...

Perhaps it is different for you and your church, but I was discouraged and warned against hanging out with "unsaved" people ... the only time I was supposed to be around unbelievers was when I was trying to get them to pray the prayer.

We lived in our Christian bubble and criticized harshly those who wandered outside the bubble and did sinful things like attend public school, go to the movies, go to local high school football games, etc. Looking back, it kind of smacks in the face of what Jesus did on this earth ... you know the whole friend of sinners image.

Yes modesty is a biblical principle ... wearing coulottes over ski bibs is not or even coulottes for that matter. It is not about the principle, it is about how it is implemented and practiced.


I can see we would not accomplish much continuing this discussion, so I will just leave you with these final thoughts:

Defensiveness over certain issues usually stems from a certain level of reality.

Take this any way you desire but I honestly do not mean it with ill intentions ... you need a good dose of grace.