# Are Independent Fundamental Baptist a cult?



## Javilo

I know that they are KJV only and Arminian.
They try to control people and do evangelize
although it is rushed and depends on the persons' response.
But they also have a high regard for the Bible.
So there is some good to the IFB movement.
Not sure if they are trinitarian.
So hard to tell if it is a cult.
Better to just avoid IFB churches?
Are any of them reformed? (e.g., Macarthur)


----------



## py3ak

Joe, there are independent fundamental baptists and then there are independent fundamental baptists. But I think the majority of independent fundamental baptists would stoutly deny that anyone who wasn't trinitarian has any right to the name.


----------



## the particular baptist

Hi Joe,

IFB's consider MacArthur a heretic for teaching the DoG and the Lordship of Christ. They teach an easy believism gospel and then apply external man-made religious rules to unconverted people.


----------



## TimV

> IFB's consider MacArthur a heretic for teaching the DoG and the Lordship of Christ. They teach an easy believism gospel and then apply external man-made religious rules to unconverted people.



Some do, more haven't even heard of MacArthur or the Doctrines of Grace; they're ordinary people who show up to church without reading a lot of theology.

You just can't make such radical and specific stereotypes about millions of people who go to churches that are vastly different from each other. Some IFB churches are very Calvinistic, like the big one where I live, some aren't, some don't even think about the subject.

To ask if IFBs are heretics is to assume that they are some sort of denomination with ridged control, which is just the last thing that they are.

All apples are fruit, but to ask the question "are all fruits apples" or to answer it by saying "yes, all fruits are apples" is an improper question, and you can't answer it by doing anything other than challenging the question, which Ruben did above.


----------



## Southern Presbyterian

I think it would be impossible to make a blanket statement about ALL IFB churches. You'd have to make a church by church assessment. Some are more "unique" than others. But most of the ones that I know about personally are Trinitarian and do preach the gospel in their own inconsistent arminian way. It was through the ministry of an IFB church that I was saved.


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon

TimV said:


> IFB's consider MacArthur a heretic for teaching the DoG and the Lordship of Christ. They teach an easy believism gospel and then apply external man-made religious rules to unconverted people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some do, more haven't even heard of MacArthur or the Doctrines of Grace; they're ordinary people who show up to church without reading a lot of theology.
> 
> You just can't make such radical and specific stereotypes about millions of people who go to churches that are vastly different from each other. Some IFB churches are very Calvinistic, like the big one where I live, some aren't, some don't even think about the subject.
> 
> To ask if IFBs are heretics is to assume that they are some sort of denomination with ridged control, which is just the last thing that they are.
> 
> All apples are fruit, but to ask the question "are all fruits apples" or to answer it by saying "yes, all fruits are apples" is an improper question, and you can't answer it by doing anything other than challenging the question, which Ruben did above.
Click to expand...


Exactly! The very word "Independent" is an indication that they are not all to be stuck into the same "pigeon hole." There is a wide diversity among IFBers that renders such broad stereo-types pointless.

I have know IFBers on both sides of the so-called "Lordship Controversy" and IFBers who would contend for the five-points, and those who do not.

However, I have never met an IFBer who denies the Trinity. Don't know where he got that one!


----------



## Ex Nihilo

Presbyterian Deacon said:


> ity among IFBers that renders such broad stereo-types pointless.
> 
> I have know IFBers on both sides of *the so-called "Lordship Controversy"* and IFBers who would contend for the five-points, and those who do not.
> 
> However, I have never met an IFBer who denies the Trinity. Don't know where he got that one!



What is the Lordship Controversy?


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon

Ex Nihilo said:


> Presbyterian Deacon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ity among IFBers that renders such broad stereo-types pointless.
> 
> I have know IFBers on both sides of *the so-called "Lordship Controversy"* and IFBers who would contend for the five-points, and those who do not.
> 
> However, I have never met an IFBer who denies the Trinity. Don't know where he got that one!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is the Lordship Controversy?
Click to expand...


Here are some helpful links:

http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/lordship-salvation-6613/

http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/lordship-salvation-free-grace-macarthur-rt-19999/

http://www.puritanboard.com/f77/one-you-one-me-16602/


----------



## CharlieJ

Though even this is an over-simplification, here are some types of IFB churches.

Sword of the Lord:
KJVO
4-point Arminian, anti-Calvinist
easy-believism
evangelism-oriented
non-expository preaching
mostly undergrad education
very conservative standards
Keswick sanctification
Classical dispensational or no consistent macro-hermeneutic

some representative churches/schools (having most of these attributes): 
Lancaster Baptist Church, Rev. Paul Chapell with West Coast Baptist College
Temple Baptist Church, Rev. Clarence Sexton with Crown College of the Bible
Church of the Open Door, Dr. Norris Belcher with Open Door Bible College
Pensacola Christian College
Gospel Light Baptist Church, Rev. Bobby Roberson


Bob Jones University & Friends:
4-point Arminian to 5-point Calvinist, mostly Amyraldian
multiple Bible versions
easy-believism to Lordship
more edification-oriented
expository preaching
good share of advanced degrees
conservative standards
mix of Keswick and Augustinian views on sanctification
Classical to Progressive Dispensationalism

some representative churches/schools:
BJU (duh) - Amyraldian, Progressive D.
Northland Baptist Bible College
Clearwater Christian College
Mount Calvary Baptist Church, Dr. Mark Minnick
Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. David Doran - Classical D., 4-5 Cal.
Central Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. Kevin Bauder 
Hampton Park Baptist Church, Dr. Drew Conley


----------



## Zenas

Had a friend or two attend a IFB High-School that was a feeder school for Pensicola Concentration Camp (as they called it). That place sounded scary. All of them hate the memory of it and what they were taught there. Seriously hostile and very ignorant (not in an insulting way) people.

As far as to them being a cult, doubtful. The denomination, movement, or whatever you call it has no official stance of itself it doesn't seem. As others have noted, their theological stances are very varied. They can't be painted with a broad brush like Mormonism which, at its core belief, teaches damnable lies. These folks, while probably off track in many ways, I doubt do that.


----------



## the particular baptist

TimV said:


> You just can't make such radical and specific stereotypes about millions of people who go to churches that are vastly different from each other.



Apologies Tim

I had in mind First Baptist Church of Hammond and the and Jack Hyles following. I should have been more specific.


----------



## JBaldwin

Charlie, you pretty much covered it. 

In my youth through young adulthood I belonged to an IFB church. The pastor was from a Dutch Reformed background, but graduated from BJU and was close friends with the Joneses. He taught many of the doctrines of grace, not because he understood them, but because they were in the Bible and he wasn't about to deny anything God said in His Word. He was a classic dispensationalist, and I'm still not sure where Lordship salvation fit in.

In any case, I sure got a good foundation in the Scriptures for which I am thankful.


----------



## DMcFadden

The difficulty of defining the term looks about as easy as nailing jello to the floor. Here are some overarching commonalities.

*Independent* = "The church is not a member of any council, convention or is a part of any hierarchy outside the local congregation." Self-governing and autonomous would be descriptors here. Fundamental Independent Baptists churches typically remain separate from churches they deem "unsound," as well as other Baptists groups who join in with the "unscriptural" churches (i.e., any Baptist that organizes as a denomination).

*Fundamentalist* = holding to the "fundamentals" of the faith. This includes the original criteria advanced during the fundamentalist-modernist controversy of the last century. However, it also means to differentiate them from "evangelicals," "charismatics," and "pentecostals." Because they are cessationist, they would argue charismatic practices vitiate a church's claim to being a "New Testament" church.

*Baptist* = holding to a view of Baptist church government and history common to Baptist churches. However, in practice, the combined term, IFB, means more than this. It also includes a notion that Baptists are the only true NT churches and that they are not to be confused with "Protestants." As one of their writers describes it: "Historically, Baptists were never a part of the Roman Catholic Church or the Protestant Reformation. They cannot be correctly called "protesters" or Protestants who left the Roman Church." 



> 1. IFB's ACCEPT ONLY THE NEW TESTAMENT AS THEIR AUTHORITY IN ALL MATTERS OF FAITH AND PRACTICE.
> 
> 2. A BELIEF THAT THE CHURCH IS TO BE MADE UP OF SAVED BAPTIZED BELIEVERS.
> 
> 3. BELIEF IN STRICT SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.
> 
> 4. BELIEF IN THE PRIESTHOOD OF THE BELIEVER.
> 
> 5. BELIEF IN THE AUTONOMY OF THE LOCAL CHURCH.


Practically speaking, IFB congregations tend to be 6 day creationists who hold to the KJV Only position. They eschew "cooperation" with other groups in ANY form and have often come out of the SBC due to objections to the "cooperative program" for mission funding. From their point of view this violates the notion of independence and autonomy that they find in the NT.

If you need a memorable acrostic to understand the movement, try this one.



> B—Biblical Authority (almost always safeguarded by a KJV Only position).
> 
> A—Autonomy of the Local Church (and they really do mean AUTONOMY).
> 
> P—Priesthood of the Believer (no sacerdotalism or clericalism).
> 
> T—Two Offices (Elder & Deacon - in practice this means pastor and deacons).
> 
> I—Individual Soul Liberty of the Believer (not only are they _NT_ believers, they are NT believers who have a right to interpret the Bible without reference to church history or traditions as the Spirit "leads" as long as it does not contradict any of the points of this acrostic).
> 
> S—Saved, Baptized Church Membership (safeguarded by believer's baptism by immersion).
> 
> T—Two Ordinances (Communion and Baptism - although the sacramentology of the movement believes more in the "real absence" of Jesus from the ordinances and thus sees them essentially as dogged duty done only because Jesus ordained them to be done).


----------



## Christusregnat

DMcFadden said:


> *Baptist* = holding to a view of Baptist church government and history common to Baptist churches. However, in practice, the combined term, IFB, means more than this. *It also includes a notion that Baptists are the only true NT churches and that they are not to be confused with "Protestants." * As one of their writers describes it: "Historically, Baptists were never a part of the Roman Catholic Church or the Protestant Reformation. They cannot be correctly called "protesters" or Protestants who left the Roman Church."



Dennis,

Would you say that the highlighted portion above, especially that about "true NT churches" would be more fitting for Landmark Missionary Baptists than all IFBs?

Adam


----------



## Barnpreacher

Right. I was an IFB most of my life before coming to a Reformed understanding of the Bible, and some of them do have very cultish ways about them. The Ruckman following is an odd group to say the least, and I used to be one of the followers. There is very little graciousness and love found in their Christianity. Strange.


----------



## queenknitter

DMcFadden said:


> B—Biblical Authority.
> 
> A—Autonomy of the Local Church
> 
> P—Priesthood of the Believer
> 
> T—Two Offices (Elder & Deacon)
> 
> I—Individual Soul Liberty of the Believer
> 
> S—Saved, Baptized Church Membership
> 
> T—Two Ordinances (Communion and Baptism)



The church in which I grew up had this acrostic painted on the wall where the teenagers met for Sunday School. But it was different. . . . the S = Separation of Church and State. Always thought that was strange. I like yours better. 

Anyway, no, IFBs are not cults. But some ministries are cultIC, I believe. Like anything, I guess.

C


----------



## DMcFadden

Christusregnat said:


> Dennis,
> 
> Would you say that the highlighted portion above, especially that about "true NT churches" would be more fitting for Landmark Missionary Baptists than all IFBs?
> 
> Adam



Adam,

You are correct that the highlighted words read like a definitional descriptive of the Landmarkists. However, it is not limited to them alone (or at least not to those who also identify themselves as Landark Missionary Baptists). 

My best friend is a fundamentalist in a Baptist church but not an IFB. Many fundamentalists accept the NKJV or even the NASB. And they do not necessarily practice secondary or tertiary degree separation. In my experience, ANY congregation self-identifying as an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist intends to convey connotations that are larger than the three words taken in isolation.

Groups such as the GARB and IFCA are "independent" AND "Fundamental" AND Baptist" but not necessarily "Independent Fundamental Baptists" in the David Cloud sense.


----------



## JohnGill

*As a former IFBer*



Javilo said:


> I know that they are KJV only and Arminian.
> They try to control people and do evangelize
> although it is rushed and depends on the persons' response.
> But they also have a high regard for the Bible.
> So there is some good to the IFB movement.
> Not sure if they are trinitarian.
> So hard to tell if it is a cult.
> Better to just avoid IFB churches?
> Are any of them reformed? (e.g., Macarthur)



Not referring to the IFB type church referenced by DMcFadden.

*KJV only (hardcore)* - the KJ*B* was given by inspiration of God and supersedes original language manuscripts and all other language manuscripts. Peter Ruckman
*KJV only (medium)* - The KJB is inspired as much as the original language manscripts; 
*KJV only (light)* - The KJV has derivative inspiration; D. A. Waite, David Cloud

Arminian - Deny Total Depravity, man's mind was not corrupted by sin, he can choose to do good; Deny Unconditional Election - you choose to be elected by choosing salvation; Deny Limited Atonement - the death of Jesus on the cross paid for all the sins of all mankind; Deny irresistible Grace - man can resist the grace of God even in salvation or he can choose to work with the grace of God and be saved; Deny Preservation of the Saints but affirm the heresy of Eternal Security. (Eternal Security is once you prayed a prayer you're saved forever whether it shows in your outward life or not.)

Controlling people - primarily they use guilt manipulation techniques, If you really loved God you would help out with such-and-such program. Of course you're working two jobs, taking care of a pregnant wife, and three sick kids, but you're not serving God. Discourage children from learning science or mathematics in university setting. Discourage young women from thinking. 

Evangelism - 1-2-3 pray after me. David Woods evangelism program focuses mainly on telling them how much of a change Jesus made in your life and encourage them to let Jesus change their life. "Try Jesus" evangelism. No mention of the law of God or Biblical Repentance.

High regard for the Bible - sing psalms and scripture songs, allow corrupt understandings of scripture to supercede the clear teachings in the Bible. Psalm 119:9 Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? Implication is that our way is naturally corrupt. Ignore the implication and teach semi-pelagianism. Common to hear sermons on how Lydia opened her heart to God. Most sermons reduce to reading a few verses, little exposition, losts of jokes and funny stories for entertainment purposes.

They are trinitarian.

The vast majority are cultish. Those churches which hold to the teachings of Peter Ruckman are a cult. The same goes for those who support or were taught in and still support Hyles Anderson College. Some are Baptist Briders. They are opposed to Reformed Doctrine and have such tracts in the church as: The Deadly Flower and Why I Disagree With All 5 Points of Calvinism.

They also claim Laurence Vance's The Other Side of Calvinism is a masterful and scholarly refutation of the evil doctrine creeping up in Baptist churches known as Calvinism.

I had a similar experience to JM's with the London Baptist Confession of Faith. For a while I also taught the Heidelberg Catechism to the 1st and 2nd grade boys. While they understood it, loved it, and wanted me to come back and teach again, the other guy in the class could not understand any of it. And so he took over and resorted to just entertaining them.

General knowledge of the Bible is superficial at best. When a friend of mine asked, How do we obey the Old Testament commandment to greet the brethren with an holy kiss?, he was answered by the teacher with, It's OT and we don't have to do it. My friend was new and didn't know any different. The teacher is a deacon and an "evangelist". In general the people who attend do not engage in much critical thinking over scripture. Those that do are either regarded as 2nd class christians or eventually just leave.

They have high moral standards many are biblical and quite a few not.

Resources to help you gauge what they are:

My old church here where I used to drink the kool..er where I attended: Bible Baptist Church :: Sermons from 2007. Try Greenfield as well as the pastor.

Hyles-Anderson College Click here for Jack Schaap's heresy on the Lord's Supper. Look for videos about the college at the site or at YouTube.

Jack Hyles Literature and Sermons

David W. Cloud's website bearer of false witness against John Calvin. Here is a printout of his sermon THE CALVINISM DEBATE: WHO IS THE ENEMY?

West Coast Baptist College - An Independent Baptist Bible College - Lancaster, CA Videos at the site or YouTube. This college should be given credit for moving away in many parts from IFBxdom.

Jim Vineyard's Oklahoma Baptist College, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma > Home. If you research the man be prepared for his vulgarity.

The colleges are a good place to find a wife who knows how to cook and take care of children. Of course you'll have to deprogram her. But since she's been taught all her life to obey her husband, the deprogramming should be fairly easy. Once they sink their teeth into reformed theology, stand back. Ever see a sweet, gentle, kind, meek woman get roaring mad? Many are in a hurry to be married before old maid age, 22.

The closest thing in Reformed churches that I have heard of are certain FV churches.

Some are worse than others. To classify the movement think Church Growth/Emergent Church in bizzaro world.

IFBx churches are a last resort church. We're required to attend church; these are the type you attend because of the command.

Hope this helps. If you must attend be wise as a serpent about Reformed theology.


Read this forum, focusing on Hyles Anderson, West Coast Baptist, & Oklahoma Baptist, Calvinism & Arminianism; search for posts by grounded grid and Jeff Blanchard. Also look for posts with JAV in them. And have some antacid handy.


----------



## Scott1

The Scribner Bantam dictionary definitions:


> cult:
> "1 particular ritual or system of worship; 2 devotion to a person, thing, idea, or the like; 3 group bound together by some esoteric ideology"
> 
> sect:
> "1 a number of persons adhering to a specific doctrine or set of beliefs; 2 religious denomination, esp. a faction of dissenters from an established church"
> 
> denomination:
> "... 4 religious sect"


The dictionary meanings would place a lot of Christian denominations in that category and reduces all denominations to sects.

While I'm hesitant to disagree with an authoritative dictionary, I have always understood "cult" in a perjorative sense (e.g. "bad'), "sect" as being a peculiar offset group, but not "bad" like a cult, and a "denomination" as being ordinary, mainstream. In this understanding, this group would certainly not be a "cult," probably not even a "sect" but maybe a denomination with some "sect"-like tendencies.

While I have only a very general observation of this group from a distance, it seems we are greatly overusing the term and need to be very careful using language to describe Christian groups (e.g. WLC 143-145). 

While this denomination appears to be errant in some aspects of doctrine and behaviour, there are many brothers and sisters in Christ in it, and we ought not pejoratively label the whole group. I would call this a denomination with some error of doctrine and behaviour, and with some sect-like tendancies.


----------



## pilgrim3970

Some sure act like it.

I have a co-worker who shared with me recently that he had become increasingly unhappy with many things about the church he has been attending. It has gotten to the point where he is wanting to leave. When he spoke to the pastor and told him that he would be leaving, the pastor replied that in so doing he would be "trampling on the blood of Jesus". 

Needless to say, I advised him to leave.


----------



## Barnpreacher

pilgrim3970 said:


> Some sure act like it.
> 
> I have a co-worker who shared with me recently that he had become increasingly unhappy with many things about the church he has been attending. It has gotten to the point where he is wanting to leave. When he spoke to the pastor and told him that he would be leaving, the pastor replied that in so doing he would be "trampling on the blood of Jesus".
> 
> Needless to say, I advised him to leave.




I was told when I left the IFB church I attended that my ministry was over and basically I would never do anything for the Lord from that point on. 

In all seriousness though, God is good. Had I never left that church I probably would have never "dared" to start reading reformed authors. The providence of God thrills my soul when I think about all the ways He has worked things out in my life.


----------



## CharlieJ

YXU said:


> Javilo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know that they are KJV only and Arminian.
> They try to control people and do evangelize
> although it is rushed and depends on the persons' response.
> But they also have a high regard for the Bible.
> So there is some good to the IFB movement.
> Not sure if they are trinitarian.
> So hard to tell if it is a cult.
> Better to just avoid IFB churches?
> Are any of them reformed? (e.g., Macarthur)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am in Greenville SC, there are a lot of independent fundamental baptist churches and independent fundamental bible churches.
> 
> They are very identical, the bible churches disagree strongly on the baptism of infants as well as the independent baptists. As far as a know, fundemental baptists are all general baptists, reformed baptists will name their church reformed (I guess).
> 
> They are:
> 
> Armian in grace,
> Dispensational in covenant relationship with God,
> No Lordship, easy faith is taught and no observation of God's commandments,
> Strongly against Roman Catholic Church,
> Strongly against the so-called reformed faith,
> Sometimes a lot of man-made rules are established to restrict people (ethical standards or so)
> They would not trace their origin to the Puritans, rather they do so to the Anabaptists.
> 
> You will find mottoes like that:
> 
> "Most of the reformed churches only teach theology and man-made doctrines, we as fundamentalists teach the Bible only."
> 
> "I don't understand what is a Calvinsim or Armianism, I don't, all I understand is the Bible. "
> 
> "Armianism is a heresy, while Calvinsim is wrong also, we teach only the Bible, sadly, even man like Spurgeon and Edwards fell in this area."
Click to expand...


YX, I too live in Greenville and am very well connected throughout several different church networks. Your information is certainly true of some churches, but is also somewhat dated.

For example, BJU Bible faculty is mostly Amyraldian and mixed on Lordship.

Hampton Park Baptist Church, Mount Calvary Baptist Church, Heritage Bible Church, and Community Baptist Church are all over 1000 in attendance and the leadership is Calvinistic, if not fully Calvinist.

The Chuch History professor at BJU/Seminary teaches that the Baptists came not from the Anabaptists, but from the English separatists.

Of course, there are other IFB churches that match the description you gave very well.

Oh, and if you attend Faith Free Presbyterian, I did as well for a while when I was in college and love that church dearly. Both Alan Cairns and Michael Barrett have been instrumental in my spiritual development.


----------



## queenknitter

We're getting quite a collection of us Greenvillians and BJUers around here. . . .

C


----------



## Kim G

queenknitter said:


> We're getting quite a collection of us Greenvillians and BJUers around here. . . .



I was thinking the same thing . . . 

"Do you hear that? It's the winds of change . . ." Randall in _Monsters Inc_.


----------



## JBaldwin

> YX, I too live in Greenville and am very well connected throughout several different church networks. Your information is certainly true of some churches, but is also somewhat dated.
> 
> For example, BJU Bible faculty is mostly Amyraldian and mixed on Lordship.
> 
> Hampton Park Baptist Church, Mount Calvary Baptist Church, Heritage Bible Church, and Community Baptist Church are all over 1000 in attendance and the leadership is Calvinistic, if not fully Calvinist.
> 
> The Chuch History professor at BJU/Seminary teaches that the Baptists came not from the Anabaptists, but from the English separatists.





Are these churches really reformed? I always thought that these churches were very strong on "works sanctification" and legalistic. 

If you want to listen to a talk on what fundamentalism is (from a fundamentalist's perspective), click on this link: Baptist College of Ministry - Fundamentalism Video Lectures

This man was in it from the earlier stages and was personal friends with Bob Jones, Sr.


----------



## queenknitter

JBaldwin said:


> YX, I too live in Greenville and am very well connected throughout several different church networks. Your information is certainly true of some churches, but is also somewhat dated.
> 
> For example, BJU Bible faculty is mostly Amyraldian and mixed on Lordship.
> 
> Hampton Park Baptist Church, Mount Calvary Baptist Church, Heritage Bible Church, and Community Baptist Church are all over 1000 in attendance and the leadership is Calvinistic, if not fully Calvinist.
> 
> The Chuch History professor at BJU/Seminary teaches that the Baptists came not from the Anabaptists, but from the English separatists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are these churches really reformed? I always thought that these churches were very strong on "works sanctification" and legalistic.
Click to expand...


You're going to get different answers here. Even between me and Kim, me and Charlie, and me and our anonymous BJU student.

No, they aren't. They aren't confessional. They aren't Covenantal. I think Charlie's evaluation of them is spot-on. 

In fact, they can't be too Reformed. Any church in the BJU orbit that talks a little too Reformed is threatened by the Bob Jones III specifically. If the word Calvinism is mentioned from the pulpit or if the pastoral staff attends distinctly Reformed seminaries, then they will be banned from the BJU faculty, staff, and students. That weighs heavily on the churches. 

I wish it weren't so. I didn't believe it myself when I first heard it. 

C


----------



## Neogillist

CharlieJ said:


> Though even this is an over-simplification, here are some types of IFB churches.
> 
> Sword of the Lord:
> KJVO
> 4-point Arminian, anti-Calvinist
> easy-believism
> evangelism-oriented
> non-expository preaching
> mostly undergrad education
> very conservative standards
> Keswick sanctification
> Classical dispensational or no consistent macro-hermeneutic
> 
> some representative churches/schools (having most of these attributes):
> Lancaster Baptist Church, Rev. Paul Chapell with West Coast Baptist College
> Temple Baptist Church, Rev. Clarence Sexton with Crown College of the Bible
> Church of the Open Door, Dr. Norris Belcher with Open Door Bible College
> Pensacola Christian College
> Gospel Light Baptist Church, Rev. Bobby Roberson
> 
> 
> Bob Jones University & Friends:
> 4-point Arminian to 5-point Calvinist, mostly Amyraldian
> multiple Bible versions
> easy-believism to Lordship
> more edification-oriented
> expository preaching
> good share of advanced degrees
> conservative standards
> mix of Keswick and Augustinian views on sanctification
> Classical to Progressive Dispensationalism
> 
> some representative churches/schools:
> BJU (duh) - Amyraldian, Progressive D.
> Northland Baptist Bible College
> Clearwater Christian College
> Mount Calvary Baptist Church, Dr. Mark Minnick
> Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. David Doran - Classical D., 4-5 Cal.
> Central Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. Kevin Bauder
> Hampton Park Baptist Church, Dr. Drew Conley



The "Sword of the Lord" type looks really yucky, especially because of easy-believism which I consider to be _another gospel_.


----------



## Javilo

IFBx churches are a last resort church. We're required to attend church; these are the type you attend because of the command.

Cris, based on your post and this thread, I've decided to just avoid these
churches instead of attending and trying to discern wheat from chaff.
I was just looking for a church that is evangelistic which these are but not
in a good way. But I don't see reformed churches outside handing out
tracts like the IFB's. It is too bad their theology is flawed. I just believe
that we are called to bring the gospel into the marketplace as in Acts.


----------



## py3ak

I believe Minnick and Doran will pretty well preach TULIP. Some years ago Minnick was strongly urging everyone to buy Owen on sanctification. I think a lot of fundamentalists who become calvinistic hesitate even longer over sanctification than they did over limited atonement. "Well, of course, sanctification is by grace, but sometimes people don't listen and you have to _______________".


----------



## queenknitter

py3ak said:


> I think a lot of fundamentalists who become calvinistic hesitate even longer over sanctification than they did over limited atonement. "Well, of course, sanctification is by grace, but sometimes people don't listen and you have to _______________".



Ah yes!! Tell me about it!! 

C


----------



## JohnGill

pilgrim3970 said:


> Some sure act like it.
> 
> I have a co-worker who shared with me recently that he had become increasingly unhappy with many things about the church he has been attending. It has gotten to the point where he is wanting to leave. When he spoke to the pastor and told him that he would be leaving, the pastor replied that in so doing he would be "trampling on the blood of Jesus".
> 
> Needless to say, I advised him to leave.



Commonly heard verse from such pastors in these situations: 1Jo 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would [no doubt] have continued with us: but [they went out], that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.


----------

