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

You can quote me:

The only board found in the New Testament is the board Paul floated on (Acts 27:44)

But if a church is incorporated … sorry you have to have a board.

[Jim]

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

I agree with the sentiment here, but not the specifics. I don’t regard deacons as leaders, and I don’t think you see leadership language used of deacons anywhere in scripture. You only see this language used of pastors. I think have several elders who you regard as leaders and with whom you counsel is the way of wisdom. Unfortunately, most Baptist churches today have elevated the deacon to serve as an elder and essentially abandoned the true role of the deacon. For the corporation, you can just as easily identify the various elders as the corporate officers.

“…various man-invented offices such as presidents, chairmen, moderators, etc.”

For a position within a church to not be mentioned in the Bible doesn’t automatically equate with it being unbiblical. It it were so, then I presume that churches would have to dispense with having ushers, custodians, or even Sunday School teachers for that matter…

I have a business proposal I am working on with my son who is serving in Afghanistan. I think it will require about $ 10,000 in capital but could turn out to be a profitable and fun side-business for him and me.

Recently our lawn care company while doing service on my yard damaged my neighbor’s siding (a power rake drove stones against his siding damaging it). My neighbor was a bit upset at me. I called the lawn care company and they took care of the repairs.

But that’s not my business idea. But in the line of doing my new business, I could very well damage someone else’s property. So my business will need insurance. And I want to keep my business’s finances separate from my own (if it goes under … I don’t want it to take me to the bottom with it).

And so we will incorporate.

Churches do the same: Reasons:

• The assembly wants to own property and they want the property to be in the name of the business (imagine if your Pastor owned your church building! Yikes!)
• The assembly wants to separate the assembly’s business and finances from any single individual.
• AND their are other benefits for the non-profit (and churches don’t make profits!) : no property tax on building and yard, no sales taxes on purchases
• AND with 501(c)(3) status, contributions are deductible for the donor.

How many times have you heard this in evangelism encounters: “I’m against organized religion”. My standard response is “Would you rather have disorganized religion?”

Take the simple pot-luck planning:

• Who will bring the plates and silverware?
• Who will bring what dish?
• Who will set up the take down the seating?
• Who will clean up?
• Who will manage the sign up sheet?

Dear Pastors …. delegate it to someones … you study the Bible and pray ….

Don’t like the word committee … well it’s not a bad word! “a group of people who are chosen to do a particular job or to make decisions about something”

• Give ‘em a task … you’re in charge of pot-luck planning!
• Get ‘em organized
• Get back to what God has called you to do!

––––––

Response to Chip re are Deacons leaders?

How I regard them from Phil 2: Paul regarded Epaphroditus as a “fellow worker, and fellow soldier”

I regard Deacons as leaders. They have a role. Let’s call our difference of opinion a nonessential

Jim,

Privates and generals are both soldiers, but only one of them is a leader. You find commands like obey and rule (and other leadership functions found even in the title bishop) attached to pastors in scripture, but you never find these types of words used in regards to deacons.

There is a great gulf between the General and the Private …

But no so great between the 2nd Lieutenant and the Staff Sergeant

––—

If a deacon has authority it’s because it’s delegated to him

I skimmed through the Ron Comfort pamphlet on Calvinism. If there’s a single accurate statement about Calvinism or its implications, I didn’t see it.

I believe it was Comfort who preached one of the most abominable sermons I ever heard at the IBF church my family attended in the ‘90’s. He ended the sermon with an altar call for all parents to come to the front of the church to pray that their children would be called to full-time ministry (because any other vocation was lesser). I was dismayed that nearly everyone went forward.

This guy co-authored a book with Kent Brandenburg who is the most divisive of all Independent Baptists. He would carve out his own exclusive pure breed that of course, agrees completely with him.

Anyone who uses 1 Corinthians 9:22 as a justification for embracing CCM and its derivatives is engaging in false teaching and theological nonsense.

Will,

Kent and I disagree on much (as would Bobby and I), but your language is unfair and uncharitable. I doubt that Pastor Mitchell bustles about doing Brandenburg’s bidding. Lackey. Wow.

Do you think it’s possible to be divisive by making dismissive, prejudicial remarks about the parties involved in a debate rather than engaging the substance of what they are saying?

[KD Merrill]

Anyone who uses 1 Corinthians 9:22 as a justification for embracing CCM and its derivatives is engaging in false teaching and theological nonsense.

[Christensen]

The entire framework of Missions Theology is based on the premise that to reach various cultures and subcultures (Acts 17:22, I Cor. 9:22), we must be creative and flexible in our methods and media; the eternal truth of God’s Word, not religious artistic style, is the treasure we carry.

In fairness to Mr. Christensen, he is not referring to CCM directly when he cites I Corinthians 9:22. He is referring to the philosophy of adapting the presentation of the Gospel to divergent cultures. Feel free to disagree with him on that point, but don’t imply that he was referring to the verse as a justification for whatever musical style.

…which you seemed to have missed. Indeed, the very first sentence of the paragraph you quote above reads, “Cultures do shift and vary greatly, and these temporal and regional variations have always been reflected in music styles.”

Context is important - and the context in which Mr. Christensen writes is all about music. 1 Corinthians 9:22 has been horribly abused by those who attempt justify CCM and its derivatives (HHH, etc.) as a tool for evangelism. Anything goes! Pragmatism rules!

WilliamD:

You wrote:

This guy co-authored a book with Kent Brandenburg who is the most divisive of all Independent Baptists. He would carve out his own exclusive pure breed that of course, agrees completely with him.

I, too, disagree with Bro. Brandenburg on many issues, but he is a serious man whose arguments deserve to be taken seriously. I disagree with him on the King James issue, and have read the book he edited on the matter. It is no mere propaganda puff piece. His fellowship group is teaching Biblical Hebrew online. I can’t think of any independent, fundamental Baptists, off-hand, who don’t out-source this work to seminaries.

If you disagree with the article, then bring up some salient points! Don’t just malign him.