Kent Brandenburg's Assessment of Independent Baptists
- 69 views
that the label “association” is a historic one. IIRC, it’s been used in the States since mid-1800s. The Primitive and Old Regular Baptist groups are probably the ones who have used it the longest. Not to mention its usage by the founders of the Conservative Baptist Association.
Hoping to shed more light than heat..
http://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2015/05/an-honest-basic-assessment-…
Comment: in this he indicts IFBs for Hyles’ connections
What is the big Arizona conference next March? (mentioned in parts 3 and 4)
Any link?
“Is the Bible the basis for this separation teaching, or is it independent Baptist politics?”
The fact that one even has to ask such a question alludes to the all-too truthful answer. Separation, as practiced in Baptist circles, is often a sham. Loyalties & allegiances as determined by the good ole’ boy network entrenched in fundamentalism have led to some odd partnerships & alliances (just a few of which Brandenburg mentions).
What we typically wind up with is that such non-essentials (disputable matters) as dress codes, alcohol, music preferences, and the like lead to strife, rifts, and divisions; while things such as easy-believism, KJV-onlyism, and the like (which strike at the core of essential fundamentals of the faith like Salvation and Inerrancy) are dismissed with a wink and a shrug.
[Jim]What is the big Arizona conference next March? (mentioned in parts 3 and 4)
Any link?
This has to be what he’s referring to:
He mentions a repentance-less Gospel plague among independent Baptists:
I believe most independent Baptist churches now preach a false gospel, and when I say most, I mean over 50%. Almost all of these are the revivalist churches, which I believe outnumber all other independent Baptist churches, and these pervert the gospel mainly in their false teaching and belief about repentance. To do this, they have twisted numbers of salvation passages, turning those biblical texts that teach the gospel into something post-salvation, Christian living, or practical sanctification.
He criticizes opposition to the Lordship of Christ:
All of the above are about a perversion of repentance, but that is one side of the equation. Those wrong about repentance are wrong on the other side of the equation too. They minimize Who Jesus is. They believe He is Savior. They believe that He is God, the Second Person of the Trinity, to a certain extent. I think they diminish Deity of Christ with their exclusion of the Lordship of Christ. You can’t stay in rebellion against Jesus and actually believe in Him. I’m saying they don’t believe in Him either, minus His reign. Jesus said, “Repent for the kingdom is at hand,” and the kingdom was at hand, because the King, Jesus was there. The above leave that out to various degrees.
And finally, this coup de grace:
How did the above happen? The purpose again of this post and series isn’t about how or why so much, but I will give a small summary of my assessment here. Quite a few factors came together into a poisonous elixir. Some relate to the distortion of Keswick Theology, Finney, Moody, Torrey, Scofield, Scofield’s Reference Bible, early ecumenical evangelism, Dallas Theological Seminary, then Rice, the Sword of the Lord, and then Hyles. These influences spread to independent Baptists through their colleges and conferences. An undermining theological problem mixed with bad church growth methodology. They lowered the bar of salvation until it wasn’t salvation. More got “saved,” but they were receiving the placebo. The distortion multiplied and continues to this day with numerous false teachers.
Of course, out of all the above has come very emotional altar calls and manipulation and then other very strange perversions, like 1-2-3 pray with me, easy prayerism, and “soul winning” where the winners come back with 50 to 100 saved. After that, whole strategies were developed to get them into the tank. Evangelicals have had their own offshoot of this and I see them all as dovetailing in all sorts of corruption in evangelicalism and fundamentalism.
Sounds excellent to me.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
[Larry Nelson]This has to be what he’s referring to:
Ask yourself … “which speaker doesn’t seem to belong in the set?” Tips for remedial learners
Tip: It’s not James Tillotson (even though he does not have “Dr.” preceding his name!
(click for larger)
[Jim]Ask yourself … “which speaker doesn’t seem to belong in the set?” Tips for remedial learners
Tip: It’s not James Tillotson (even though he does not have “Dr.” preceding his name!
(click for larger)
“I’m going with ‘Sexton’ for $1,000 Alex!”
it strikes me that there is official, Hyles-style revivalism, and then there are more subtle forms of “peer pressure” that end up at the same point—lots of false conversions. And to be blunt—my writing a while back about how I’d never seen a church that had members derived from VBS—I’m guessing that Pr. Brandenburg is being a little bit nice about that 50% figure, if you catch my drift.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
[Larry Nelson]Jim wrote:
What is the big Arizona conference next March? (mentioned in parts 3 and 4)
Any link?
This has to be what he’s referring to:
Interesting to see Dave Doran and Clarence Sexton listed as speakers. I wonder if a certain friend of mine will show up at this one. Kind of funny in a hilariously ironic kind of way.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
http://www.garbc.org/greeting-from-national-representative/
My view: Sexton’s Fundamentalism is NOT a Fundamentalism worth saving.
http://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2015/05/an-honest-basic-assessment-…
Should spark some discussion:
Independents lose their independency through voluntary association. I’m not talking about fellowship with another church, but the deference to the group larger than the church, that hasn’t been given the instruction or the promises of the church. I’m calling this a success syndrome, because it is pragmatic at root, imagining advantages beyond God’s plan. It is akin to Israel’s regular alliances with pagan nations, intermarriages with heathen princesses, and other endeavors superior to divine design.
The coalition comes in a few different forms for independent Baptists: colleges, boards, camps, publishers, fellowships, conferences, and networks. I’m not talking about people who aren’t independent. I’m talking about the coalitions of independents, which seems like an oxymoron.
Rather than looking to conserve independency, independents search for coalition, further ties and attachments. We see new mergers and alignments on a fairly regular basis, forming around a new leader or cause. With each, the idea is that ‘we’re better together than we are separate.’ ‘We can do better missions, publish more and better books, see more saved, and be more encouraged with a large group.’ ‘If we don’t do this, we will be worse off, etc. etc.’ Each individual church begins to forfeit its distinctions, lost within the group. Those distinctions often represent separate biblical teachings that obey and honor God.
http://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2015/06/an-honest-basic-assessment-…
I’ve written a lot about this, but people have made their commission, “invite,” instead of “go.” They think that the commission is inviting unsaved people to church. It isn’t. It is going and preaching. If you make the commission, “invite,” you change the nature of the commission, and your church will change in nature too.
A part of the problem in fulfilling the Great Commission also relates to “church planting.” The Bible teaches evangelizing. When you have a gathering of disciples, you get a church. So-called mission has gotten this out of order. They start with church planting. Their goal is to launch a church. You don’t know if a church is there. You evangelize and if a church starts, it starts. Sometimes churches are started and the area still never is evangelized. Never. The church launchers reached their goal, which was to get a church. What I’m saying is that they never reach the goal, fulfilling the command, in order to fulfill their goal, which sounds like a good goal, starting a church. I would doubt in many cases if it is even New Testament church-like, because of this change in the nature of the goal.…
I do think it is pathetic, disturbing, and maybe nauseating what superficial stuff passes as important to independent Baptist churches, while they are basically disobedient in getting done what they are supposed to do. Their beloved programs are more important. Getting the right name, ya know, Mercy Church, and the platform set-up and the band and the team and all of that. Meanwhile people go their sweet way without getting preached to. That is a point A to point B problem. They are busy sitting at home all day reading theology and then not obeying it. Come on!
If people who called themselves Christians were fulfilling the Great Commission, the gospel would have already been preached everywhere. It hasn’t, and things are getting worse. In most cases, I believe it is because of a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the Great Commission. Not only is the gospel being perverted by independent Baptists, but so is the Great Commission.
…..but it strikes me that one thing I’m still not seeing in brother Brandenburg’s writing is a clear summary of what is important to be independent for. I’d submit the Fundamentals and the Solas, which of course will come as a surprise to no one that knows me. :^)
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
Kent challenges me and I appreciate him
And I agree with him on this: Church planting NE (not equal) the Great Commission
Discussion