Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) Deception

Exposing the Dangerous Teachings of the Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) Denomination

Exchange with Ike


An interested reader named Ike posted a comment on this site a few months ago and I offered a reply. Recently he returned to counter my reply. Since I don’t want to tie up the comments section with discussions and counter replies I’ve made a separate page where Ike and I can have an exchange.

Below is Ike’s original message. In the comment section below that will be our exchange. Other comments are welcome.

I was a Southern Baptist who is now an Independent Baptist. What you describe as “Phariseeism”, I call it choice. I choose to attend a church that honors God in music, version of Bible (KJV is the only “non-profit” Bible), dress, and worship. Is it for everyone? No, but it is for some of us. I resist the contemporary crowd for my PERSONAL beliefs.

My question would be: Who forced you to attend this church? We make choices based on our values and convictions, if yours and mine differ, then we are different. Nothing wrong with that, it is what makes us different. Rather a simple thought, but this tends to fire the liberals and our opposition into anger. It appears it has angered you as well. I will apologize if my beliefs anger you, but please choose how you vent your anger. I hope a lost person does not read this and responds by thinking all churches are full of legalistic crazies!

If you would study all denominations, you would realize that all churches upheld the same standards sixty years ago. The message has not changed, why should the messenger? We see people saved almost every week, so the message still works. I was attending a church where the new preacher relaxed on the “values-based” parts of the ministry. Come as you are is a spiritual idea, not a physical. The girls wore next to nothing and he “preached” from a newer version of the bible. He taught on love and forgiveness, but never on the consequences of sin or separation. Both are in the Bible. We had two young ladies end up pregnant and drop out of high school. In three years, the attendance went from 160 on average to less than 75. Why? I felt we were no longer honoring God in our worship.

All of this to say if you have found a better way, great! I hope you stick with it. Otherwise, I would recommend you refresh yourself with Matthew 7:5.

Updated: October 9, 2011 — 8:48 pm

36 Comments

Add a Comment
  1. Bruce L. Scheffler

    I would like to express a more formal definition of the word church that is being used in this debate along with the generally held view of church. This is taken from another website that I believe is being used by the Lord (as this site is) to help His children understand what is meant by ‘church’. I don’t know if the admin would allow me to give you the website but if he does then I will gladly post the link. Here is why we use the word ‘church’ out of context in todays conversations.

    Truly God has called us out of the world unto Himself – into His Assembly. This is the “Church” (according to its true biblical meaning)! We, indeed, are the “called out ones“. However, even the word “church” itself is really a poor term to use if we want to be technically accurate about things. The word church has no literal derivative in the original text of Scripture. It was added by translators hundreds of years after the New Testament was written. Believe it or not, neither Jesus nor any of the apostles ever used it with respect to God’s people! The English word “church” is presumed to come from a Greek word that, also itself, is never even used one time in all of Scripture! Here we have an example of translators modifying the text to make it seem to align better with the religious tradition of men rather than trying to convey the literal intended meaning. The word “church” naturally tends to draw the reader’s thoughts to religious structure and form rather than organic spiritual life. When the King James Version of the Bible was created, James actually instructed the translators (through a bishop by the name of Robert Bancroft) not to change the word “church” to reflect its actual meaning (something William Tyndale had already done in his translation of the New Testament years before). This truly is not a conspiracy theory, this is documented history! The Bishop, with the King’s approval, devised 15 rules which the translators were ordered to abide by in their development of what has come to be known as “the Authorized Version”, one of which was this rule not to tamper with the old ecclesiastical terms (i.e. church). Again, this is historical fact.
    In case someone might presume otherwise, it should be stated that the King Jame’s Version of the Bible was not the first English translation. The Bible had already been translated into English in previous times. In fact most of the KJV was copied exclusively from prior English translations. It is a well known fact among many scholars that King James was not a fan of the Bible translation most popular in his day known as the Geneva Bible. There were two major reasons for this. One, because of the Geneva Bible’s Calvinistic leanings and, two, the Geneva Bible had marginal notes to help explain certain texts and some of these notes challenged his view of what he believed to be the divine right of kings to govern the church and stand as its head. James saw the Geneva Bible as a threat to his lordship over the church and this no doubt fueled much of his ambition to create a Bible version that was officially “authorized” by the king himself.
    This is just a beginning of the way the word church became the standard used today, even though it is wrong.
    Just my 2 cents…

  2. Love how Ike trivializes the debate to simply a difference of opinion and referrs to those who believe differently then he as “liberals”!!! How funny. I got the same message in my IFB experiences. If you weren’t an IFB you were considered liberal. If that isn’t telling about how the IFB operates then nothing is.

  3. I have enjoyed your back and forth with Ike. You have pointed out things so clearly to him and yet he refuses to see, its actually not so much that he refuses to see as much as he can’t see because he is so deeply entrenched in the movement. I have hope for folks like Ike though, because he does truly love the Lord and though he has an almost unnatural attraction to a 17th century translation of God’s word (taught that by the ifb) if he will stay in that kjv and listen to that precious, Holy Spirit I believe that the Lord will lead him out of this mess and into a true relationship with himself (God). He thinks he is in a true relationship, and actually is, however all of his, whoops, I shouldn’t say all, let’s go with “most” of his perceptions of having a relationship with the true and living God is colored with those legalistic ifb glasses. You know though, our Lord may want brother Ike right where he is for now. That would be hard for us to understand, but I know God’s ways are above our ways, perhaps through Ike he is somehow helping someone there that we just simply can’t fathom or understand. I’m like you though, whom the Lord has set free is free indeed. I won’t be boxed in, I’ll not follow the leader whent the leader starts saying there is a secret code contained in the kjv involving the number of vowels and consonants and tithing for new testament saints when I know better. Hey folks your pastor is not God’s right hand man. By all means support him, lift him up in prayer follow him, but please, understand that he is simply a man made from the dust just like you and me!

    KP, I would encourage you to read some of these responses from literally hundreds of damaged folks on this site, our combined, cumulative experiences tell alot about the abuses at the hands of legalistic ifb pastors and churches from all over the country and you can see a theme, if you will, of we’re right and they’re wrong mentality. I haven’t been to all ifb churches but I can see that other folks from all over the country have had the same or similar experiences. Does that make sense. I just see a need for brothers and sisters to dive into their bibles be it kjv (if you can understand it) or newer versions and search the scriptures and when you find nasty judgemental, unchristianlike attitudes stand up and say something. Our precious Saviour, while on this planet, reserved his harshest criticism for “religious” people.

    When Ike was talking about dressing up for church, I just thought about “ol” John the Baptist. I’ll bet he wouldn’t have been able to get past the first usher in most ifb churches. Just read the new testament and see if you can find anything that Jesus had to say about “dressing” for church, it is simply not there!

    I’m starting to ramble so I better close. I want to let you know that I saw something new and unique somewhere on this site today in one of your responses to someone. You said something to the effect that as it relates to sin that all sin is future, considering when Jesus died for us, meaning that “all” sin was in the future. I want to keep that nugget in perspective as I study the scriptures. tks

    God Bless,
    Greg

  4. I was very excited to find this site because I’m a very analytical and thoughtful Christian. I don’t believe anything that is just told to me, and I don’t take certain practices (KJV only Bibles, for example) as “law”. Unfortunately, the only problem I see with this site is the constant flaming of the IFB denomination. I grew up in it, too. I met people like you (those that believed it was the KJV Bible that saved them, the strange convictions, etc.). I knew ministers like those you spoke of, and I could go on and on. What shocks me though is that you put together a whole website to “help” those who fell into legalism within the IFB denomination. I will remind you: I too grew up in this faith. I NEVER believed the fallacies that you did. Nobody ever told me (at seven, eight, nine years old) that if I didn’t wear a dress (because I am female) to church I was sinning. And, yet, I did see those that looked down their noses (as I’m sure many churches have a few bad apples mixed in with the good) as they paraded in their finest. I was saved at 7 years old, and never worried that I said the wrong prayer or must say a certain stream of words to truly make it into the Kingdom of Heaven (though they did help to lead me through one…but it wasn’t the words that saved me, and I new it even then!). Perhaps, the real website that you should be creating should be one of revelations of God’s words and tenets (because I appreciate some of the work you’ve done here), and do a private study on forgiveness and bitterness. And if anyone is to blame for your misguided understanding of the Bible, maybe it is your parents…? Mine had many frank talks about how heaven will be filled with people from all denominations, and even those who have done the most heinous of sins will find forgiveness. I’m sorry for you. And, just so you know, I’m not IFB anymore (but a close sister, the Missionary Baptist). I don’t hate anyone, but I do think it’s important to speak out against those who persecute other Christians. You have every right to disagree with the teachings of IFB, however, if you are truly saved as you wish readers to believe, then wouldn’t your time be better devoted to what the Bible truly says than how you can discredit a fellow Believer? And, honestly, Ike’s curiosity about your faithfulness to a church was one that I had too, because your answer was very telling about how disillusioned you are over organized religion. Sure, you feel betrayed and misled, so you have every right to feel disillusioned. However, it also makes your remarks about the IFB denomination suspect, because you are very biased. Your experience is not everyone’s experience with IFB. I only left because I found a better fit. Praise the Lord for having so many different groups of worshippers that I may find one that matches my unique personality (and, yet, still teaches the Truth)!

  5. Those IFBs who want a shock is that some of the most beloved hymns of many church hymnals were Christian words set to music of the current day bar tunes. Legalism is a killer, spiritually deadly as a viper, which Jesus Christ condemned those of His day, saying they were whited sepluchres full of dead men’s bones. Paul did not just preach to exclusive people, he ministered God’s gospel, the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ , and forgiveness and salvation through none other. Maybe not all IFBs are guilty of repressive dogma, but the ministers who have not had sufficient training in apologetics, correct exegesis, and sound theological interpretation of the Word of God, the Good News of the Gospel, need to reexamine their ” calling “. Offending one of these little ones is as serious as their claims that all other churches are heretical. I am not a Biblical scholar but I am one who was greatly disturbed after reading an IFB web site. It has taken me considerable time and effort to straighten my fatalistic attitude after reading such material. I am glad to have run across this website to help me attain a more thorough knowledge of the doctrines and practices of this type of church. Note I am cautious about speaking about those who are called of God to preach the unsearchable riches, but when a minister becomes the absolute authority of a congregation, he being a man needs to be subject to authentication, with the admonishment of scripture telling us to be discerning, testing their words whether they be of God or of men. May God reveal the truth of error of this organization and others who twist the Word to maintain control to feed their ego instead of being humble before God and seeking to preach the infallible Word that some might be saved.

  6. I don’t think we’ve reached an impasse, but if you think so then I’ll try to understand. I feel like we are just getting started. I wish you wouldn’t be so hasty to discontinue the discussion.

    I hope that one day your eyes will be opened and you will experience the freedom that I have come to know.

  7. I believe we have come to an impasse. While we disagree on many subjects, we agree on the most important one, Jesus is the ONLY WAY! I do respect your passion and your work, to the extent you are trying to help people and you are sold out to the cause. I feel continuing our discussions would not prove fruitful for either of us and it is time for me to move on. I will continue to pray for your and yours and request you do the same. Good luck with your outreach and my God continue to bless you.

    In Christ,
    Ike

  8. Just a practical note… Please provide a source for your quote above. I will have to delete if if you don’t so I avoid copyright infringement.

    I’m glad that we seem to be narrowing down our differences, but there are a few things here that need to be ironed out still.

    The term ekklesia is actually a political term rather than a religious term. It was an organization of people who gathered to stand up against an oppressive government. It was a way for people to make a peaceful break from a corrupt government (something that we desperately need at present in the US, but that’s for another blog). What’s important to remember with this word is that Jesus was not only recognized as a religious figure, but also a political figure. He was of royal descent, the line of King David. In addition to his spiritual ministry, Jesus also stood up against the oppressive government of the time and His followers were considered “ekklesia” or “called out” and were persecuted by the apostate church of that day who abandoned the house of David proclaiming they had no king but Caesar. R. Scott, and H.G. Liddell, A Greek-English Lexicon. When this term is translated into the word “church” in our modern bibles it is referring to the universal church or body of believers who are “called out” (ekklesia) and set apart. It really has nothing to do with the church that we know of today. They held their own meetings, were united and had a meeting place because they were trying to avoid persecution.

    It would be important for me to point out that I never said that we should “substitute” church for community service or evangelism (I think it’s ironic, by the way, that you thought of door-to-door evangelism for my reference to witnessing) and I don’t think we should substitute. Each has their place and time. I’m just speculating how different things would be if we put more focus on spreading the gospel rather than focus on going to church.

    Also, I don’t think that I completely understand what you are saying about type A and type B personalities and leaders and followers. From my perspective the IFB falls in the category of false teachers. Pride is a danger for leaders of IFB churches as well.

    When I was talking about my preference for meeting I was referring to my preference for small groups vs. large groups not home church vs. organized denominational churches. Sorry for the confusion, I should have been more clear about that.

    Even if I were referring to home church vs. organized denominational churches, though, it would be important to make the distinction that a home church isn’t a denomination. It’s just a body of believers gathering together at a specific place and a specific time (your definition of church). Think about it. You went from one denomination – the SBC – to another denomination – the IFB. You essentially just traded one set of dangers for another set of dangers.

    I resist denominations, especially the IFB, for many reasons. I’m not resisting “the contemporary crowd” as you call it because (if I follow your line of reasoning here) I’m in the minority – not the minority in the sense that I’m among the non-church going crowd, but in the sense that I’m a Christian that resists church the way we do it in today’s society. I would even go as far as saying that I’m against religion, but that’s for another discussion. I guess you are correct in the sense that I resist popular opinion (I disagree with how the majority of Christians ‘do religion’), but I see this as acceptable because of the dangers of denominations, especially the IFB denomination given that popular opinion is often just popular, nothing more.

    Thanks for your kind words. I have to admit it was a nice change. I’m not really a bad guy. I’m just passionate about this issue. My eyes have been opened and all I want to do is share my knowledge.

  9. I agree 100% that denominational differences are not God’s will, but man’s. God wanted one body of believers, not hundreds.

    The church is mentioned in Acts 16:5 “5And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.” The word “church” in this verse is translated from the Greek word “ekklsia”. The definitions are many, but the two of the definitions are, (this portion of the paragraph was removed by the site Administrator due to copyright violation since the author did not provide a source for his quote.)

    You are correct, in my opinion, based on personal convictions, this is why I think the established church is important.

    I also agree with your perspective on the Great Commission. I think Christians have assigned their personal responsibilities to the leaders of the church and to the government. That is why we have welfare today because the church quit taking care of the widows and orphans. I still disagree that we should substitute church for community service or door-to-door evangelism. Our society is made up of more followers than leaders, this is evident in how easily people join cults, false religions, gangs, and other organizations that lead people astray. The type “A” personalities would have to lead the “B” personalities, and then you would have the danger of pride with one person feeling as sole leader (cult). There are warnings in the Bible about false teachers and church leaders that went in the wrong direction.

    The last thing I have for today is your comment, “Its just our preferred method of fellowship and worship. Some people do better in small groups rather than large crowds. Its more of a personal preference than anything.” I cannot comprehend why your method of worship is a personal preference, and it is acceptable, but our preferred method is not? I am not trying to pick a fight, but my comment in my first post (“I resist the contemporary crowd for my PERSONAL beliefs.”) is basically what you are saying in your comments.

    I agree that all churches get caught up in playing church, aka religion, and lose sight of the purpose and the goal. I will admit our values are different than yours, but we both are following our personal convictions. I promise you, I am nobody’s puppet. I joined the IFB church for the standards because I felt the way of the SBC was becoming too liberal. They were joining with other churches in allowing women to preach, allowing homosexuals to become members, and were playing politics with the government. How could I continue to attend a church where I personally disagreed with the denomination’s stance on these issues? I felt the IFB was legalistic and purposed I was not going to join a church that was narrow-minded. I continued to pray for God to put me where He wanted me, and you know the rest of the story. I live in a small town of 7,000 people in Tennessee, not a large city in Wyoming or Arizona. We don’t have “mega-churches” in our area, the closest church I know of that has an average attendance above 1,000 is three hours away! I know I am rambling and I am sorry for it, but I only wish I could convince you that we are working as individuals members of one body. I have no idea why it is important to me, I just feel compelled at this point. I know my life history is not and should not be a focus, but it is what I know the most about. I can quote scripture and we can disagree about the application, or the focus. We can take cheap shots at each other, but all that does is create strife and guilt (at least for me). I want all Christians to come together to do God’s will and your message only creates division. I am sorry for this ending, it is not what I intended to say, but believe it or not I do love you in Christian love. I think we will answer a lot of these questions one day in Heaven. I will look for you there one day. At this point, I am out of words and sit at my keyboard thinking of you. You pray for me and I will continue to pray for you. I pray for God’s will be done in both our lives.

    God bless and keep you and your family in His protection and strength.

  10. PS – In thinking more about the Great Commission, I think it’s too easy for people hide in a church. Church has become just another ritual and tradition for many Christians. It’s too easy for people to blow off the Great Commission because they feel that they are part of an organized church that is doing the work that they are supposed to be doing.

    We can get so caught up in going to church that we miss the work that we are supposed to be doing. Imagine if all the Christians of the world would go out and witness or doing community work on Sunday morning instead of going to church. Just think about how great that impact would be.

  11. I don’t understand why you still want to debate this. I feel like we’re beating a dead horse. I agree with those things you say, except perhaps for “we are commanded to come together as a body of believers”. I don’t know if thats supported with scripture.

    Keep in mind that this site is ultimately about the IFB. I’m speaking out about the IFB not organized church. In other words, this site is about the topic of the IFB not the topic of organized church so I don’t really want to lose focus.

    Now, having said that, I think your rationale for “organized church” seems to be a bit archaic so lets think for a moment about your arguments.

    First, missionaries are sent from mission boards not churches. Missionaries ask churches for financial support, but they are ultimately sent from mission boards. Missionaries could just as easily ask individuals, home groups and other organizations for financial support as they could a local church. I don’t see why missionaries NEED churches for financial support. In fact, I personally feel that, because of denominational differences, mission work is actually hindered by churches in today’s society. IFB churches, for example, will only support missionaries that are IFB in doctrinal affiliation. I don’t think that Jesus envisioned churches declining to support a missionary because of doctrinal differences.

    Second, the same is true for spreading the gospel. Jesus charged believers with the task of spreading the gospel NOT churches. The great commission is a charge for individuals NOT organized churches. It was actually for his disciples, but it can be applied to believers today. It can also be for churches, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be. Similar to mission work, though, I think that the gospel message is hindered by denominational differences. Many people are turned away from the Gospel because of dogmatic denominational leaders. Just because some have chosen to turn a blind eye to the damage the church has caused and is causing to the Gospel message doesn’t mean that only good can come from pairing organized churches with the Gospel message.

    Third, just because the Bible outlines a formal structure with leaders for a church doesn’t mean we MUST do it that way. Paul was giving instructions to the early church leaders to help guide them in establishing the true church (the body of believers). This can also serve as a guide for those who wish to build an organized church in today’s society.

    Fourth, having a home group isn’t because we are hiding and has nothing to do with persecution. Its just our preferred method of fellowship and worship. Some people do better in small groups rather than large crowds. Its more of a personal preference than anything.

    Fifth, the verses you gave me to support your opinion is just that, an opinion. I just don’t see how you can draw that opinion from those verses you gave.

    Sixth, you stated: “Establishing the New Testament church was one of the purposes of the apostles, by a commandment from Jesus.”. I don’t know if that is true or not so I ask for you to support that with scripture. If this is true according to scripture I don’t see how denominations are supported with this. Denominational differences are the cause of much discord among Christians. I just can’t see how that is what Jesus had in mind if He gave that charge to the apostles. A church may “organize believers” as you say, but it’s not the ONLY way for believers to be organized.

    Finally, to answer your question, the purpose of the church is multifaceted and includes, but is not limited to worship, fellowship, spreading the gospel message and teaching/instruction. I think there is a need for leadership and structure in any organization. Churches need structure and leadership for the same reasons that any other organization need structure and leadership – to avoid chaos.

  12. Ok, let’s try again.

    I mentioned in my earlier post that church attendance was important. I gave you verses that supported my opinion. A regular meeting time, does not have to be Sunday, and meet at an appointed place. Establishing the New Testament church was one of the purposes of the apostles, by a commandment from Jesus.
    Without organized churches I wonder where would missionaries be sent from? Who would support them with monetary gifts?

    A church organizes believers and the Bible gives the requirements for Pastors and deacon/elders. There is a formal structure and the purpose of the church is to spread the Gospel. How could the spreading of God’s word be more successful without the support of a local church?

    Know the meeting on Sunday more a tradition, not a commandment, but we are commanded to come together as a body of believers. The church was under scrutiny by the Jews in the early church, much as the churches in China are today. We have the freedom to worship in public without fear of government interference (for now). The USA was formed by Christians and seekers of religious freedoms. Why should we move back to meeting in private when we can meet publically?

    May I ask you thoughts on the purpose of the church and is there not a need for a formal structure of leadership?

  13. It’s always great to hear when someone has accepted Christ as his/her Savior. I rejoice.

    I’m at a loss on how to respond to the rest of your post. I’m fearful that whatever I say will be taken in the wrong context by you. Perhaps it would help you to get some training or read up on logical fallacies and what it means to have an argument using logical reasoning and healthy debating techniques.

    Here is an easy suggestion to help you get started. Take your focus off of me and put it on the subject matter of the site. I don’t know how to say it more clearly then that. If you follow that rule then you will probably be OK. If you want to continue debating me then pick a topic and stick with it. I will no longer entertain anything except for discussing the topic of interest. Any more ad hominem, straw man, red herring, etc. fallacies will be simply pointed out and then dropped.

    If you want to continue to post messages on this site follow those instructions.

  14. Ban me? Go ahead, it doesn’t matter a lot to me. This is your site, do as you wish. I will respect your decision either way.

    I would love to have a rational discussion. That would mean you would have to attempt to show more respect to your “guest”. Give respect and you will receive respect. I agree we have went off topic, but I think we both could improve on how we “talk” to each other. Agreed?

    If I have a typo, I am fine with you pointing it out. I can accept the feedback.

    I had one of the young men in my Sunday School class accept Jesus today. He prayed his own prayer and he confessed to Jesus. He understood he was lost and felt the Holy Spirit of God today. I do not know what you would say about a 12 year old who accepted Jesus today in our church, but I would hope you could see that God is still working within the IFB churches. At least ours! Can you take joy with me or will you discount this too?

  15. And the ad hominems continue. I refused to lower myself to commenting on all your spelling errors and typos, although I could. Please stick with the discussion if you want me to keep allowing your comments.

    I’m not going to entertain this line of discussion anymore. I’m glad for your inability to have a rational discussion and for your focus on me instead of the issues. It serves to provide evidence for what this site is about.

    If you wish to continue then pick a topic and discuss the topic. If not, our discussion will end with this post.

    Oh and by the way, you are a guest on this site. You don’t get to dictate to me what you want me to do. So pick a topic and lets have a rational discussion or you will be permanently banned from the site. Is that clear enough for you?

  16. Oh, almost forgot. When you say “Your pathetic.” It should be you are or you’re pathetic. That way when you call me names in the future, you will get it right!

  17. Let’s recap. This time you say, “You are seeing lack of discernment and aggression because you want to see it.” I want to see aggression? Really, you do not see your comments as aggressive? Comments like: “You are trying to lie about what you said and then lecture me on being nice and ethical. Your pathetic.” “…are rude, arrogant, ignorant, closed minded, you can’t keep from making assumptions and attacks…” Me attacking you, that is a joke. What about this one? “You’ve turned it into some type of pissing contest.” Nice, your parents would be proud of your level of respect from others and you poor choice of words. I make assumptions because you are unclear. I will make another few assumptions. I think you are very immature, probably no older than mid-thirties, were know as the “troubled” kid in school and church. You have no formal education and, in your arrogance, think it is your “job” to save people from organized religion. The IFB just happens to be your target because you were a rebel when you were young and have yet to mature past the point of rebellion. Your name calling is childish, and if you think I will tolerate you berating me verbally while I sit on my hands, your are as silly as you seem. Your anger has clouded your judgments. If we were face to face, I would explain it to you so you could understand. Instead you hid behind your monitor and use verbal abuse as a tool to divert attention from your inability to comprehend that fact you might be wrong. I will not quit posting to this site, but will you delete my future posts or will you be a man and leave them? I did not come to pick a fight, but I am will to do so if you want. My qualifications? You would be surprised to my background and, in your ego-blinded rage, you have failed to see the respect I have extended you. If your feelings are hurt, be a professional and resist the urge to name call. Only a coward uses these methods. If I am wrong, then debate me like a scholar, not a child. Your passion is misguided and your immaturity in your last post shows the lack of Spiritual discernment.
    Now, I will ask you again, what would you like to discuss next. Your personal attacks are childish and is wasting both our time.

  18. It will give validity to your analysis of the scriptures. Why are you so hesitant to provide them?

    My credentials are listed on the “About Me” page of this site, always have been.

    Two things, I try to have you focus on one thing at a time so it is easier for readers to follow. Secondly, I do not concern myself with what does or does not annoy you. Annoying you is not my purpose, so it plays no part in this discussion. Why do you bring it up? Is it to make this personal and attempt to gain sympathy for your cause?

    That’s why I said “I understand, though, if you want to focus on one topic at a time.” I guess you missed that part.

    I brought it up so you will answer my questions. It’s really not that difficult to figure out.

    Annoying me is a side effect of your posts. I didn’t say that you are doing it on purpose.

    Umm, if you didn’t disagree, we would not be discussing it. Pretty simple idea, would you agree?

    We could agree on Hebrews 10:25 and still be having this discussion (it’s not much of a discussion anymore by the way). I have no idea how you apply Hebrews 10:25 so I can’t agree or disagree yet. I can’t read minds – at least minds of people I can’t see.

    You give me your thoughts on Hebrews 10:25 please so to avoid confusion or assumptions.

    Hebrews 10:25 is part of a message. Read by itself it’s an incomplete thought. It can’t be pulled out of context and given a different meaning from what the author of Hebrews meant for it to have.

    Hebrews 10:19-13:25 is about the Christian faith. Jews who had become Christians in the 1st century were tempted to fall back into Judaism because of uncertainty, the security of custom, and persecution. The author of Hebrews is giving a charge to believers of that time to live by faith which is better than merely fulfilling rituals and customs. It is a challenge to grow and mature in the faith and live in obedience to God. This is best accomplished, ideally, when believers support, encourage and strengthen each other (10:25).

    The “meeting together” in this context does not necessarily mean church the way we think of it today. It has a wide range of application from two believers talking and encouraging each other to a modern mega church with thousands of people meeting.

    Yet another example where you are taking liberties with my words. When will you stop taking liberties with my words?

    How is quoting you taking liberty with your words?

    Sounds childish, doesn’t it. Just like your comments do?

    No I don’t think my comment sounded childish. It’s was a legitimate statement since I’ve asked you at least a dozen times to stop making assumptions about me.

    I did not say that we were supposed to meet at a church building. Your words, not mine. What I DID say was the early Christians “come together in one place”. Never did I mention where the one place was.

    I beg to differ. You gave every indication that you were talking about a church building. You even said to me “The reason I see church attendance as important is as follows:” and then proceeded to give me a list of reasons why going to church is important. You even scolded me for not attending an “organized church” and for telling people to stay home on Sundays rather than to “participate as a member of a organized church.” You also stated: “I would rather be like Jesus and be in the temple than stay home or have group meetings to discuss how holy we are or how more enlightened we must be to see what millions in this country is missing by going to church.”. I’m not sure how else to interpret “organized church” other than the type of churches that we meet in today.

    Its no wonder why this discussion isn’t going anywhere. You can’t even remember what you said.

    The IFB does church LIKE EVEYONE ELSE!

    That’s why I talked about our culture and said that “I agree that meeting together is a good thing and that even meeting on Sunday at Church is a good time/place to do it since it’s kind of cultrualized (for lack of a better term) now in our society – in other words Sunday Church meeting is the common method of today’s society for Christians.”

    I also said in a previous post “I don’t agree with the way we do church in today’s society whether its an IFB, Presbyterian, Lutheran or whatever. The way the modern church does religion is not supported by scripture.”

    I have never attended a church with services on Saturday, other than revival. Have you?

    Yes I have attended a church with services on Saturday. There is even an entire denomination dedicated to Saturday Sabbath worship. They are called Seventh Day Adventists.

    If I was to attend a church that met on Sunday and I showed up on Saturday, then I would be the one at fault, not the church. That is about the silliest argument you have made yet. That is why I question your credentials; some statements you make are almost laughable.

    If you would pay attention it may not be so laughable to you. I never said to show up on Saturday even though the church meets on Sunday. I said for the church to have services on Saturday or Monday. And you accuse me of twisting words? pfffffff

    Let me move on to the next point before I offend you again. Your expounding on 1 Corinthians 16:1-2 was very well constructed and thought out, but you completely missed my point. The point I was making was the direction to meet at an appointed day of the week, not why they were meeting.

    How am I supposed to know hat your point is if you don’t tell me? We are talking about meeting at church for services. I Corinthians 16:1-2 has nothing to do with that.

    The word tithe, since you obviously do not know, is also known to mean: “Tithes are called personal when accuring from labor, art, trade, and navigation; predial, when issuing from the earth, as hay, wood, and fruit; and mixed, when accuring from beaste fed from the ground”, Blackstone. Time and money are included, so your argument “Careful study of the 1 Corinthians passage will show you that the first day of the week was Sunday, BUT it wasn’t a time of worship. It was a time of work” is invalid.

    Then why was it printed on the OFFERING ENVELOPE (the place where we put our money in for the offering)? It’s not invalid. You are just trying to hand wave again. You’re good at that. Anyway, I thought we were talking about worship services? Why are you talking about tithing our time? I don’t make the connection.

    Even more so since my statement, “but it was a weekly appointment to meet together” has nothing to do with a time to worship, as you stated in your resonse. I used the word “tithing” and you must have not fully understood the application of the word, but I DID NOT say they met to worship in my comments. You must have assumed I did or you are taking more liberties with my words. You should not misquote me; it is not nice or ethical to do so.

    I’m through repeating myself. You can’t even keep up with what you are saying let alone what I’m saying. I’ll remind you what you said. You stated: “I provides [sic] scriptures that show the church was established by God, the body of believers came together to worship on an appointed day (emphasis mine)…”. You are trying to lie about what you said and then lecture me on being nice and ethical. Your pathetic.

    Where did I ever say it was a sin to miss church? If I work late on Wednesday and I miss church, it isn’t a sin.

    I didn’t say you said it was a sin to miss church.

    You are expressing what you experienced in your past, but why not debate me on what I say, not what you interject?

    Giving examples and sharing one’s experiences are part of debating.

    What are you disputing then? Can you, with clarity, give me your point in a response, and please resist the urge to tell me to read the entire website again so I can decipher for myself your point. I am still having fun, are you?

    I’ve already told you what I’m disputing in my previous message. I’m done repeating myself with you.

    Your lack of discernment shows in your impulse aggression. That was the reaction I was going for. If someone questions you, the response is very aggressive and usually condescending. These are defense mechanisms. You are not improving in that area at all. I will continue to expose the fallacy in your arguments why you attempt to divert my points, all the while twisting my words and misquoting me. Will you focus on what I am saying or will you continue refer to something that happened to you years ago?

    You are seeing lack of discernment and aggression because you want to see it. You refuse to see anything else. You don’t know me and even if you did I doubt that you have the credentials to diagnose me with an impulse control disorder. I think this is wishful thinking on your part, just another attempt to discredit me in an ad hominem fallacy. You can’t debate with me so you resort to attacking me.

    How do you know I’m twisting your words when you can’t even remember what you say (see the examples given above).

    I bet you didn’t know that sarcasm is a passive aggressive way to show aggression. (Since you have trouble remembering what you say you admitted that you are being sarcastic. See your message above.). Hmmmm…

    I have one more request, would you please stop stereotyping all IFB in one bucket like you do in your site? Open your mind to the possibility that not all IFB churches are like what you describe in your site. Also, let me know what you would like to discuss next!

    Like I said, I’m done repeating myself with you. I’ve already talked about this many times. If you don’t know by now, repeating it again isn’t going to help.

    Its up to you to decide on what to discuss. You came here to pick a fight with me remember?

    To be honest, I don’t really want to discuss anything else with you. You are rude, arrogant, ignorant, closed minded, you can’t keep from making assumptions and attacks, and you refuse to follow along properly. This isn’t a discussion or a debate anymore. You’ve turned it into some type of pissing contest. I’m happy to continue entertaining your silly messages and I’ll continue to reply if you want to post more, but I have no desire to pick another topic to discuss.

    If you want to pick a topic I will try and discuss it with you though.

  19. “What is your reason for wanting to know my credentials? Why is that so important to you?” It will give validity to your analysis of the scriptures. Why are you so hesitant to provide them? “I sure do wish you would answer ALL my questions to you. It’s quite annoying to put so much effort into replying only to have most of it ignored.” Two things, I try to have you focus on one thing at a time so it is easier for readers to follow. Secondly, I do not concern myself with what does or does not annoy you. Annoying you is not my purpose, so it plays no part in this discussion. Why do you bring it up? Is it to make this personal and attempt to gain sympathy for your cause? “How do you KNOW we disagree with the application of this verse? I don’t recall talking about it before. And yet another assumption. I hope you stop making assumptions soon.” Umm, if you didn’t disagree, we would not be discussing it. Pretty simple idea, would you agree? You give me your thoughts on Hebrews 10:25 please so to avoid confusion or assumptions. “These three passages I’ll address together because they bring up the same questions for me. How do you draw the conclusion that we are supposed to meet at a church building on Sunday and perform the traditional service that we currently have from these passages?” Yet another example where you are taking liberties with my words. When will you stop taking liberties with my words? Sounds childish, doesn’t it. Just like your comments do? I did not say that we were supposed to meet at a church building. Your words, not mine. What I DID say was the early Christians “come together in one place”. Never did I mention where the one place was. “This, however, is not the point. The point I’m arguing is the IFB’s message that one MUST attend church on Sunday (am and pm services). I’m arguing that we don’t have to do church the way the IFB does it.” The IFB does church LIKE EVEYONE ELSE! I have never attended a church with services on Saturday, other than revival. Have you? If I was to attend a church that met on Sunday and I showed up on Saturday, then I would be the one at fault, not the church. That is about the silliest argument you have made yet. That is why I question your credentials; some statements you make are almost laughable. Let me move on to the next point before I offend you again. Your expounding on 1 Corinthians 16:1-2 was very well constructed and thought out, but you completely missed my point. The point I was making was the direction to meet at an appointed day of the week, not why they were meeting. The word tithe, since you obviously do not know, is also known to mean: “Tithes are called personal when accuring from labor, art, trade, and navigation; predial, when issuing from the earth, as hay, wood, and fruit; and mixed, when accuring from beaste fed from the ground”, Blackstone. Time and money are included, so your argument “Careful study of the 1 Corinthians passage will show you that the first day of the week was Sunday, BUT it wasn’t a time of worship. It was a time of work” is invalid. Even more so since my statement, “but it was a weekly appointment to meet together” has nothing to do with a time to worship, as you stated in your resonse. I used the word “tithing” and you must have not fully understood the application of the word, but I DID NOT say they met to worship in my comments. You must have assumed I did or you are taking more liberties with my words. You should not misquote me; it is not nice or ethical to do so.
    Stay with me, it is getting exciting! ” What I disagree with is the IFB’s manipulation of people by sharing the message that it’s a sin to not go to church.” Where did I ever say it was a sin to miss church? If I work late on Wednesday and I miss church, it isn’t a sin. You are expressing what you experienced in your past, but why not debate me on what I say, not what you interject? ““Can you please show me in the Bible where it says that Christians are supposed to go to church?” You’ve done a good job of showing us that it’s a Biblical principle, that it’s good for believers to meet for specific purposes on an appointed day with different roles for people etc., however, those aren’t things I’m disputing.” What are you disputing then? Can you, with clarity, give me your point in a response, and please resist the urge to tell me to read the entire website again so I can decipher for myself your point. I am still having fun, are you?
    Your lack of discernment shows in your impulse aggression. That was the reaction I was going for. If someone questions you, the response is very aggressive and usually condescending. These are defense mechanisms. You are not improving in that area at all. I will continue to expose the fallacy in your arguments why you attempt to divert my points, all the while twisting my words and misquoting me. Will you focus on what I am saying or will you continue refer to something that happened to you years ago? I have one more request, would you please stop stereotyping all IFB in one bucket like you do in your site? Open your mind to the possibility that not all IFB churches are like what you describe in your site. Also, let me know what you would like to discuss next!

  20. I will apologize for the tone of my last post, it was very sarcastic. My intentions were to be sarcastic and draw a reaction from you. Which it did. Also, you still have a condescending tone of superiority, but we all have our struggles. I would really like to know your credentials, but I can understand your hesitancy in providing them. I am still praying for you.

    Apology accepted. I’m curious, what kind of reaction were you trying to draw from me? What kind of reaction did you see in that post? Why were you trying to draw a reaction from me anyway?

    What is your reason for wanting to know my credentials? Why is that so important to you?

    Church attendance? Let’s focus on this first.

    I sure do wish you would answer ALL my questions to you. It’s quite annoying to put so much effort into replying only to have most of it ignored. I understand, though, if you want to focus on one topic at a time.

    The reasons I see church attendance as important is as follows:

    I have to admit, I’m a bit disappointing. I was actually hoping for something more substantial than just pulling a few passages out of context. Do you really know why you do the things you do when it comes to spirituality or are you just robotically following the opinion of the IFB? I never knew why I did the things I did except for what the IFB told me. It was rather freeing to research and find out if what the IFB taught me was really true or not.

    1. We can start at Hebrews 10:25, but you and I disagree with the application of this verse.

    A bit presumptuous don’t you think? How do you KNOW we disagree with the application of this verse? I don’t recall talking about it before. And yet another assumption. I hope you stop making assumptions soon.

    2. 1 Corinthians 11:17-18 tells us to come together in the church. Verse 20 of the same chapter says come together in one place. Again, chapter 30 says when you come together.

    4. 1 Peter 5 says the elders (pastors) are to “feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof”. This is the instruction for tending the flock (church).

    5. Acts 13:1 talks about the church being at Antioch. Churches being established are mentioned in other books of the Bible as well.

    These three passages I’ll address together because they bring up the same questions for me. How do you draw the conclusion that we are supposed to meet at a church building on Sunday and perform the traditional service that we currently have from these passages?

    How do you get the message that it’s better to go to a church building to meet rather than meet in a home or somewhere else? I just don’t see it. They do NOT instruct us “to come together in the church” and they give no indication that Christians should meet on Sunday.

    By the way, I’m not arguing that Christians shouldn’t meet together, encourage, edify, teach, support each other etc. I agree that meeting together is a good thing and that even meeting on Sunday at Church is a good time/place to do it since it’s kind of cultrualized (for lack of a better term) now in our society – in other words Sunday Church meeting is the common method of today’s society for Christians.

    This, however, is not the point. The point I’m arguing is the IFB’s message that one MUST attend church on Sunday (am and pm services). I’m arguing that we don’t have to do church the way the IFB does it

    3. 1 Corinthians 16:1-2: “Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.” The instructions were on tithing, but it was a weekly appointment to meet together. The first day of the week (kata mian sabbatoµn) is the same text used in Luke 24:1.

    This one I’d like to focus on separately because it’s a passage that is commonly misunderstood. There are entire books written about the “First Day of the Week” issue. It’s very confusing for most people because there is a lot to understand about it. I will try to simplify it and give a reasonable summary.

    1 Corinthians 16:1-2 is actually one of exactly eight references in the NT to the phrase “the first day of the week”. The other seven are: Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:2, Mark 16:9, Luke 24:1, John 20:1, John 20:19 and Acts 20:7. The thing is, however, that the word “Sunday” appears zero times, and none of the eight passages speak of Sunday worship.

    Careful study of the 1 Corinthians passage will show you that the first day of the week was Sunday, BUT it wasn’t a time of worship. It was a time of work. The Sabbath (the time set aside to worship and rest) was always on Saturday the seventh day of the week. This was established in Exodus and didn’t change in the NT.

    This 1 Corinthians verse was printed on the little offering envelopes in my church and I was told that this passage sets the first day of the week as the time for taking up the church offering. This is a major misinterpretation of scripture by the IFB

    This passage is NOT about going to church nor is it about giving tithes. If you read the context you will find out that the Corinthians were meeting on the first day of the week, NOT to rest or worship but to work. This was a routine AFTER SABBATH workday where they gathered food to take to the poor. This was not a day of rest and worship but of work. It was the day after the Sabbath, the first day of the week.

    The church was not established until after Jesus left and sent the Holy Spirit (Pentecost). The Church is the body of believers, but the Bible gives examples of the believers coming together in one place. You asked me back up what I say with Scripture, so I did. I provides scriptures that show the church was established by God, the body of believers came together to worship on an appointed day, the Pastor is called by God and is to oversee the church, and missionaries was sent out of the churches to establish new churches. We will focus on one thing at a time, so not to confuse either of us or anyone who may be reading this. I will await your response.

    Again, I’m not denying the benefits of going to church or that meeting together as Christians is a principle taught in the Bible. I’m not saying that the church isn’t important and doesn’t have its place.

    What I disagree with is the IFB’s manipulation of people by sharing the message that it’s a sin to not go to church. The IFB gives the message that if you skip church you are backsliding in the least and rebelling at most. I was guilted into going to church because the IFB told me that good Christians go to church when the doors are open and bad Christians skip church. Of course I wanted to be a good Christian so I followed their instruction. They used verses, just like you are using here, to support their teachings.

    Anyway, you didn’t really answer my question. I asked “Can you please show me in the Bible where it says that Christians are supposed to go to church?”. You’ve done a good job of showing us that it’s a Biblical principle, that it’s good for believers to meet for specific purposes on an appointed day with different roles for people etc., however, those aren’t things I’m disputing.

    Let me be more specific. Please show me please in the Bible where we are required to attend church service on Sunday, in the morning and evening, Wednesday for prayer meeting, Thursday for visitation, be there for each one, in a building established by a minister with a congregation, where we sing hymns, take offering, the pastor give a three point message, and there is an invitation.

    In your previous post, the sarcastic one, you mocked me for wanting to stay home on Sundays and for wanting having church in my home and for “not participating as a member of an organized church”. So I ask again, how do you support that with scripture? Please show me that the Bible tells us that we are required to become members of our local organized church and refrain from staying home on Sundays.

    I’m asking these things multiple times and in different ways to make sure you understand what I’m saying. I’m not trying to be smart or appear “superior” – as you accuse me of – in anyway. I’m just trying to make sure I cover all the bases so there’s as little misunderstanding as possible.

    By the way, did you know that Sunday worship was established by the Roman Catholics? Here is an excerpt from Mark Jenkins’ article on Why Churches Keep Sunday.

    ” At the time of Christ, only pagans—specifically, the Roman Empire—worshipped on Sunday. By a.d. 230, however, Catholics were divided on which day they should observe. One early Catholic, Origen, wrote: “But what is the feast of the Sabbath except that of which the apostle speaks, ‘There remaineth, therefore, a Sabbatism,’ that is, the observance of the Sabbath by the people of God? Leaving the Jewish observances of the Sabbath, let us see how the Sabbath ought to be observed by a Christian. On the Sabbath day all worldly labors ought to be abstained from. If, therefore, you cease from all secular works, and execute nothing worldly, but give yourselves up to spiritual exercises, repairing to church, attending to sacred reading and instruction … this is the observance of the Christian Sabbath.” At that time, this Catholic leader was referring to the seventh day of the week.

    Enforced Sunday worship began with the Roman Empire, specifically Constantine. In a.d. 321, Constantine issued an edict forbidding work on “the venerable day of the sun”—Sunday. In a letter following the Nicene Council of a.d. 325, Constantine spoke of the enforcement of Sunday worship for Easter services: “At this meeting the question concerning the most holy day of Easter was discussed, and it was resolved by the united judgment of all present that this feast ought to be kept by all and in every place on one and the same day.” In other words, Easter was to be kept on Sunday, and the Jewish observance of Passover was expressly forbidden.

    To those who ignored the decrees of the Nicene Council, Constantine wrote, in another letter regarding Sabbath worship, “Forasmuch, then, as it is no longer possible to bear with your pernicious errors, we give warning by this present statute that none of you henceforth presume to assemble yourselves together. We have directed, accordingly, that you be deprived of all the houses in which you are accustomed to hold your assemblies: and our care in this respect extends so far as to forbid the holding of your superstitious and senseless meetings, not in public merely, but in any private house or place whatsoever. Let those of you, therefore, who are desirous of embracing the true and pure religion take the far better course of entering the Catholic Church …. [F]rom this day forward none of your unlawful assemblies may presume to appear in any public or private place. Let this edict be made public.”

    After Constantine gave his edict, worship on any day except Sunday became illegal (emphasis mine). Almost 40 years later, in a.d. 363, the Council of Laodicea determined, “Christians must not Judaize by resting on the Sabbath [that is, Saturday], but must work on that day, rather honoring the Lord’s day …. But if any shall be found to be Judaizers, let them be anathema [cursed and excommunicated] from Christ.”

    At the Council of Tours in a.d. 1163, Pope Alexander III made this decree: “Whereas a damnable heresy has for some time lifted its head in the parts about Toulouse, and already spread infection through Gascony and other provinces, concealing itself like a serpent in its folds; as soon as its followers shall have been discovered, let no man afford them refuge on his estates; neither let there be any communication with them in buying and selling: so that, being deprived of the solace of human conversation, they may be compelled to return from error to wisdom.”

    Historically speaking, there is no question as to who changed the day of worship. It was the Catholic Church, enforced by the Roman Empire.”

  21. I will apologize for the tone of my last post, it was very sarcastic. My intentions were to be sarcastic and draw a reaction from you. Which it did. Also, you still have a condescending tone of superiority, but we all have our struggles. I would really like to know your credentials, but I can understand your hesitancy in providing them. I am still praying for you.

    Church attendance? Let’s focus on this first. The reasons I see church attendance as important is as follows:

    1. 1. We can start at Hebrews 10:25, but you and I disagree with the application of this verse.
    2. 2. 1 Corinthians 11:17 – 18 tells us to come together in the church. Verse 20 of the same chapter says come together in one place. Again, chapter 30 says when you come together.
    3. 3. 1 Corinthians 16: 1, 2: “Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.” The instructions were on tithing, but it was a weekly appointment to meet together. The first day of the week (kata mian sabbatoµn) is the same text used in Luke 24:1.
    4. 4. 1 Peter 5 says the elders (pastors) are to “feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof”. This is the instruction for tending the flock (church).
    5. 5. Acts 13:1 talks about the church being at Antioch. Churches being established are mentioned in other books of the Bible as well.

    The church was not established until after Jesus left and sent the Holy Spirit (Pentecost). The Church is the body of believers, but the Bible gives examples of the believers coming together in one place. You asked me back up what I say with Scripture, so I did. I provides scriptures that show the church was established by God, the body of believers came together to worship on an appointed day, the Pastor is called by God and is to oversee the church, and missionaries was sent out of the churches to establish new churches. We will focus on one thing at a time, so not to confuse either of us or anyone who may be reading this. I will await your response.

  22. I’m not sure if your sarcasm means you are growing weary of the discussion, but if you want to continue please be more clear and cut out the sarcasm. I’ve tried hard to make my wording clear and clean up the tone of my messages at your request. Please show the same courtesy to me.

    Did you forget? I was saved in a Southern Baptist Church and left to join a IFB church because the SBC was becoming too liberal. I was not raised in an IFB church, but joined an IFB church at 34 years of age.

    No, I didn’t forget that. Why do you ask? I don’t follow.

    I guess my lack of an “open mind” is due to the continued deterioration of our society and most mainstream churches. I was open minded to what the SBC was teaching, until I learned where they spent my tithes and how much money they kept in the bank for “emergencies”. I felt the urgency should be on getting the Word into a lost and dying world, not putting money in savings and paying inflated salaries to the executives. I left the Southern Baptist Convention church to join the Independent Baptist Church. I guess you acute ability to learn visually failed you there?

    How would the “deterioration of our society and most mainstream churches” keep you from having an open mind about the IFB? I think the opposite would be true. A deteriorating society especially in most mainstream churches makes me have an even more open mind if only to be more vigilant about what I’m being taught. I don’t understand where you are coming from here. This line of thinking doesn’t make sense to me.

    No, I don’t recall you ever writing this information before (except for the part where you left the SBC to join the IFB). If you did I’m sorry. I said I’m good at remembering what I read not that I have a perfect memory.

    The brainwashing or naivety you mentioned can be applied to me, IF it makes you feel better that an intelligent, mature Christian could join a IFB church. There must be something wrong with me to want to join such a misled or narrow-minded church.

    I don’t understand your line of thinking here. All people who are conned are naive to the con. There isn’t something wrong with the person being conned (except if they ignore warnings from those who have experienced the same con).

    Naivety in this context doesn’t necessarily show that something is wrong with the person being conned except that they are naive to it (they don’t realize they are being conned). When the person being conned is told they are being conned they usually don’t believe it, that’s the power of the con artist. The only thing wrong with you that I can see is that you are ignoring the warnings of this site.

    I feel your open-mindedness is more dangerous than my “narrow-minded” view of the church.

    Fair enough. Why?

    We are told many times in scripture to be careful about what others teach us when it comes to spiritual issues. We are admonished to question teachers of the scriptures and to see if what they are teaching us is correct (see 1 Thessalonians 5, 1 John 4, 2 Timothy 2, and Acts 17). How is that more dangerous than narrow mindedly following the dogma of the IFB and refusing to question it?

    I’m not immune to this either. If you can show me where I’m wrong I’ll be glad to address it.

    But it is easy to tell people to stay home on Sundays, not to tithe and not participate as a member of a organized church.

    Oh Yeah? I would suggest that you try being on this side of the fence before making such statements. I wish I could show you the hate mail I’ve gotten. It hardly shows Christian love and it’s far from easy. Not only do I have to put up with the hate mail and threats, I have made great sacrifices to speak out against these things. It hasn’t really been easy at all.

    At any rate, I don’t recall telling people those things. Can you show me where on this site I tell people to “stay home on Sundays, not to tithe and not participate as a member of a organized church”? If I have I’ll be glad to re-word or remove those things. It’s not my goal to tell anyone what to do.

    I would bet more people would adhere to that philosophy than one that requires a sacrifice of time, money, and self. We are a very selfish generation are we not? Yes, I know I am being sarcastic, but you have a tendency to eliminate any possibilities that you could be wrong. You know, you could be?

    So what I’m doing doesn’t require sacrifice of time, money and self? Are you delusional? I guess, according to your logic, only the people who go to an IFB church make the sacrifice of time, money and self? That’s laughable. You’ve really out done yourself. Just when I thought you couldn’t possibly be more illogical.

    I’ve never made the claim to perfection. I know I can be wrong. Can you be more specific on which possibilities I’m eliminating? How am I eliminating the possibilities that I could be wrong? If you are going to attack me then at least have the courtesy to point to specifics to back up your claim.

    I hope your mission is successful for those who require your services. Forgive me for not thinking your work as a ministry, it seems your method is to replace church with counseling under the freedom of “being closer to Jesus”.

    This isn’t a ministry so you shouldn’t think of it as one.

    Where do you get the idea that I want to “replace church with counseling under the freedom of being closer to Jesus”? What does that mean anyway? Can you please explain?

    The Christian life should be about drawing closer to Christ and getting to know Him better NOT about going to church. Can you please show me in the Bible where it says that Christians are supposed to go to church?

    I know you will place the same comparison of co-dependence with the IFB churches and people who attend them. We are like sheep, right?

    How do you KNOW that?

    What do you mean “we are like sheep”?

    I could be wrong, most of us are wrong every now and again. I know I am incapable of expounding on the gospels like you, and I appreciate your “being flexible” with my inability to extract information from my memory the way you can,…

    You aren’t incapable of expounding on the gospels like me. It takes practice, but anyone can do it. All you need is guidance from the Holy Spirit, but only if you stop believing the garbage being told to you by the IFB.

    I don’t expect you to extract information from memory either. If you are going to make accusations, defenses and assumptions and your memory of what you read isn’t good then you will have to read the site more than once. It’s really not that difficult to figure out.

    …but the Bible says Jesus taught in the temple daily. The temple then would be the modern day equivalent to what we call “church”, right? I think I would rather be like Jesus and be in the temple than stay home or have group meetings to discuss how holy we are or how more enlightened we must be to see what millions in this country is missing by going to church.

    Well, that’s kind of correct. As a boy Jesus went to the Temple to teach the religious leaders of that day, however, during his Ministry, Jesus went out among the people to teach them, he didn’t ask people to come to the Temple/Synagogue and then teach them in there. Jesus taught on the hill side, by the river, at the shore line, etc. The Great Commission tells us to “go out into the world and preach the gospel…” it doesn’t say build church buildings and try to get people to come to the church.

    It tells us in Luke 4 that Jesus went to the Synagogue on the sabbath which was his usual practice (it says “usual practice or custom” by the way NOT daily), but he went there to TEACH. It wasn’t a local synagogue like we think of the local church. The synagogues of that time were filled with traditions and customs that Jesus wanted to eliminate. He went there to correct the religious leaders and make sure the people knew the truth apart from the traditions and customs. So if you wanted to be like Jesus based on this then you would have to be doing what I’m doing, except you would have to go and speak out in the churches rather than on the Internet.

    But lets say for the moment that Jesus did attend “church” just like we do today and you are wanting to be like Jesus in this aspect. Why do you insist on being like Jesus in this aspect but ignore the other aspects of his ministry? How do you decide which aspects of Jesus you want to be like and which are not worth being like?

    You quoted Hitler, who I have studied intently. I will leave you with another quote from Hitler, “The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force”. The issue is who is the author of the rhetoric? I will let you respond to that.

    I’m not sure what that has to do with our discussion. Care to explain?

    Anyone can use rhetoric. Rhetoric is nothing more than the use of language effectively and persuasively. The author of a particular rhetoric depends on what rhetoric you are talking about.

    Well, I guess you are back to assumptions, personal attacks and speculations. You have never once shown me support for your beliefs from the Bible despite being asked several times. You’re essentially doing nothing more than parroting the same tired dogma from the IFB. I would suggest that you back up what you say with scripture, at the very least.

  23. Did you forget? I was saved in a Southern Baptist Church and left to join a IFB church because the SBC was becoming too liberal. I was not raised in an IFB church, but joined an IFB church at 34 years of age. I guess my lack of an “open mind” is due to the continued deterioration of our society and most mainstream churches. I was open minded to what the SBC was teaching, until I learned where they spent my tithes and how much money they kept in the bank for “emergencies”. I felt the urgency should be on getting the Word into a lost and dying world, not putting money in savings and paying inflated salaries to the executives. I left the Southern Baptist Convention church to join the Independent Baptist Church. I guess you acute ability to learn visually failed you there?

    The brainwashing or naivety you mentioned can be applied to me, IF it makes you feel better that an intelligent, mature Christian could join a IFB church. There must be something wrong with me to want to join such a misled or narrow-minded church. I feel your open-mindedness is more dangerous than my “narrow-minded” view of the church. But it is easy to tell people to stay home on Sundays, not to tithe and not participate as a member of a organized church. I would bet more people would adhere to that philosophy than one that requires a sacrifice of time, money, and self. We are a very selfish generation are we not? Yes, I know I am being sarcastic, but you have a tendency to eliminate any possibilities that you could be wrong. You know, you could be?

    I hope your mission is successful for those who require your services. Forgive me for not thinking your work as a ministry, it seems your method is to replace church with counseling under the freedom of “being closer to Jesus”. I know you will place the same comparison of co-dependence with the IFB churches and people who attend them. We are like sheep, right? I could be wrong, most of us are wrong every now and again. I know I am incapable of expounding on the gospels like you, and I appreciate your “being flexible” with my inability to extract information from my memory the way you can, but the Bible says Jesus taught in the temple daily. The temple then would be the modern day equivalent to what we call “church”, right? I think I would rather be like Jesus and be in the temple than stay home or have group meetings to discuss how holy we are or how more enlightened we must be to see what millions in this country is missing by going to church.

    You quoted Hitler, who I have studied intently. I will leave you with another quote from Hitler, “The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force”. The issue is who is the author of the rhetoric? I will let you respond to that.

  24. For the most part I have a pretty good memory and attention to detail is one of my assets. I’m a visual learner so once I read something I can usually recall what I’ve read without hesitation. I have a tendency to forget that not everyone is like that. I apologize for making that mistake with you. I need to be more flexible when you ask a question and be patient in explaining things again. I don’t like to repeat myself, but I’m working on that flaw. Thanks for your patience. I will be more willing to explain things again or repeat things I’ve already written in the future.

    The prayer used to lead people to Christ is similar because of the method of training used on lay people to lead individuals to Christ. The prayer is a tool, but the conviction by the Holy Spirit is the means. I think we can agree on this?

    I agree that the prayer can be a tool, if you can agree that “the prayer” – the salvation prayer – can sometimes be misleading and confusing.

    Church is a place to exhort Christ, by worship and prayer. Do you need to attend, well, I think I am a better Christian for my church attendance plus I want to attend church as much as I can. I enjoy the fellowship of other Christians. The faithfulness of one’s church attendance is not a matter of salvation no more than what one wears. I concede “where two or more are gathered” argument to you, if you will concede we are instructed to “assembly ourselves together”. But this is another area of personal convictions for an individual, not a prerequisite to be a Christian!

    It’s ironic because even with all I’ve been through I also believe I’m a better Christian because of my experiences. If I did not had the experiences I had I wouldn’t be where I am today. I would not have such a clear view of what Grace is and what it means to be a Christian.

    I agree on the importance of “assembling ourselves together”, but I don’t agree that it has to be at church and certainly not on Sunday. The way we do church in today’s society is more tradition than anything else. Just try to introduce the idea of having church on Saturday, Monday or another day of the week, just try it for fun I dare you… I triple dog dare you! No doubt you’ll get laughed at. Why? Because Sunday is the day we are “supposed” to have church. You’ll be hard pressed to find support for that in the Bible though.

    As for the picking on Christians, you are right, I am “picking” on you. We are different. I am sure we have very different upbringings (you were raised in an IFB church, I was not), different careers (you are in a ministry, I work in the secular world), and very different opinions (obviously!). I want to understand you and why you feel so strongly about the “dangers” of all IFB churches. I would love to tell you about our church, but would you really want to hear? We are not the church you describe on this site. We care about people’s salvation and are the “community church” for our area. Being old fashion does not make us narrow minded. We have doctors, lawyers, judges, and many other educated members. If we were “simple” and “ignorant”, then wouldn’t some of the highly educated individuals in our church catch on? Yes, I know you can be educated and not wise, but these are men and women of incredible faith. I wish you knew them!

    The funny thing is that I used to say the same things about my IFB churches when I was attending them. I can recall using almost the exact same words. I would have denied to the death that the IFB churches I attended were abusive or dangerous. I would have thought that anyone who thought they were abusive and dangerous was crazy and not really saved. Or I would have thought they were rebellious and backslidden. The IFB churches I attended have doctors, lawyers, judges, police officers, nurses, professors, etc. just like your church. These were men and women of incredible faith also.

    That, however, is the point I’m trying to make. Spiritual abuse is no respecter of persons. Thats what’s so dangerous about spiritual abuse. Lets think outside of the IFB for a moment. Lets consider a real cult like Scientology. Followers of Scientology are highly deceived (I think we can both agree on this) especially in the area of modern medicine. There are very intelligent people that attend Scientology churches, but they are highly deceived. Why? Because of the manipulation, mind control and brain washing. Now I don’t think that the IFB is a cult – although I do think they have certain characteristics of a cult – but the same holds true. Anytime there is an organization that perpetuates a certain belief system and when that belief system develops a long history of passing down traditions and beliefs, that manipulation and traditional belief system becomes so enmeshed that people can’t tell the difference between that and what’s real/true. Read the “dog poop” story on the “About This Site” page.

    The biggest problem with manipulation and mind control is that the people being manipulated and controlled don’t realize it. Have you ever been conned by a con artist? If you have you will know what I’m talking about. Con artists are experts in slight of hand. They play on your emotions and vulnerability and then take whatever they are interested in. Usually people don’t realize they have been conned until after it’s over and they are on the outside of the situation looking back. In the same manner I think you are denying that the church you attend is “not the church described on this site” as you say, simply because you can’t see it. You are still under the influence, so to speak, of the mind control and manipulation, the IFB “con artists”. Please don’t be offended by those words. I know they are very strong words, but there really is no other way to say it.

    I think it was Hitler that once said “If you repeat a lie loud enough, often enough and for a long enough period of time, people will eventually mistake it for the truth.” This is especially true when people are highly vulnerable, such as those who are looking for spiritual answers. I think that this is exactly what happens in IFB circles. I don’t think it’s a matter of being “simple” or “ignorant” (I’m not sure why you put those words in quotes. I’m hoping it’s not because you are quoting me. I don’t recall using those words.) but one of naivety. People get caught up in the message of the IFB and the message is so strong and makes sense to them that they cling to it and defend it to the death simply because they are naive to the truth. They fail to realize, however, that the message is damaging and wrong.

    Its also important that you know that I don’t think that the deception is on purpose in every case. I think that more often than not the deception is perpetuated with good intent. I think that pastors are educated in the IFB circles – Bob Jones University, Hyles-Anderson College, Pensecola Christian College, Baptist Bible College, etc. – being manipulated along the way by the hard core IFB messages that they themselves are simply blindly repeating the lie. In some cases it’s just a vicious cycle of being taught and then going out and teaching the same things. This was certainly the case for me, at least partially.

    You are purposed individual, but so am I. We agree more than we disagree and I think you see that. Ours is not a message of legalism and false doctrine, but of love for God and then love for your neighbor. Are there IFB churches still out there that was like the one you attended in your youth? I guess so, but I don’t see those issues at my church. Our pastor celebrated his 40th year at the church this month. He has received recognition from the local government and our state senator issued a proclamation for him as well. His first year, there were 32 members. Now our membership exceeds 1,000 (in a community of 45,000). The Lord has blessed his ministry! The reason I sent the first reply is how personal your comments were to me. We are not the church you describe, but we are an IFB church. I wish you could see the difference! Why not say the dangers of the IFB church you attended, rather than including all IFB churches? Just a thought.

    Like I said before I believe that you believe that you are at an IFB church that isn’t like what I describe on my site. But I don’t believe that you can see the full picture since you are still involved with this denomination. I don’t know your church or your pastor so I can’t speak about what your church is like. I can speculate that, since it’s an IFB church, it is very similar to the churches I was in since most IFB churches are pretty much the same.

    Its kind of like a McDonalds franchise. You get the same type of food at every McDonalds you go to. One McDonalds restaurant may have more friendly staff, better prices, faster service and more customers than the others, but it’s still McDonalds food. The same is true for the IFB denomination. One IFB may have a more sincere pastor, more friendly staff, more ministries/outreach and more members than another, but it’s still IFB doctrine and IFB messages.

    Also, just because you don’t see the things I talk about on this site in your IFB church doesn’t necessarily mean they aren’t there. There could be many reasons why you can’t see the things I talk about on this site in your church.

    Like I say on the “About This Site” page: “Do I think that every IFB church is run in a spiritually abusive manner? No. I will let you, the reader, determine which applies to you and your unique situation.” If what I write on this site doesn’t apply to you or your church then great. Since I don’t know your church I really have no choice but to believe you, however, I remain skeptical. I challenge you to keep an open mind and truly try to see if what I say on this site is true of your church. I challenge you to refrain from hand waving and refusing to look closely enough to find out if what I write about on this site is really there. I fear that what I talk about on this site is really there, but you are just somehow blind to it.

  25. I think this is the clearest communications between you and I yet. I respect your passion for your cause, although we will never completely agree on everything, but we don’t have to agree.

    I have read the site and some things I ask are specifically covered in your site. I do this so anyone reading our communication string can read what you believe at that moment. Sometimes the request for clarity is unintentional, there is a lot of information on your site and I don’t know it as well as you do.

    Where we agree appears to be a broader way than I would have originally expected. I agree that denominations are not God’s plan and they create more confusion that necessary (and we know who the author of confusion is). That is not a way of saying I think we (IFB) are the only ones who have it “right” either! I think a lot of Christians who disagree on small things will be in Heaven together, as will you and I.

    The prayer used to lead people to Christ is similar because of the method of training used on lay people to lead individuals to Christ. The prayer is a tool, but the conviction by the Holy Spirit is the means. I think we can agree on this?

    Church is a place to exhort Christ, by worship and prayer. Do you need to attend, well, I think I am a better Christian for my church attendance plus I want to attend church as much as I can. I enjoy the fellowship of other Christians. The faithfulness of one’s church attendance is not a matter of salvation no more than what one wears. I concede “where two or more are gathered” argument to you, if you will concede we are instructed to “assembly ourselves together”. But this is another area of personal convictions for an individual, not a prerequisite to be a Christian!

    As for the picking on Christians, you are right, I am “picking” on you. We are different. I am sure we have very different upbringings (you were raised in an IFB church, I was not), different careers (you are in a ministry, I work in the secular world), and very different opinions (obviously!). I want to understand you and why you feel so strongly about the “dangers” of all IFB churches. I would love to tell you about our church, but would you really want to hear? We are not the church you describe on this site. We care about people’s salvation and are the “community church” for our area. Being old fashion does not make us narrow minded. We have doctors, lawyers, judges, and many other educated members. If we were “simple” and “ignorant”, then wouldn’t some of the highly educated individuals in our church catch on? Yes, I know you can be educated and not wise, but these are men and women of incredible faith. I wish you knew them!

    You are purposed individual, but so am I. We agree more than we disagree and I think you see that. Ours is not a message of legalism and false doctrine, but of love for God and then love for your neighbor. Are there IFB churches still out there that was like the one you attended in your youth? I guess so, but I don’t see those issues at my church. Our pastor celebrated his 40th year at the church this month. He has received recognition from the local government and our state senator issued a proclamation for him as well. His first year, there were 32 members. Now our membership exceeds 1,000 (in a community of 45,000). The Lord has blessed his ministry! The reason I sent the first reply is how personal your comments were to me. We are not the church you describe, but we are an IFB church. I wish you could see the difference! Why not say the dangers of the IFB church you attended, rather than including all IFB churches? Just a thought.

  26. My statement – “…you just will not accept that because you do not believe I (or all IFB) could possibly be right on anything!” – was based on my perception of your comments to me concerning Independent Fundamental Baptists (Christians, not churches). You must agree that if intent and perception is not matched, then there is a breakdown in the chain of communication! Based on your comments, I feel my statement was accurate and concise.

    I know it’s difficult to communicate in this format and I’m not naive to the fact that there will be break downs in communication, especially in this format. All I ask is that you please ask for clarification rather than assume intent. If you are assuming intent then chances are that you aren’t perceiving correctly. I’m not the best communicator/writer in the world so if something isn’t clear or there are conflicting statements, please ask for clarification rather than simply assuming intent. This will help our discussion go more smoothly. I do like the new format of putting the quotes we are replying to in the message. That seems to help.

    If I am incorrect on my perception, then please tell me what, in your opinion, IFB are “right”. I have read your site (let me repeat that I have read your site) and have not noticed one thing the IFB churches do that you agree with.

    When it comes to the gospel message and salvation I think the IFB gets it right. Salvation through faith in Christ’s attoning work on the cross. I also agree with the IFB’s stance on the security of the believer (once saved always saved). But this message is so tainted with other errors it’s difficult to say that even this is a good thing.

    For example, the church I grew up in emphasised prayer for salvation. Now I don’t think praying for salvation is wrong, but they would require a specific prayer using specific words. For a long time I thought it was the prayer that saved me rather than Christ. It confused me and tainted the message of salvation.

    The Word of God was preached and I felt the conviction of the Holy Spirit telling me I was going to die a sinner’s death if I rejected Him. The Bible the preacher was using was a KJV. I believe the KJV Bible still convicts, it is still effective for preaching the Word so individuals will be convicted and saved. That was my point! Can we agree here?

    Sure I can agree on that, as long as you understand that my point is not about conviction for salvation, but about dependence on the KJV as the only/best source for studying/preaching/teaching etc. the Word of God.

    Also, I urge you to consider how many people are turned off to salvation or simply don’t understand the gospel message because of the archaic words/phrases and unintelligable lingo of the KJV. Just because YOU were able to comprehend the KJV and get saved as a result doesn’t mean that everyone can. I was confused about my salvation, among may other things, for a long time after I got saved because I simply couldn’t comprehend the KJV well. When I started reading the NIV after leaving the IFB, I actually understood things in the Bible for the first time in my life. And these weren’t new things, they were things that I had read about and studied many times.

    Ok, this is where you and I will never agree 100%. I agree with you when you say we are set apart and that is the spiritual separation mentioned in Romans 12. The part we will disagree with is we cannot compromise with the world to win the world to Christ. Sin is an action that can derive from a behavior. Forgive me in advance for giving a definition, but I feel it is important. Behavior is: “The actions or reactions of persons or things in response to external or internal stimuli.” If we do not abstain from certain activities, then we can end up making a wrong choice. If I were in a bar, I would be more apt to get drunk, drive my car drunk, and have an accident. The environment I created for myself let to my accident. If I let the worldly pleasures in (stimuli), then my BEHAVIOR will change (actions aka sin). Would you agree?

    I agree with you on all of this. You are essentually talking about behavioral consequences. I’m not saying that there are no consequences for our behavior nor am I saying that we are free to sin or do whatever we want just because we are covered by grace. I agree that sin can result from behaviors. What I’m trying to communicate is that our behaviors have to be a personal decision based on the guidance of the Holy Spirit and on INDIVIDUAL convictions and preferences not on what the IFB or any other church tells us what is right or wrong.

    Like I said before, the IFB has no right to try and convict people of what is right and what is wrong. The duty of the church is allow the Holy Spirit to convict. To stick with your example, going to a bar for me is fine because I can’t stand the taste of alcohol. I’m not tempted in the least to drink so I would never get drunk. But the IFB tried to convince me that going to a bar is wrong no exceptions. If I went to a bar as an IFBer then I would be sinning in their eyes even though I didn’t drink because they are trying to convict me that going to a bar is a sin. This “conviction” is coming from the IFB NOT the Holy Spirit and therefore is not from God.

    Like I said before, the IFB, in my experience, has gotten it backwards. The IFB puts the emphasis on behaviors first. It’s a ‘change the behaviors and the heart will change’ type of emphasis. This is backwards. The emphasis should be on the heart and a relationship with Christ. Then the behaviors will change as a result of the heart change. It’s up to the individual to change their behaviors. It’s not the IFB’s responsibility to change people’s behaviors. When I was among the IFB the emphasis was on my behaviors NOT my heart which is wrong and legalistic. I don’t know how to communicate this more clearly.

    Regularly would be when you church has a service. I would say being there most of the time would quantify regular church attendance. I think it is important because it shows commitment. Do you go to work every day? If you play on any sports teams, do you make it to every practice and game? Why would you not attend church services when you can? What would be the harm in being faithful to attend church?

    To answer your question then, based on your definition of regularly, no I do not attend church regularly. The reasons are many, but essentially its just not a priority in my life at the moment.

    I’m not sure I understand how commitment fits into going to church. Perhaps you can expound on that idea? I can understand a certain commitment level for work and sports since people would be relying on my participation and I would be part of an organization where I’m making a contribution. I can’t say the same for going to church. I don’t see the comparison here. Perhaps I’m missing something? Care to explain further?

    First, I HAVE READ THE SITE. I put in all caps so maybe you will finally read it. I have placed in my notes several times, but you seem to overlook it.

    I know you SAID you’ve read the site that’s why I said “if you’ve read the site LIKE YOU SAID YOU DID”. You seem to have a certain disconnect with what I’m saying. This is a good example because you somehow didn’t pick up on the “…like you said you did” part of that sentence and only focused on the “if you’ve read the site…” part.

    You say you read what I write, yet you make statements and ask questions that are obviously already addressed and answered on the site. Your comment on the “KJV Only Deception” page is another perfect example. You said: NIV leaves out Acts 8:37 and Romans 16:24. These verses are in the KJV, but not the NIV. This is very clearly answered just two two clicks of the scroll bar above your comment. I’m wondering how you missed that.

    I just don’t understand how you can make statements and ask questions like “What is the purpose of this site” when the answers are right in front of your nose. I just don’t get it. That’s what makes me wonder if you’ve actually read what I’ve written.

    The purpose of this site is shared throughout my writings. The purpose of this site is multifaceted and dynamic. It’s simple yet complex. The most basic idea is to simply have a voice. I want to share my experiences.

    I guess what I don’t understand is what do you plan on gaining from this website? Do you feel (I am not being juvenile here) that when you bow at Jesus’ feet at your appointed time, He will say you followed His will with this website? My opinion, which I am entitled to, is you are doing more harm than good.

    I don’t want to gain anything with this website. I don’t even care if I get a “well done” from Jesus when we meet. I’m not looking for anyone’s approval. I do feel that I’m following the will of God for my life, but really all I know is that the IFB is doing harm to the Body of Believers and I want to do whatever I can to make it stop.

    Let me answer your question with a few questions. How is trying to expose and fix something thats broken doing harm? Do you not understand the I see the harm as coming from the IFB towards others? Just read some of the comments that people have made. There are experiences in the IFB that people have shared here that are so traumatic that they have been changed and even turned away from God. I’ve even met people who have rejected God completely and become Atheists because of the way the IFB hurt them. I have several close friends that refuse to set foot in church again because of their bad experiences with the IFB.

    How can you ignore that? How can you honestly turn a blind eye to the damage that the IFB does in the lives of people and simply hand wave it away by stubbornly thinking that the IFB does no harm? Are you really that blind to the damage that this denomination is doing or are you just refusing to see it? That’s a legitimate question by the way, I really want to know how you can miss this when it’s right in front of you. I’m not just pulling things out of thin air here. I have years of experience, and thousands upon thousands of testimonies to prove it.

    Please tell me in what ways is this site doing more harm than good? And don’t tell me that I’m dividing the body of believers because the body of believers is already divided by denominationalism.

    Why not create a website on the dangers of pornography, or drug abuse, or alcohol abuse, or spousal abuse, or false doctrines of actual cults that deny the deity of Christ?

    Although those are excellent topics, I do not have a website about them because I’m not passionate about those things and the Lord hasn’t called me to speak out against those things.

    Why pick on other Christians? We are Christians, I don’t know if you believe that or not, but again, that is not for you to decide.

    What exactly are you implying here, that Christians are somehow exempt from being scrutinized? I think the exact opposite is true. Christians should be held to a higher standard then non believers. If Christians are doing something that is harming the body of believers and interfering with the testimony of the cross then they are the ones who should get the most attention. Christians need the accountability of checks and balances just like non believers.

    Why pick on Christians? I could ask you the same thing. Why are you spending time discussing these things with a Christian rather than speaking out against alcoholism, drugs, pornography, etc? If you see someone doing something harmful or something you think is wrong would you not try to dissuade them from their behavior even if he/she were a Christian? In deed you would which is probably why you are discussing these things with me. Well, that’s all I’m trying to do. I see something radically wrong with the IFB, so wrong that people are getting seriously hurt, and I want to do something to try and stop it and to try to help others who have been hurt.

    I’m sorry, but I just can’t hide my passion about this. From my perspective your way of thinking is very twisted and I just can’t understand how you are missing it.

    Is there IFB churches that are legalistic in their customs? I would be amiss if I didn’t say “yes”, but there are Southern Baptists, Methodist, Catholics, Jews, Church of God, Church of Christ, etc that have their customs and traditions that are just as prevalent in their churches as our customs and traditions are in ours. Is it because of you past experiences in one IFB church or have you attended other IFB churches?

    I answer this question very clearly on the “About This Site” page (and yet another example that makes me wonder why you are asking this question if you have read the site). Yes, I’m writing here about my experiences. I haven’t experienced those other churches/denominations like I have the IFB so I’m simply writing about my experience in the IFB church.

    I will be having a guest on Monday the 18th that experienced abuse in denominations other than the IFB. She will be available all day to answer questions. I would encourage you to propose some of these questions to her.

  27. Where to begin? At the first I suppose.

    “…you just will not accept that because you do not believe I (or all IFB) could possibly be right on anything!”

    “Why do you insist on putting words in my mouth? I’ve never said that nor do I believe it.”

    My statement was based on my perception of your comments to me concerning Independent Fundamental Baptists (Christians, not churches). You must agree that if intent and perception is not matched, then there is a breakdown in the chain of communication! Based on your comments, I feel my statement was accurate and concise. If I am incorrect on my perception, then please tell me what, in your opinion, IFB are “right”. I have read your site (let me repeat that I have read your site) and have not noticed one thing the IFB churches do that you agree with.

    “When I was convicted by the Holy Spirit that I was lost and needed salvation, the preacher was using a KJV of the Bible. Same for everyone else who was saved before the first “new version” of the Bible. I understood it what he preached and was accepted Jesus as my Savior. That is how so many others was saved,”

    “Me too, however, I later realized that I was relying on the KJV rather than Christ for my Salvation though. That’s where the danger lies.”

    The Word of God was preached and I felt the conviction of the Holy Spirit telling me I was going to die a sinner’s death if I rejected Him. The Bible the preacher was using was a KJV. I believe the KJV Bible still convicts, it is still effective for preaching the Word so individuals will be convicted and saved. That was my point! Can we agree here?

    “We are commanded to be separated (spiritually) in the Bible. Be not unequally yoked, be not conformed to this world. Would you agree this is confusing young people as to separation?”

    “I’m sorry that you don’t see it as God honoring. I think you are missing out. We are not commanded to be separated the way you speak of it. We are separated (set apart) because we are born again, NOT because we have certain behaviors or dress a certain way or listen to certain music. I believe the opposite, that it is the IFB, among other such denominations, that confuses young people about the topic of separation because of their legalistic stance on separation and because they confuse it with a command which it isn’t.”

    Ok, this is where you and I will never agree 100%. I agree with you when you say we are set apart and that is the spiritual separation mentioned in Romans 12. The part we will disagree with is we cannot compromise with the world to win the world to Christ. Sin is an action that can derive from a behavior. Forgive me in advance for giving a definition, but I feel it is important. Behavior is: “The actions or reactions of persons or things in response to external or internal stimuli.” If we do not abstain from certain activities, then we can end up making a wrong choice. If I were in a bar, I would be more apt to get drunk, drive my car drunk, and have an accident. The environment I created for myself let to my accident. If I let the worldly pleasures in (stimuli), then my BEHAVIOR will change (actions aka sin). Would you agree?

    “Also, why is it important to you to know if I attend church “regularly”? Am I seen differently in your eyes depending on my schedule for attending church? If so why?”

    Regularly would be when you church has a service. I would say being there most of the time would quantify regular church attendance. I think it is important because it shows commitment. Do you go to work every day? If you play on any sports teams, do you make it to every practice and game? Why would you not attend church services when you can? What would be the harm in being faithful to attend church?

    “My purpose, by the way, is stated clearly throughout this site. If you’ve read the site like you said you did you would understand my purpose so I don’t understand why you don’t understand my purpose.”

    First, I HAVE READ THE SITE. I put in all caps so maybe you will finally read it. I have placed in my notes several times, but you seem to overlook it.

    Lastly, the purpose statement on your site is: “This site is dedicated to exposing the Mind Control, Manipulation, Deception, Spiritual/Emotional Abuse, Heresy, Legalism (AKA “Phariseeism”), and Authoritarianism behind the Independent Fundamental Baptist Denomination (IFB).

    I guess what I don’t understand is what do you plan on gaining from this website? Do you feel (I am not being juvenile here) that when you bow at Jesus’ feet at your appointed time, He will say you followed His will with this website? My opinion, which I am entitled to, is you are doing more harm than good. Why not create a website on the dangers of pornography, or drug abuse, or alcohol abuse, or spousal abuse, or false doctrines of actual cults that deny the deity of Christ? Why pick on other Christians? We are Christians, I don’t know if you believe that or not, but again, that is not for you to decide. Is there IFB churches that are legalistic in their customs? I would be amiss if I didn’t say “yes”, but there are Southern Baptists, Methodist, Catholics, Jews, Church of God, Church of Christ, etc that have their customs and traditions that are just as prevalent in their churches as our customs and traditions are in ours. Is it because of you past experiences in one IFB church or have you attended other IFB churches?

  28. The misidentification is probably my fault. I was using Brandon’s computer when I last emailed you. I probably forgot to switch accounts and inadvertently used his email address. I apologize for that.

    …you just will not accept that because you do not believe I (or all IFB) could possibly be right on anything!

    Why do you insist on putting words in my mouth? I’ve never said that nor do I believe it.

    I did not equate the KJV with the only way to be saved, you twisted my words (again).

    Sorry, I misunderstood. Thanks for clarifying.

    When I was convicted by the Holy Spirit that I was lost and needed salvation, the preacher was using a KJV of the Bible. Same for everyone else who was saved before the first “new version” of the Bible. I understood it what he preached and was accepted Jesus as my Savior. That is how so many others was saved,

    Me too, however, I later realized that I was relying on the KJV rather than Christ for my Salvation though. That’s where the danger lies.

    I don’t see the NEED for a new contemporary version of the Bible. Can you explain to me the necessity of the new versions you agree with (not including versions we would both agree are not useful)?

    I answer this question on the “KJV Only Deception” page. There are many reasons why it would be a good idea to use versions of the Bible other than the KJV.

    Secondly, I do not see the value of the contemporary music. I went to a contemporary concert once when I attended a Southern Baptist church, and I felt so uncomfortable, I got up and left.

    My question to you would be why did you fail to see the value, because it truly has no value (e.g., you have opened your mind and researched it) or because you felt guilty since the IFB tells you it’s wrong? I used to fail to see the value in Christian contemporary music as well, until I realized that it was actually the IFB’s stance on music that’s wrong. Also, just because YOU don’t see the value in something doesn’t mean there is no value in it, nor does it necessarily mean it’s wrong. As an example, I was uncomfortable with computers for a long time because my church rejected certain types of technology (i.e., the internet). I rejected the value in computers and the internet because I was deceived into focusing exclusively on the bad things about them. Are computers or the internet wrong? I don’t believe they are, but at the time I did because of my perception of computers and the internet because of the lies I was told.

    I will not name the artist, but it was a female group and it was like a rock concert. These young ladies were barely dressed, all the lights, smoke machines, choreographed dance moves…it felt more worldly than Godly. That is why I choose not to listen to this type of music. To me, it is not God honoring, which is my opinion.

    I will concur that SOME Christian contemporary artists are not legitimate and I admit that I would feel uncomfortable with that as well, however, that’s where discernment comes in. We all have to sift through the good and bad stuff regarding everything in life. Just because ONE female group behaved that way doesn’t mean that ALL Christian contemporary music is wrong or bad. Just because there are some CCM artists who behave in that way doesn’t justify rejecting all CCM. There are many Christian contemporary artists that have high integrity and shine the light of Christ. Why do you ignore those artists and only focus on the ones that are wrong?

    By comparison, did you know that “Amazing Grace” was initially rejected by the church at the time? It was rejected for two reasons, both of which are found in your argument. The first reason was that John Newton put his lyrics to music. Music was considered sinful in the 18th century. People used to recite the hymns as poems rather than sing them during church services. They rejected the piano and organ as “worldly” instruments because they were used in saloons/bars. The second reason was that John Newton was a slave trader and an alcoholic before he accepted Christ as his savior. People then didn’t want their “music” associated with such a “worldly” person. People missed out on a great opportunity to minister to others and draw closer to God as a result of their misguided “uncomfortableness”. Now, Amazing Grace is one of the great hymns of the faith. I wonder how many CCM songs have the same fate. I wonder how many people miss out on wonderful music and lyrics because of their misguided “uncomfortableness”.

    You left early from that concert which is a shame because you probably missed the part of the concert where the artists share their personal testimonies and the Gospel message. You probably also missed the their invitation where many may have gone forward to accept Christ as Savior.

    I’ve been just as blessed by Michael W. Smith, Phillips Craig and Dean, Chris Tomlin, Avalon, FFH, Point of Grace, and many others as I have by the great hymns of the faith. There are good CCM artists out there and many people are being led to Christ by their music and their music helps many grow and mature in the faith. I’m one of those people.

    We are commanded to be separated (spiritually) in the Bible. Be not unequally yoked, be not conformed to this world. Would you agree this is confusing young people as to separation?

    I’m sorry that you don’t see it as God honoring. I think you are missing out. We are not commanded to be separated the way you speak of it. We are separated (set apart) because we are born again, NOT because we have certain behaviors or dress a certain way or listen to certain music. I believe the opposite, that it is the IFB, among other such denominations, that confuses young people about the topic of separation because of their legalistic stance on separation and because they confuse it with a command which it isn’t.

    Next, reading your response, I assume (forgive me if I am incorrect in my assumption) that you do not attend church regularly?

    You are incorrect and you are forgiven. Actually it depends on what you mean by “regularly”. Also, why is it important to you to know if I attend church “regularly”? Am I seen differently in your eyes depending on my schedule for attending church? If so why?

    I would hope you could see the importance of being faithful to a good church.

    I can see the importance, however, I have a feeling that what we don’t agree on WHY it’s important.

    There are a lot of good churches out there that are not IFB, so I would hope you could find one you agreed dogmatically with.

    Again, why is it important to you that I go to church? I don’t agree with the way we do church in today’s society whether its an IFB, Presbyterian, Lutheran or whatever. The way the modern church does religion is not supported by scripture, but I take what I can get. The church I attend currently is the best I can find for my family and I.

    The Bible teaches the importance to the church and not just the two or more together debate either. It is hard to be a member of one body if there is only two arms or three fingers. If the church is not important, why did God establish it?

    Where are you getting this from? What do you mean by this? I don’t understand your reasoning. How is the body of Christ missing parts if I don’t go to church? Where is this found in the Bible? The church God established is The Church, e.g., the body of Believers. It has nothing to do with the way we do church in today’s society.

    Last thing, I have never, nor would I ever assume Independent Fundamental Baptist have a monopoly on the Word of God or on the moving of the Spirit of God. You took some liberties with my words yet again. I think there are a lot of great men of God who led churches with a tremendous testimony! Adrian Rogers, Tony Evans, and David Jeremiah are some that come to mind. Great men who led non-IFB churches. I don’t discount their work as folly because they were not IFB, and I don’t believe they would discount the preaching of Curtis Hudson, John R. Rice, or Jack Hyles as folly either.

    Thanks for clearing that up. In previous posts you have written as if the IFB is the end all be all of Christianity so I have trouble seeing the other side of your thought process.

    David Jeremiah has spoken out against Jack Hyles on numerous occasions, especially related to his child raising books where he writes that parents should leave marks on the skin when spanking their children and that parents should continue spanking until the child stops crying, however long it takes. See the “Spanking Deception” page for more information about that topic.

    As for you thinking this is an ad hominem fallacy, you are implying that you MUST be correct and my opinions are personal attacks toward you. Sorry, but you will not allow me to quote scripture, so my words is all I have. You must be misinterpreting my intent, so I guess we have a communication issue more than anything else. Would you agree?

    There is a lot wrong with this paragraph. No I don’t agree that I’m implying those things. Yes I do agree that we have communication issues, but nothing that isn’t normal for this type of informal debate. I think that if you stop making assumptions and start asking questions things will be more clear to you.

    I don’t recall stopping you from quoting scripture either. Feel free to use whatever scripture you wish, as long as you understand that I will consider it meaningless if you twist it around and use it out of context. Don’t worry though, I will let you know when you’ve done that.

    In previous posts you have attacked me rather than the topic, that is the very definition of an ad hominem fallacy. For example, in your previous post you wrote:

    I am tired of educated individuals thinking they are wiser or smarter than IFB. The tone you use and the way you speak is very condescending and negative.

    This is an ad hominem fallacy because you are attacking the way I debate rather than the topics of interest. Ad hominem fallacies are usually a way of distracting from the discussion and attempting to refocus the discussion on the person one is debating rather than the debate itself. I wasn’t referring to your opinions as ad hominem fallacies, I was referring to you ad hominem fallacies as ad hominem fallacies. The post I’m responding to now is much better and I thank you for focusing on a topic rather than on attacking me or the way I communicate.

    I will continue these responses, as long as you don’t mind the debate. I don’t understand your purpose, but I am honestly trying to place value on your opinion. If I were trying to discount your thoughts and opinions, I would have sent this link to every IFB preacher I knew so they could debate you. But why would I want to do that? I don’t want to change your mind, I don’t believe it is possible, but only offer my opinion as a counter to yours.

    I appreciate that. My purpose, by the way, is stated clearly throughout this site. If you’ve read the site like you said you did you would understand my purpose so I don’t understand why you don’t understand my purpose.

    You are welcome to debate as long as you wish. You can also send a link to whomever you wish. I’m more than happy to answer questions or debate whoever is interested.

    My mind has already been changed, but not in the direction you would have it change. To change in the direction you want would be a step backwards for me. The Lord has opened my eyes and I’ll never be bound in the bondage of the IFB again.

  29. I apologize for my assumptions concerning your professional career. I made an assumption based on the emails I received. I am not trying to discredit you nor do I feel you are lost. I firmly believe there is ONE way to heaven, that is through the shed blood of Jesus. We agree a lot more than we disagree, you just will not accept that because you do not believe I (or all IFB) could possibly be right on anything!

    I did not equate the KJV with the only way to be saved, you twisted my words (again). When I was convicted by the Holy Spirit that I was lost and needed salvation, the preacher was using a KJV of the Bible. Same for everyone else who was saved before the first “new version” of the Bible. I understood it what he preached and was accepted Jesus as my Savior. That is how so many others was saved, I don’t see the NEED for a new contemporary version of the Bible. Can you explain to me the necessity of the new versions you agree with (not including versions we would both agree are not useful)?

    Secondly, I do not see the value of the contemporary music. I went to a contemporary concert once when I attended a Southern Baptist church, and I felt so uncomfortable, I got up and left. I will not name the artist, but it was a female group and it was like a rock concert. These young ladies were barely dressed, all the lights, smoke machines, choreographed dance moves…it felt more worldly than Godly. That is why I choose not to listen to this type of music. To me, it is not God honoring, which is my opinion. We are commanded to be separated (spiritually) in the Bible. Be not unequally yoked, be not conformed to this world. Would you agree this is confusing young people as to separation?

    Next, reading your response, I assume (forgive me if I am incorrect in my assumption) that you do not attend church regularly? I would hope you could see the importance of being faithful to a good church. There are a lot of good churches out there that are not IFB, so I would hope you could find one you agreed dogmatically with. The Bible teaches the importance to the church and not just the two or more together debate either. It is hard to be a member of one body if there is only two arms or three fingers. If the church is not important, why did God establish it?

    Last thing, I have never, nor would I ever assume Independent Fundamental Baptist have a monopoly on the Word of God or on the moving of the Spirit of God. You took some liberties with my words yet again. I think there are a lot of great men of God who led churches with a tremendous testimony! Adrian Rogers, Tony Evans, and David Jeremiah are some that come to mind. Great men who led non-IFB churches. I don’t discount their work as folly because they were not IFB, and I don’t believe they would discount the preaching of Curtis Hudson, John R. Rice, or Jack Hyles as folly either.

    As for you thinking this is an ad hominem fallacy, you are implying that you MUST be correct and my opinions are personal attacks toward you. Sorry, but you will not allow me to quote scripture, so my words is all I have. You must be misinterpreting my intent, so I guess we have a communication issue more than anything else. Would you agree?

    I will continue these responses, as long as you don’t mind the debate. I don’t understand your purpose, but I am honestly trying to place value on your opinion. If I were trying to discount your thoughts and opinions, I would have sent this link to every IFB preacher I knew so they could debate you. But why would I want to do that? I don’t want to change your mind, I don’t believe it is possible, but only offer my opinion as a counter to yours.

  30. Hi Ike, I’m glad you found our discussion. Sorry I had to move it on you. I’ve got a lot to unravel here so bear with me as I try to explain myself and hopefully answer your questions. It looks like the first order of business will need to be clearing up a few of your faulty assumptions and accusations, again.

    First of all, I’m not Brandon. Please don’t address me as Brandon. Brandon is a colleague of mine and I’m happy to promote his counseling business, however, Brandon is in no other way affiliated with this website.

    Secondly, I’m not a Psychologist. I’m not sure where you got that idea from. Thirdly, I’ve never flaunted my education. I’ve never even suggested that my education makes me better or smarter than anyone else. It’s one thing for YOU to think that, but don’t put that on my shoulders. Like I said before, I’m sorry if the tone of my messages come across as “condescending and negative”, but I can’t help how YOU interpret the tone of my messages. I simply don’t know how else to communicate. This is the way I communicate and I’m not able to change it. It’s how God wired me and it’s how I write. I don’t understand why you keep trying to use YOUR interpretation of the tone of my messages to discredit me. Perhaps its just an ad hominem fallacy. At any rate, I think that the way you interpret the tone of my messages says more about you than it does me.

    Also, I don’t think that I am smarter or better than anyone else and I will not stand for you or anyone else accusing me of that. I do believe that God gave us the ability to reason and use logic. Blindly following the traditions made by mankind without using our minds to see if they are from God is just as much of a sin as neglecting the Word of God completely.

    Finally, you can safely assume that I know where you are coming from. I know exactly what you are communicating because I had the same messages that you are bringing to the table shoved down my throat for over 25 years. I know the IFB teachings and beliefs inside and out. The advantage I have is that I now get to look from the outside in. I’m no longer deceived by the false teachings of the IFB or any other church. This site makes it pretty clear that if a person is following the teachings of the IFB, or any other church, rather than the Word of God then he/she is not really following the Word of God.

    The purpose of this site, as clearly stated on the home page and in my prior message to you, is to educate people about the deceptive teachings of the IFB. If you are convinced that the IFB is correct then you have nothing to worry about. I’m not here to change anyone’s mind or question your convictions. All I ask is that you remember that they are YOUR convictions. They aren’t my convictions and you have no right to push YOUR convictions on me or look down on me for not having the same convictions as you.

    I would encourage you to read the page on Spiritual Abuse since it addresses all of what’s wrong with your thinking process including, black and white thinking (just because I don’t have YOUR convictions doesn’t mean I don’t have convictions), confusing absolutes, preferences and convictions (the convictions YOU have aren’t necessarily commandments that are to be followed by everyone), manipulation of scripture (the reason why your prior posts weren’t approved), legalism (your list of dos and don’ts aren’t supported by scripture) and image conscious (your idea that one must dress a certain way in order to be properly dressed. I hate to break it to you, but dressing your best for church isn’t supported by scripture nor does it make you a better Christian).

    If you’re convicted that what the IFB teaches is truth then I’m fine with that. What I’m not fine with is people like you judging me because I don’t have the same convictions. The IFB has no business playing the role of the Holy Spirit. It’s not the IFBs place, or any church for that matter, to convict people on proper dress, proper music, proper movies, etc. This may be a shocker for you, but the IFB doesn’t not have the monopoly on the truth! You may think it does, but it doesn’t.

    If you don’t want me to lecture you then stop coming to this site to defend the IFB. Like I said in my previous message, you came to this site to voice your disagreement with it. All I’m doing is defending myself. If you don’t want me to voice my point of view then why are you here trying to debate it with me? I’m only questioning your convictions because you have come to this site to defend the IFB. YOU started this conversation not me. All I’m doing is trying to (1) clear up your assumptions and accusations and (2) help you see my point of view.

    Let me answer your question about ‘churches that change’ with a question. Where do you get the idea that change is bad or wrong? Is that in the bible? If so where? Just because the IFB remains true to traditions and beliefs that are as old as and older than Moody, Spurgeon, and Sunday doesn’t make them more true. The only thing that tells me is that the IFB remains closed minded to other possibilities.

    Oh and by the way, if you are relying on the KJV to be saved then you aren’t saved! Salvation is through faith in Christ NOT the KJV. That isn’t my idea that’s from the scriptures (see Ephesians 2). The Bible is pretty clear that the only way to heaven is Christ.

    Also, I’m not acting as judge. I resent you accusing me of that, again. Like I said before, I’m just sharing what I’ve learned in the hopes that others will become free from the bondage of the IFB also. If you don’t want to leave the IFB then don’t. It’s up to you.

    When I go to church I attend a Calvary Chapel. Why did you even ask that question? Are you truly interested or just looking for another way to try and discredit me?

    Why do you think my heart needs softening? Only the Holy Spirit knows the state of my heart. It’s kind of presumptuous of you to assume that my heart needs softening isn’t it? I know another word for it, judging. Do you even see that you are doing the very thing that you accuse me of doing?

    You say that your convictions are from the Holy Spirit. I believe that you believe they are, but I don’t think that you realize there is a possibility that they aren’t. When I was in the IFB movement I thought my convictions were from the Holy Spirit also, but they weren’t. My convictions came from the brainwashing I got. They were convictions of my church and pastor NOT from the Holy Spirit. All I ask is that you honestly evaluate if your convictions are truly from the Holy Spirit and not from the IFB. The reason is because Spiritual Abuse if very subtle and people think that their convictions are from the Holy Spirit when they are actually beliefs and traditions of a particular church or denomination (i.e., the IFB).

    I try my best to warn people about the dangers of the IFB. If you don’t want to hear it or open your mind to these warnings then there is nothing more I can do for you. Perhaps one day you will be free from the IFB, I can only hope. If you wish to continue to discuss these issues then by all means feel free to continue. I will try my best to answer your questions or counter your arguments with honesty and integrity. I will also try my best to have a better tone when writing so that you aren’t so easily offended and so that you can focus on the issues presented rather than trying to discredit me.

  31. I understand and respect the fact you are a Psychologist, educated and articulate in your arguments. You should be proud of your accomplishments. I am college educated (BBA), but I am not to your level of education and maybe my discernment does not equal yours, but I know what is in me is the Holy Spirit of God and I know what convictions I feel are place upon my by the Holy Spirit.

    I see the true works of the devil are dulling our Spiritual sense to the dangers of compromise and conformity. Lucifer was gifted with the ability to make his own music, but his pride made him desire to be God. I believe 100% that Satan is still a powerful influence in music today. I think he has a strong influence on video games, music, movies, television, etc. I think one would foolish to believe we can watch a rated “R” movie or secular music or violent video games and maintain a strong, focused relationship with God. I think the house of the Lord should be respected. I think there is nothing wrong with dressing for the occasion. I will wear a suit and tie to a wedding, funeral, or even to a nice restaurant, why not dress the same for God? Is the church less important to me than these areas? No. Do I think what I wear to church is a matter of salvation? Absolutely not!

    I am tired of educated individuals thinking they are wiser or smarter than IFB. The tone you use and the way you speak is very condescending and negative. I am truly sorry you had a rough childhood or a negative experience in your church as a youth. It could happen in ANY denomination! I concur the difference in the denominations is the work of the devil. Keeping that in mind, what churches have changed over the years? Us or the other? Every generation of my family in the New World was saved under preaching from the King James Bible. So, am I to believe we all are lost and cannot realize we are lost because what we preach from has not changed for a few hundred years? We don’t play contemporary Christian music because the music and beat resembles secular music, so we must be misguided? We teach proper dress so men look like men and women look like women, so we are legalistic and narrow-minded? Men like Billy Sunday, Charles Spurgeon, and Dwight Moody preached on the same subjects, but I guess that was needed back then, not now?

    Please don’t lecture me about my faith being weak or misguided. Do we have activities or values that are more about tradition that Biblical guidance, yes we do, and so does every other church in America. You are trying to save people from what? Really, what is your purpose? You love me by questioning my convictions, my commitment to live that I FEEL pleases God. I would like to know where you attend church or do you not go at all anymore? Who made you the judge? I am certain it was not God, that is His job! You keep praying for me because I promise, I am praying for your heart to be softened.

  32. I think the real issue is not just IFB Churches, but it’s the box of Man’s organized religion. Read 2 John. It was written to a woman and her children who were walking in truth and they were encouraged and cautioned not to believe False preachers who seek to deceive. He did NOT reprimand her for not being in a ‘church’. We see Spiritual Abuse in all denominations, but you really do hit the nail on the head with IFB Churches. Not all are exactly like you describe, but certainly most are. Man sinned exceedingly when he formed denominations.

  33. I apologize if my message came across as mean or condescending or however you took it. That wasn’t my intention. Please don’t mistake intensity and urgency as “anger and strife”. Remember, you came to this site to share your disagreement with it. All I’m doing is defending and explaining myself. I was just using the “dress for church” issue as an example from my experience. Also, I never accused you of calling me “ignorant, simple, stupid, or any other condescending words.” I don’t recall calling you names either. And even if I did it wasn’t to “to degrade [your] thoughts and opinions”.

    There is more to showing love than stuffing strong emotions and being fake with flowery words and niceties. To answer your question; How am I showing love? Do I really need to spell it out for you? Fine then, I love you and I want to rescue you from the clutches of IFB legalism. Hows that? Just because I’m not showing love the way YOU show love doesn’t mean I’m not showing love. Just because YOU interpret the “tone” of my message a certain way doesn’t mean I’m not showing love. I show love by spending the time to carefully explain the dangers of the IFB so that people will find true freedom in Christ. I can only hope that you can appreciate it.

    I’ll admit that I am angry, but not at you and not in the way you assume. I’m angry that the IFB promotes a works based righteousness. I’m angry that the IFB misinterprets scripture and manipulates people. I’m angry that the IFB has destroyed families and lives by pushing strict standards and rules on people. I’m angry that the IFB has participated in the fracturing of the body of believers by secluding themselves and refusing to have fellowship with other believers simply because others don’t “do religion” like they think it should be done. I could go on. But really what’s wrong with being angry? Anger is a human emotion, it’s not a sin to be angry.

    Finally, to answer your other question, I call it discernment. Read the last paragraph of my previous reply for a reminder. That statement isn’t about questioning a person’s salvation. It’s about questioning the way the salvation message of the IFB is preached. You’ve missed the entire point of that paragraph, although I’m not surprised. It’s par for the course.

    The real war USED to be with the flesh and the devil, until the church decided to split and focus on denominational differences rather than truth. Don’t you get it? This is exactly what Satan wants. He wants you to focus on defending the IFB rather than the truth of the Word and the Gospel of Christ. This site speaks out against that very thing.

    I’m glad that you came out of addiction to alcohol. That is a great testimony and yes, a wonderful picture of God’s grace. At least on that we can agree.

  34. Pingback: Discussions |
  35. I did read your site and I note your thoughts. I hope everyone can see the difference in your tone and language versus mine. I never referred to you as ignorant, simple, stupid, or any other condescending words. You called me names in an effort to degrade my thoughts and opinions. I provided my thoughts and yes, my assumptions, but I did so in a respectful manner (EPH 4:32). Can you say the same? You speak of love, but you showed me none in your response. Saying we do not minister to individuals who are not dressed accordingly is preposterous. You should be ashamed for even making that accusation. We provide a ministry to our community, just like your church does.

    I would hope you realize we will all be in Heaven together. I placed my trust in Christ in November of 1997. I was an alcoholic who was lost in his sin. Jesus touched my life and now allows me to lead others to Him. What an amazing grace He has for us!

    I would hope everyone who reads your site would understand the real war is with the world, flesh, and the devil. IFB churches are not sending people to hell, sin is! I will continue to pray that the Lord will assist you with your anger and strife.

    P.S. – Oh, forgot one thing. Your comment, “Actually I would have question the genuineness of their salvation since the message they are hearing is one of legalism and phariseeism. Those things are not part of the salvation message.” defines judgement. What would you define this comment as?

  36. Thanks for your message Ike. I’m afraid that you’ve misunderstood what this site is about. My guess would be that you didn’t actually read the site. If that guess is correct I would encourage you to actually read the site before making such assumptions and accusations. I’d like to address your assumptions, but first you’ve made some serious errors in logic which I’d like to address first.

    Calling Phariseeism a choice is nothing more than mere hand waving of a very serious issues. With that mindset we could excuse anything as a “choice”. Snake handling… just a choice, Sexual abuse… just a choice; Using the NIV… just a choice; Rock music… just a choice. See how silly that logic is? Phariseeism is an issue that Jesus speaks out against many times in the New Testament. Much of Christ’s ministry was combating the false teachings and legalism of the Pharisees of his day. Phariseeism is not just a choice in the style of worship or world view a person has. Phariseeism is a sin, one that God takes very seriously and one has devastating consequences among believers. The Pharisees plotted to kill Jesus because He refused to follow their rules – See Matthew 12.

    Your misunderstanding if this issues is evident in your very words. You say that you ”choose to attend a church that honors God in music, version of Bible…dress, and worship.” That smacks of judgementalism; as if I am refusing to make that same choice to honor God just because I don’t listen to the music, read the version of the Bible, dress and worship the same way YOU do. Not only is that full of illogic it’s legalism in it’s most ugly form. God is honored in many ways not just the ways that the IFB endorse.

    I’m working on a KJV Onlyism section for this site so I will point you to that section when it is complete for answering your silly notion that the KJV is the only version of the bible that honor’s God. Here is a preview. Just because the KJV is the only non-profit Bible doesn’t mean that it’s the most accurate or God honoring Bible. Being a non-profit book has nothing to do with it’s accuracy.

    Now to answer your question, my parents forced me to attend the IFB and its learning institutions. The brainwashing kept me in it when I was no longer under my parent’s control. Your assumption that I chose to attend the IFB only serves to show your ignorance and judgmentalism.

    You’re assuming that I’m angry as well. On the contrary. If I have any emotions it’s grief, grief for your ignorance and blindness. I only wish that you could experience the freedom in Christ that I have. If a lost person reads this site they will understand the message I’m trying to convey, as will you if you take the time to read this site yourself.

    I must inform you that I’m well versed in the different denominations. Once again you have made an assumption about me that is completely unfounded. Even if I weren’t, what difference does it make? Why would you think that just because things change that they are bad? Sixty years ago we didn’t have more accurate interpretations of the Bible and Sixty years ago society was not as complex as it is today. If you use that logic then where does it end? Did you know that 100 years ago organs and pianos were considered sinful and were not used in church worship? Did you know that singing the hymns was considered sinful? People used to recite the hymns because they thought that singing was not God honoring. If that is your mentality then nothing in this millennium, let alone this century, is God honoring. There have been many changes even in the IFB camp.

    To refuse to change is to remain stagnant and to miss many opportunities for ministry. Just because your church refuses to change and is still seeing people saved doesn’t mean that the messages of others is less effective. It just means that you are meeting a need, but your way of thinking can’t reach everyone. You said it yourself, just because the IFB way works for you doesn’t mean it works for everyone. It’s a personal choice. Actually I would have to question the genuineness of their salvation since the message they are hearing is one of legalism and phariseeism. Those things are not part of the salvation message. I was manipulated into salvation when I was attending the IFB church I grew up in. I had many doubts until I finally understood the salvation message apart from the legalism and phariseeism of the IFB. I can’t say for sure, of course, but had I died before I learned the truth about the IFB I can’t say for certainty that I would have gone to heaven since I was relying on the IFB way for my salvation rather than God’s way.

    If you think that “Come just as you are” is just a spiritual idea you are sadly mistaken. This is a good topic for another page on this site. Jesus ministered to prostitutes, tax collectors, infidels, homeless, poor people, just to name a few. He didn’t set up an IFB church and refuse to minister to people unless they came in and dressed a certain way. It’s preposterous to think that “come just as you are” is only a spiritual idea. What shortsightedness! I feel sorry for you, honestly!

    You warn me about Matthew 7:5 yet you ignore your own judgmental attitude. This is a good example of misinterpretation of scripture that is so often found in the IFB movement. You’ve taken that verse out of context and twisted it around to fit your point of view. Matthew 7:5 is an incomplete thought. You have to read that verse in context to see what the true message is. If you read Matthew 7:1-5 you will see that the warning is against the kind of hypocritical, judgmental attitude that tears others down in order to build oneself up. It’ is not a blanket statement to overlook wrong behavior of others, but a call to be discerning rather than negative. Jesus told us to expose false teachers (continue reading chapter 7), those who are wanting religion rather than a personal relationship with Him. That is ultimately what this site is about and ultimately, I’m afraid, what you are missing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) Deception © 2009-2016 Frontier Theme