Marks Of The False Teachers Among Independent Baptists--Part 1

That demanded that some Biblical doctrine and practice had to fall into a man-made “agree to disagree” category in order for there to be fellowship in earnestly contending for the faith. Key to the mindset was a ranking of doctrines into “essentials” and “non-essentials.” Those ideas might look good at first glance, but they have a major problem: There is no Scripture for them. They are totally philosophies of men.

Examples:

• From a long time ago: Genesis 6:2, “the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose”. What happened here? What is this doctrine? Angelic - human mscegenation? Or intermarriage of children of faithful line with those not of faith?
• From some time ahead (presupposes pre-trib rapture / dispensational position): Church-age saints are resurrected at the rapture? What about Old-Testament saints? I was taught that they are resurrected at a latter time
• Today’s doctrines: Versions, “tassels on the four corners of the clothing” (Deut 22:12). Don’t hear much about that … but skip back to vs 5 of the same chapter. Observation … I probably heard more about that verse than the Trinity when I was a new Christian (perhaps a hyperbole!). Back to mscegenation … still taught in some circles in the south (and I am not talking about “Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus). (observation - not distant history)
• How settled are these issues: tithing? total abstinence? the schooling choice of children? women working outside of the home?

It is a fundamentalist flaw to flatten all doctrine and make it all essential. A helpful read from the ESV study Bible is Essential vs. Peripheral Doctrine

Such heresies exist at times in a particular church (politics, committees, boards, cliques) and sometimes among churches. They are the product of “false teachers among you” and should be rejected by New Testament pastors and churches.

Try having an effective church potluck with an organizational structure (may be ad-hoc) that looks like a committee!

I suggest that if one wants to pick some low-hanging fruit one could pick Ron Comfort’s The Fruits of Calvinism. If this guy is to be believed … I am a heretic! Or perhaps there’s another answer

Jim, where do you find this stuff?

Wayne,

Comfort is pretty well known in IFB circles. I heard him preach in my church when I was still a kid, but that was before he went completely nuts on Calvinism. If you read Jim’s article, you saw Comfort allude to the texts as well. He’s KJVO.

I appreciate Bobby. We correspond from time to time. He prays for my son who is serving in Afghanistan.

He is working hard on putting his thoughts to paper (to blog) and I appreciate his efforts.

• All the prosperity gospel teachers: There is a long line of them: Swaggart et al.


• The charismatic preachers (some overlap with above)


• Those who purposely misrepresent the positions of others with straw-man arguments. I understand some are ignorant.


• The easy believism crowd


• The two Jacks … one gone … one imprisoned


• Some in KJVO camp: Ruckman & Gail Riplinger (double inspiration position) (but not DA Waite whom I have great regard / or other KJV preference folk / majority text people)


• The hyper-fundies who will separate over any nit / some in the empire-builders club


• Those who attack Calvinist soteriology / falsely representing it (see link above).


• Those who lied about MacArthur’s blood position and continue to do so


• Renegades against lawful authority & the anti-tax crowd. Eg Kent Hovind


• ​Those who deny total depravity and the utter unworthiness of sinners


• The Garland guy who falsely teaches about music … I forgot his name … starts with Frank (Garfield? Garland? … help me out!)

[Jim]

• ​The Garland guy who falsely teaches about music … I forgot his name … starts with Frank (Garfield? Garland? … help me out!)

Frank Garlock?

[Larry Nelson]

Jim wrote:

• ​The Garland guy who falsely teaches about music … I forgot his name … starts with Frank (Garfield? Garland? … help me out!)

Frank Garlock?

That would be the guy

Whatever else can be said about the writer’s ecclesiology, this statement is terribly misinformed and historically naive:

I would guess that the faction that has most influenced the independent Baptists (those who have not joined conventions) is a movement called Fundamentalism that emerged in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s as a powerful “idea” that preached “let’s unite around a few basic doctrines so we can contend against the false.” That demanded that some Biblical doctrine and practice had to fall into a man-made “agree to disagree” category in order for there to be fellowship in earnestly contending for the faith.

Bobby,

I think you are over-reacting here and are misusing the concept of “heresies” in some of your applications. Any individual or institution can possibly be heretical. It does not mean that all extra-biblical institutions are inherently heretical. There are good mission boards, seminaries, Christian colleges, Christian Schools, Christian Camps. I don’t think it is reasonable to label them with such an injurious term as “damnable heresies”. “Damnable” means damnation. There is only one kind of damnation in the Bible. These institutions can help a local church and in many cases they have. In some cases they have not. This is a broad-brush approach.

http://www.philchristensen.com/subpage30.html

I attended a Frank Garlock session at a Men for Christ conference in Plymouth. It was theological nonsense

From his reply to my comment on committees:

The Lord’s appointed and authorized institution for all of His ministry is the church. That is His committee.

I had earlier said:

All a committee is: a group of people appointed and authorized to do a job. Yes committees can get out of hand as the old saying goes: “a camel is a horse designed by a committee”. You can have pastoral authority and leadership and committees.

My response to Bobby (here now as I may have been shut out over there):

• So you have a committee of 2 … (or 4 … the Trinity and you)!
• On the “Lord’s appointed” … has not God appointed two offices for the church?
• Have fun planning the next potluck!

My comment on Boards - which I posted there but has not been published by moderator (as of this time).

All a board is a committee. The wise pastor(s) will sit down periodically with other leaders. The Pastor who does not regard Deacons as leaders is foolish. For the church that is incorporated, the State (and I remind Pastors … if you chose to be incorporated … you put yourself under that constraint for better or worse!) requires certain positions: President (many times the Pastor) … a Treasurer (often times a Deacon) and a Secretary (Deacon ditto). To not have that organization - if you are incorporated is to be a renegade against government. Romans 14 addresses this

The Church is incorporated (image below) and is required by law to have a board. So Bobby don’t be a renegade!

http://www.nonprofitmaine.org/learn/resources/starting-a-nonprofit/star…