# Institute in Basic Life Principles



## Stephen L Smith (Feb 17, 2013)

How would you describe the Institute in Basic Life Principles?


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 17, 2013)

The basic Principles level can be very beneficial. I learned a lot about what God expected in how I should relate to authority in an age where we were taught to question even the respect due to authority. I learned that God gives grace to the humble and that God will use authority and meant for that authority to help mature us into what we should be. That is very biblical when we read why God gave us parents, pastors, teachers, etc. The Fifth commandment is proof of that as is Hebrews 13. We should be careful about moving those markers. Some of the levels that went past the basics tended to be cultural preferences and tended toward some legalistic non biblical leanings. But I greatly benefited from the Seminar when I attended it at The Scope in Virginia Beach back in the early 80's. 

Eph 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 
Eph 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 
Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: 
Eph 4:14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; 
Eph 4:15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: 
Eph 4:16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love. 

Heb 13:7 Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation...
Heb 13:17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you. 

This teaching also helped me in my service in the Military. I can't tell all the dangers the Lord has kept me from because of my submission to my Elders and authority. Most of the time I didn't see what they perceived as a Parent does when raising a child. So I must say that I gained a tremendous amount of blessing from what I learned at the IBYC seminar. And oh yeah, I liked the Pineapple story also. But that is another story. I met the missionary who wrote that. 

At the same time I know of people who got really messed up as adults who tried to say they were to be obedient to their parents even as adults. Every teaching that has truth has the propensity to err in the heart of man.


----------



## JohnGill (Feb 17, 2013)

If you're referring to Gothard's work, as something to be avoided.


----------



## lynnie (Feb 17, 2013)

Unbelievable amounts of legalism and technique parading as biblical teaching. Do the right things and jump through the proper hoops. No dependency on God needed. No Holy Spirit working needed. Just do the seminar stuff.

I went to all of them. It is was just so confusing to a 21-22 year old girl to try and figure out how I was supposed to submit to my Dad, when he had regular screaming fits that I needed to get rid of my g-d da-ned effing bible and stop going to a effing church with idiot Christians.

Gothard never did tackle Jonathan taking David's side against his father as I recall. 

Then there were the women with abusive husbands, and all they had to do was submit harder and hubby would change and see the light and stop abusing. Of course wifey had to stay and get beat up, at least back when the seminar started. Maybe he altered that a bit in later years?

Then there were the ancestral curses. I know why Timothy says not to get all engrossed in endless geneologies...God forsaw Gothard  It is so 20 somethings like I was won't go investigating all your generations way back to find out if anybody on either side was a witch or a mason or a God only knows what, so you can break all the curses of your ancestors going way back. Oh what a horrible dark cloud that was, worrying about my masonic grandad and my great great great who was the daughter of a NH Indian Chief...imagine the curses over me from the Indian great spirit idolatry. 

Gothard is what you call "heresy of emphasis". Yes, there is a true teaching about submission to authority, the same way there are true teachings about a lot of things. But fix on one out of balance to the extent he does and you get nothing but a mess. I know so many Calvinists who had to detox from their early Gothard influences. I would avoid his legalism like the plague.


----------



## JohnGill (Feb 17, 2013)

lynnie said:


> Unbelievable amounts of legalism and technique parading as biblical teaching. Do the right things and jump through the proper hoops. No dependency on God needed. No Holy Spirit working needed. Just do the seminar stuff.
> 
> I went to all of them. It is was just so confusing to a 21-22 year old girl to try and figure out how I was supposed to submit to my Dad, when he had regular screaming fits that I needed to get rid of my g-d da-ned effing bible and stop going to a effing church with idiot Christians.
> 
> ...



As a former IFB person I had always thought Gothard was limited to IFB churches. I didn't know that his nonsense had infected Calvinist Churches as well. The IFB church I attended was heavy into Gothardism. When they pushed it on me I asked to read the book first since so many at church had them. When I was told I had to attend the "course" to get a book my red-flag-o-meter blew up. Later I found one in a second hand shop and read through it. It had very little scriptural foundation and much of what scripture was mentioned was a twisting of scripture to provide a foundation for many of his teachings. I also found a PDF copy online years ago of a newer version and still the same old nonsense. I put Gothard in the same crazy boat as Peter Ruckman.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 17, 2013)

I saw a lot of good come of it. But then again, it was to be used in the context of the Church, I had some good leadership. For all of the bad stories you guys are telling I know many good stories. I actually know a lot of things about a lot of parachurch ministries and Churches that would curl your hair also that are related to those ministries good and bad. 

As one Pastor Tom Lutz once asked me, "We are Reformed, why do we need Gothard." I tended to agree. Maybe for some it was an overcorrection. I know for a lot of people it wasn't necessarily that. I know a lot of 3rd generational kids from that era that are walking with God. Their parents learned some good stuff and passed it on and they are still passing on the good stuff. Unfortunately, there were those who didn't have a good balance. That happens in a lot of places.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Feb 17, 2013)

JohnGill said:


> IFB



On this side of the world USA slogans can be hard to understand. Is IFB Independent Fundamentalist Baptist?


----------



## Andres (Feb 17, 2013)

You might add the poll option "never heard of 'em". That's my vote.


----------



## JohnGill (Feb 17, 2013)

Stephen L Smith said:


> JohnGill said:
> 
> 
> > IFB
> ...



Sorry about that. But yes, it means Independent Fundamentalist Baptist. Sometimes you may see it with a "x" at the end. This designates a more extreme variety such as a Ruckmanite church or a Baptist Brider church. If you go to The Jack Hyles Home Page - mp3 audio sermons, bible studies & books you can get a good idea of what in general is believed.


----------



## Mushroom (Feb 17, 2013)

Definitely nutbaggy stuff. Back in the late '90's there was a cohort of Gothard followers at our Church. All of them have long since left, most have descended into variously gross antinomianism, home church nuttiness, or more extreme forms of legalism. It may be that some people have benefited individually from it, but remember that God used a donkey to convey His message once. Had one gothardite lady tell me on a prayer chain about a youngster's problems followed by "You know, he IS adopted..." I responded that I was, too. She stumbled about apologetically until I said I was adopted into the Lord's family. That quieted her down.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Feb 17, 2013)

Bill Gothard brought the ministry here to New Zealand about 1990. He said the Lord had given him a verse about "from the rising of the sun .... the Lord's name is to be praised" and noted that New Zealand is the first main country to see the rising of the sun!

Aside of the nonsense I have personally observed, it seems to me to have also produced some well disciplined and godly families. Also if you note the Statement of Faith, it is very evangelical.


----------



## Herald (Feb 17, 2013)

The bottom line is that Gothardism is not needed in the church. What is needed is sound biblical teaching from pastors and elders, with the added component of accountability. Gothardism is like processed food. It will keep your body fueled, but it will also bring with it a bunch of unhealthy additives.


----------



## JohnGill (Feb 17, 2013)

Herald said:


> The bottom line is that Gothardism is not needed in the church. What is needed is sound biblical teaching from pastors and elders, with the added component of accountability. Gothardism is like processed food. It will keep your body fueled, but it will also bring with it a bunch of unhealthy additives.


----------



## JohnGill (Feb 17, 2013)

> Cult. Run, do not walk to the nearest exit.



You need a twitter feed for your pithy statements

We can start calling them Joshu-isms.


----------



## Theoretical (Feb 17, 2013)

If you want to see the real fruits of this movement, just look at how it treats the afflicted and suffering. At least Pentecostals who think it's a demon don't blame you for your suffering per se. I've seen some really terrible spiritual callousness and generational cursing from Gothard-influenced folks.


----------



## rbcbob (Feb 18, 2013)

Simplistic, proof-texting, cookie cutter, external Christianity.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Feb 18, 2013)

It is interesting that 57% see the IBLP as a cult; 43% see it as a valid Christian Christian organisation. Some years ago I saw a full statement of faith of the IBLP and it was solidly evangelical. i cannot find this but see a summary at Statement of Faith | Institute in Basic Life Principles. Therefore would it be more appropriate to call them a sect than a cult?


----------



## Herald (Feb 18, 2013)

Stephen L Smith said:


> It is interesting that 57% see the IBLP as a cult; 43% see it as a valid Christian Christian organisation. Some years ago I saw a full statement of faith of the IBLP and it was solidly evangelical. i cannot find this but see a summary at Statement of Faith | Institute in Basic Life Principles. Therefore would it be more appropriate to call them a sect than a cult?



How about "not helpful"? Gothardism attempts to do what the church is responsible for. 

Sent from my most excellent Galaxy S III


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 18, 2013)

How can I receive salvation?

http://iblp.org/questions/do-i-really-need-be-saved

They clearly hold to a gospel message as I understand it.


----------



## Mushroom (Feb 18, 2013)

The same would have been said of the wildly pentecostal pelagians that I was involved with in my early 20's, Randy. Pelagianism was condemned as a heresy a long time ago. God did use them for pulling a good number of His children out of the fire, mainly through being exposed regularly to His Word. Does that excuse the heresy?


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 18, 2013)

I am not so sure about that Brad. For one thing they don't have a gospel that proclaims justification by faith alone based solely upon the Person and Work of Christ. 

As I noted above I have seen parachurch organizational stuff used and abused. I have seen it done in congregations who do not have a proper ecclesiastical structure. I have seen some horrendous things. Just look at how the Bible is used and misused by various people through the ages. Finney definitely ruined many but his root problem was that he didn't have the Gospel. IBYC shares the gospel message about our need for Christ as the sole means for salvation. Not by works of righteousness. It isn't the same as I understand it. So I would have to say it isn't the same thing as the wildly pentecostal pelagians.


----------



## Mushroom (Feb 18, 2013)

Their wording would have been exactly the same, Randy. Where IBYC and the pentecostal pelagians both err is in what remaining in the faith entails.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 18, 2013)

Brad said:


> Their wording would have been exactly the same, Randy. Where IBYC and the pentecostal pelagians both err is in what remaining in the faith entails.



Not from what I have seen and known Brad. I am saddened that your experience has been so bad. We both have different experiences. You seem to have had some poor experiences as you would have in a Pentecostal Church that had a false take on the scriptures themselves. I was a Navigator. I have seen that material used in all kinds of Churches as I have seen Evangelism Explosion used even in Nazerene Churches. I guess we have different experiences. Just because someone takes the bible and preaches from it and ruins lives by their misapplications is not going to make me think the Bible is a bad thing to turn to. 

The gospel is spelled out very well in those presentations and the Pentecostals and Finney's of the world would repudiate it.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 18, 2013)

> I'll call it a cult because of the heavy burden laid upon its members in the binding of their consciences on matters which are pressed as 'gospel,' that are, in fact, NOT Gospel.



I just haven't seen that Josh. I have to admit that I have seen some strange stuff in the material and have not defended it but stubbornly opposed some of it. But I have not heard those things called gospel.


----------



## JohnGill (Feb 18, 2013)

> Randy,
> 
> I'll call it a cult because of the heavy burden laid upon its members in the binding of their consciences on matters which are pressed as 'gospel,' that are, in fact, NOT Gospel. That is not to say that every person who has ever had association with them is guilty of such.
> 
> *I'll also add that there is a 'Reformed'-esque version of this goin' around that I find equally as dangerous and unhelpful.*



God forbid. Perhaps I'm naive, but I always find myself surprised when Reformed churches end up with the same issues as IFB(x) churches.

Randy, I know others who have had a positive experience from the material. For many, it reached them at the right time in their lives. To me, the problem is that there are too many more lives whom the material has hurt with its various false teachings. (Generational bondage, extreme authority stands, dogmatic assertions on arbitrary matters, bad definitions of theological terms such as grace, etc.) And as Bill has rightly said, Gothardism is trying to do the job of the church. I think churches would be better off with Baxter's Christian Directory than the works of Gothard. Weighed in the balance, Gothardism does more harm than good and if for no other reason, this is enough to preclude it from use amongst the churches of Christ.

As an aside, though their statement of faith may seem to be within the bounds of the true presentation of the gospel, this is no guarantee that Gothard's material presents such a true presentation. One only has to look at the way Federal Visionists appear orthodox in many of their statements and yet redefine the terms within those statements to reflect their heterodoxy. When dealing with an organization that has caused so much conflict we should hold such thoughts in remembrance.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 18, 2013)

> *And as Bill has rightly said, Gothardism is trying to do the job of the church.* I think churches would be better off with Baxter's Christian Directory than the works of Gothard. Weighed in the balance, Gothardism does more harm than good and if for no other reason, this is enough to preclude it from use amongst the churches of Christ.
> 
> As an aside, though their statement of faith may seem to be within the bounds of the true presentation of the gospel, this is no guarantee that Gothard's material presents such a true presentation. One only has to look at the way Federal Visionists appear orthodox in many of their statements and yet redefine the terms within those statements to reflect their heterodoxy. When dealing with an organization that has caused so much conflict we should hold such thoughts in remembrance.



I can agree with most of this. There are dangers in some of it I admit that need to weighed in the balance by the Church. I also in years past have been critical. You can probably find some of those criticisms on this forum. But i am not willing to classify them as a cult. That is a step to far. How Churches use the material can be cultish as there are cults that use the Bible. Even cults attend and have used Billy Graham crusades which is a whole other discussion. Chuckle


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Feb 18, 2013)

JohnGill said:


> I think churches would be better off with Baxter's Christian Directory



Baxter was not sound on the crucial topic of Justification by grace through faith alone. One can argue that his Christian directory is based on this flaw.


----------



## Don Kistler (Feb 18, 2013)

I attended the Institute in Basic Youth Conflicts several times as a young adult, as well as their Leadership Seminar once at UCLA back in the early 70's. What I saw is that most of what I heard back then was largely Old Covenant thinking: "If you do this, then God will do that."

I remember a mountain of guilt when hearing that Gothard had done this and that, when he didn't have a car of his own, and God gave him 7 cars in one day. When that didn't happen to me, the obvious response is: "What am I doing wrong?"

There are good moral principles to be learned from these seminars, and some good biblical principles to apply, but a lot of discernment is needed. I felt that those attending knew far more about what was in their red binder than what was in their Bible.

My two cents worth...


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Feb 18, 2013)

PuritanCovenanter said:


> The basic Principles level can be very beneficial. I learned a lot about what God expected in how I should relate to authority in an age where we were taught to question even the respect due to authority.



I was wondering how true this authority benefit was Randy. Those horns on your photo make you look quite a rebel


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 18, 2013)

Stephen L Smith said:


> I was wondering how true this authority benefit was Randy. Those horns on your photo make you look quite a rebel



Then you should see me in my Confederate Kepi.


----------



## JohnGill (Feb 18, 2013)

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Stephen L Smith said:
> 
> 
> > I was wondering how true this authority benefit was Randy. Those horns on your photo make you look quite a rebel
> ...



Anyone else think ZZ Top when they see these?


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Feb 18, 2013)

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Then you should see me in my Confederate Kepi.



Right that's it Randy. i shall get the application papers from the IBLP juvenile delinquent department and get you admitted there. Don't worry they have a "covenant family" focus with a "sprinkling" of truth, so you will feel right at home


----------



## calgal (Feb 23, 2013)

Stephen L Smith said:


> It is interesting that 57% see the IBLP as a cult; 43% see it as a valid Christian Christian organisation. Some years ago I saw a full statement of faith of the IBLP and it was solidly evangelical. i cannot find this but see a summary at Statement of Faith | Institute in Basic Life Principles. Therefore would it be more appropriate to call them a sect than a cult?



Only if you call the LDS a sect not a cult based on their written documents (the LDS do have a Statement of Faith that looks really good at a quick glance).


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 23, 2013)

calgal said:


> Stephen L Smith said:
> 
> 
> > It is interesting that 57% see the IBLP as a cult; 43% see it as a valid Christian Christian organisation. Some years ago I saw a full statement of faith of the IBLP and it was solidly evangelical. i cannot find this but see a summary at Statement of Faith | Institute in Basic Life Principles. Therefore would it be more appropriate to call them a sect than a cult?
> ...


That seems a bit off base to me. The foundations are definitely different. The theology is foundationally different. The doctrine of God is different. There are underlying factors on both sides that prove one knows the true grace of Christ and who he is. If you going to make this kind of statement then you might conclude that solid Statements of Faith are in fact not in conflict with the Mormon's full statement of their faith. Terminology is used different and defined differently. As you note "their written documents" prove what I am saying, if I am not mistaken.


----------



## calgal (Feb 23, 2013)

PuritanCovenanter said:


> calgal said:
> 
> 
> > Stephen L Smith said:
> ...


Actually Randy, it is not so off base.The LDS Articles of Faith (I used statement not article) could have come from any random Arminian church. The talk about prophets and prophecy is a lot like the Penecostal talk. Same applies to Gothard and Co. They add rules the Lord never wrote and enforce obedience to a man made set of "standards."


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 23, 2013)

calgal said:


> Actually Randy, it is not so off base.The LDS Articles of Faith (I used statement not article) could have come from any random Arminian church. The talk about prophets and prophecy is a lot like the Penecostal talk. Same applies to Gothard and Co. They add rules the Lord never wrote and enforce obedience to a man made set of "standards."



But Gail you said more than that. And you were correct in doing so. 


calgal said:


> "based on their written documents"



This was stated upon foundational truths. They are not the same God's comparatively nor do they even remotely come close doctrinally concerning eternal salvation and justification by faith alone. This is so far apart from apples and oranges even. It is like steak and oranges. They aren't even of the same kind.


----------



## Shawn Mathis (Feb 23, 2013)

"I know so many Calvinists who had to detox from their early Gothard influences. I would avoid his legalism like the plague."

I'm one who detoxed from this legalistic organization. It along with my own charismatic church drove me toward woe and sorrow. Which God used to reveal his sovereign grace. I looked into Gothard a while back when I ran across it in homeschooling circles (the murderer Matthew Murray ranted about Gothard's legalism) with even a homeschooling leader defending him. He denies grace in the OT. He has charistmatic overtones including the rhema-word errors of Pentacostals. One book, endorsed by Adams, explains some of his more shaddier practices and various exotic and scary "interpretations" and "applications": A Matter of Basic Principles

Does he say anything good? As one person put it: is it worth digging into a pile of (menure) to find the dollar coin?


----------



## christiana (Feb 23, 2013)

What is the reason and purpose for any parachurch organization and is there a true need for such if your home church is teaching the whole counsel of God? Many times a parachurch organization will add confusion and disloyalty to the mix when the home church if supported with the same enthusiasm would draw the family of God together and help them to resist any temptation of attending and/or supporting any other body of teaching, or so it seems to me. Think of all the other similar organizations which folk flock to for seminars, conventions and extra teaching and one must decide and discern which if any are truly beneficial over the long haul. Our pastor in the past did preach against any parachurch group and encouraged all to show loyalty to their own church body and teaching. I see this was discussed in a previous post:
http://www.puritanboard.com/f47/para-church-organizations-biblical-should-we-support-them-36013/


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 23, 2013)

I missed the manure being in confessional churches I guess. I am not advocating everything that has happened in you alls pentecostal circles. But then again I wouldn't advocate anything in them probably except the doctrine of the Trinity if they even had one. And I had troubles with some of the Advanced Material. I am most grateful I didn't experience what you guys did and I am most grateful God didn't put me through the aberrations of the pentecostalism and legalism that you guys are reporting.


----------



## JBaldwin (Feb 24, 2013)

I lived and worked at the IBYC headquarters in the early 1980s, and I knew Bill Gothard and his extended family personally. The organization is very cult-like. They do not have a real understanding of the grace of God. It is also very works-based. In short, "Run Away, Run Away!"


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Feb 25, 2013)

JBaldwin said:


> I knew Bill Gothard



How would you describe Gothard's character? Would you regard him as a Christian?




JBaldwin said:


> The organization is very cult-like.



Could you expand on this?


----------



## JBaldwin (Feb 25, 2013)

Stephen L Smith said:


> JBaldwin said:
> 
> 
> > I knew Bill Gothard
> ...


I am not in a position, especially since it's been so many years since I've even spoken to Bill Gothard, to say whether he is a christian or not. He professes to know Jesus, and he lives by a very high moral code. Bill communicated to the staff on more than one occasion, as he did in his seminars, that if you wanted to have a good life, you have to follow good Biblical principles. While this is true, there seemed increasingly among the staff the idea that if you did not live by the principles spelled out in the seminars, there was something wrong with you. Many of the principles which Bill taught were based on one-liners from the OT that were taken out of context. As I look back on it, and as I saw after I left, this was nothing more than a works-based sanctification. 

As far as the group being cult-like, my experience (and the experience of others I know) was that once you were "in", it was difficult to leave. While I personally left of my own free will, I was ostracised by the organization.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Feb 25, 2013)

JBaldwin said:


> As far as the group being cult-like, my experience (and the experience of others I know) was that once you were "in", it was difficult to leave. While I personally left of my own free will, I was ostracised by the organization.



Thanks for the helpful comments. I was attracted to the IBLP as a teenager and an Arminian. The impression I got was they promoted God fearing principles and God fearing, mature, wise, kind and strong families - a strong attraction for a young man like myself who did not come from a stable family. Over time, however, I found the IBLP families not to be as spiritually mature as I first thought. Their approach to sanctification is formula based and forgets it is a life-long process. The new book put out on John Owen's 3 works, Overcoming sin and temptation [Crossway books], is far more helpful.


----------



## Herald (Feb 25, 2013)

Stephen L Smith said:


> JBaldwin said:
> 
> 
> > As far as the group being cult-like, my experience (and the experience of others I know) was that once you were "in", it was difficult to leave. While I personally left of my own free will, I was ostracised by the organization.
> ...



Stephen, any movement that is "formula based" runs this risk. Simply put, the Christian life is not easily compartmentslized. 

Sent from my most excellent Galaxy S III


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 25, 2013)

I have a question, does this look formula based? 



> Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Rom 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
> Rom 10:11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
> Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
> Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.



Or how about this one?



> Eph 6:1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.
> Eph 6:2 Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise)
> Eph 6:3 That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.



Some might consider these to be formula based.



> Rom 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.
> Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
> Rom 12:3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.





> Heb 13:7 Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation...
> Heb 13:17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.



One of the problems here is that some of these things are prescriptive. 



> Php 4:8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.
> Php 4:9 Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you.





> Joh 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him...
> Joh 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.





> Rom 8:12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
> Rom 8:13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
> Rom 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.



BTW, these are all things you will learn at IYBC. Yes, John Owen is very good and I would highly recommend him. We are called to struggle with sin and mortify our lusts. It is a work that is very hard and it does not justify us. But it is a command so that we can work out our salvation (sanctification). Many Christians are opposed to this kind of teaching because they like their sin more than they like God. I know I am one. But I am not willing to deny the truth as I need a place to keep returning to. Repentance demands my telling the truth.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Feb 25, 2013)

PuritanCovenanter said:


> I have a question, does this look formula based?



Randy, I am sure all true Christians believe *ALL* the precepts of scripture are to be obeyed. The question is: is IBLP biblically balanced enough to be a ministry one can recommend to Christians to aid in their spiritual growth, or is it seriously imbalanced so that appropriate warnings about this ministry are appropriate?

And I do speak as one who is cautious about many aspects of my Christian life.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Feb 25, 2013)

JBaldwin said:


> They do not have a real understanding of the grace of God.



Randy, this is very telling - written by someone who has seen inside the organisation.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 25, 2013)

Gothard: The man and his ministry : an evaluation: Wilfred Bockelman: 9780916608071: Amazon.com: Books

So have I Stephen. And I agree that there are problems. I have read the books. Even the one I link to above. This was started off with whether or not these people should be considered a Cult. In that declaration I would conclude by implication that that might mean non-Christian. I think that maybe some should be careful here concerning that matter. And some should be cautious about what they are declaring concerning the grace of God and how it is understood.

If you read the reviews of the books Shawn and I link to they kind of look like the pole here. You will see the authors have a bias. Some pointed bias I might add. Yet there are problems and I have readily admitted that. But some of the judgment here is incorrect in my estimation. And it goes too far. Like J. Baldwin, I have some connectivity also. And I confronted some things that I saw and experienced.

Concerning the recovery stuff... There are groups out there who have also detoxed from Reformational Theology. So the detox situation is nil to me. Just an FYI.


----------

