Tag: Christianity

Book Giveaway: The Essence of Christian Doctrine by Martin Murphy

~ Bob Hayton

I recently reviewed The Essence of Christian Doctrine by Martin Murphy. This little book is an excellent primer on the Christian life and would make for good discipleship material.

Well, the author informed me there is an updated edition available now of his book, and he’d like to offer two giveaway copies to the readers of my blog. So now through Wednesday 6/29 at 9pm, we’ll host a book giveaway for one of these two copies. Just fill out the Google form below to enter the contest. Spread the word about the contest for additional entries (details below).

You can find out more about this book at any of these fine retailers: Christianbook.com, Amazon.com, or direct from Theocentric Publishing Group.

Contest is now closed.

Congrats to Craig Hurst and James Farrat for being the winners in our contest.

On Blended Worship: Intentionally Mixing Music Styles to the Glory of God

~ Bob Hayton ~ 9 Comments

A recent comment concerned music styles and the worship wars. The three way split, envisioned by the commenter included the following.

1) Those want to do nothing but maintain the status quo, whether that is the contemporary style that is now familiar (with no new forms like Christian rap), or a traditional hymn-focused style — this group wasn’t going to budge from their stance.
2) Those who want to move back to the psalmic/hymnic tradition handed down to us from the early church — this group was further described as “Conservative Christianity”.
3) Those who allow for anything within the worship service.

What is missing from this list is “Blended Worship”. Why is it that we have to worry about being “comfortable” in our style? What about loving others and using styles that are accessible to others? Certain styles or songs may move me more than others, but they may hit other people where they are at more readily than they do for me. That has been my view of the issue for the last five years or more, now.

On this front, here are some quotes from documents on worship from my old church, Bethlehem Baptist Church, pastored by John Piper.

Because we value the importance of old and new , historic and current, we will pray that “the Holy Spirit may lead us into ways of worship that are continuous with the historic witness of worship given to the church throughout its history in the world, and at the same time He may lead us into the discovery of new forms and patterns that meet the needs of the people of our day” (R. Webber, “Worship Old and New” ). We will continue to be a “both/and” people that cherishes all the richness and freshness that comes from God.

Because we value the importance of both head and heart in our worship experience , we will continue to fill our minds with Biblical thinking about God, others, ourselves, and life, while at the same time putting renewed and greater emphasis on giving expression to our heart’s affections for God during worship.

Because we value being a singing people with growing appreciation for diverse expressions of love for God, we will use as many musical styles and forms as are helpful to worship and respond to God appropriately, as we seek the “significant range” of “at-homeness” referred to in Fresh Initiative #2. We will encourage whole-hearted participation by the entire congregation in all parts of the worship service, as the defining sound of Bethlehem worship becomes the singing voices of all God’s people praising Him.

Because we value increasing in a humble willingness to support others whose tastes are different than ours, we will put understanding above accusation, forbearance above faultfinding,and Biblical unity above the demand for uniformity. We will create opportunities for God’s reality to be conveyed more powerfully by learning to affirm the forms and styles that edify our brothers and sisters. Our relationships of love for each other will lead us to patiently support and rejoice with those who appreciate other styles, believing that God is able to meet us in the context of any Christ-exalting worship style.

Because we value growing in appreciation of both fine and folk elements in worship, we will strive to affirm the strengths and avoid the weaknesses inherent in both forms. We will worship within the range of gifts that God bestows on us, never compromising spiritual qualifications for aesthetic considerations, as we pursue undistracting excellence in spiritual leadership.

Because we value a determination to welcome people different from ourselves for the sake of Christ, we will continue to embrace God’s call for visible manifestations of love toward each other and our neighbors, providing opportunities before, during and after the service to reach out to those God would have us touch.

Because we value being more indigenous to the diversity of our metropolitan cultural setting, both urban and suburban, we will seek ways to communicate and worship that allow for a significant range of diversity in those whose worship is driven by a passion for the supremacy of God in all things.

Sunday morning worship is a corporate expression of our passion for the supremacy of God. We sense God’s leading to develop fresh expressions of this passion that 1) allow for a more focused and free lingering of love in the presence of the Lord; 2) reflect musically the diversity of our congregation and our metropolitan culture; 3) interweave the values of intense Godcenteredness and more personal ministry to each other in the power of the Holy Spirit. The following clarify our worship distinctives at Bethlehem:

We will continue with one common worship service format, “that with one accord [we] may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Our worship life will have a “defining center,” with significant range on either side of that center, resulting in a broader worship life than in the past that people can comfortably call “home.”

The mingling of historic and contemporary music No church or service can be all things to all people. But we do not value stylistic narrowness. We believe there are affections owing to God that different tunes and different texts and different genres may awaken better thanothers. We will strive to be who we are without exalting our own tastes as the standard of excellence or power. We will see God’s guidance in each worship setting to be both indigenous and stretching.

The last paragraph was excerpted from What Unites Us in Worship, and the other paragraphs were excerpted from Bethlehem’s Philosophy of Worship. There is a lot more in the philosophy document than what I’ve shared, but these sections focus on “blended worship”.

What do you think? Does your church emphasize a “blended worship” style?

Can the Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) Movement Reform?

~ Bob Hayton ~ 39 Comments


A blogging friend of mine, Will Dudding, recently shared some thoughts on his journey of the last five years or so, since he started blogging. His blog name is The Reforming Baptist, and he is a co-blogger with me on Re:Fundamentals and KJVOnlyDebate.com. After taking a break from blogging the past few months, Will came back to share some of his thoughts on where he’s at in a recent post. I want to excerpt some of his comments and discuss them here, below.

Since I have put blogging on the shelf for the last seven months, I have been learning some things that I needed to be quiet and learn. So, I’ll share them with those of you who have waited to see if I’d ever come back.

Originally, this blog was born out of my increased exposure to theology and ministry philosophy that was more God-centered than what I was accustomed to. So, I wanted to express what I was learning and kind of think through some issues in a public way in order to interact with others out there about it. However, I was very much a frustrated young man who was still struggling in my cocoon. As most of you know, I grew up in the Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) environment. After being exposed to life outside of that group, I felt as though I had been hoodwinked all my life and I used my blog to express my frustrations and address all the myths, errors, falsehoods, etc.. that I had bought into. Inadvertently, I learned that I had a porcupine effect on some people. Eventually, I began to sense that very same spirit of dissent in a few members in my congregation. It was then, that I realized that my spirit had probably negatively effected some people whom I was supposed to be leading. We ended up losing one family shortly after I stopped blogging. It was really painful to see them go, but I had to wonder after the fact how much of their dis-satisfied disposition was caused by mine? It took a rebuke from someone close to me that got me thinking about this, and so I knew it was time to quit blogging. I needed to shut up and listen to what God needed to teach me.

Another lesson I learned these past months is that the IFB or Fundamentalist movement, network, culture (whatever you want to call it) is not going to be revived or reformed. Those loyal to it cannot and will not recognize the inherent and fundamental defects of the movement. It will continue to decline from relevance and influence on its own. God doesn’t revive or reform such things. He does so to individuals. There is no use trying to correct the course of Fundamentalism by reasoning with the Scripture because for the most part, Sola Scriptura is not really valued by the movers and shakers in the movement. So, I have learned that it is best to just leave it alone and get my head out of the clouds – I am not going to make a dent in reforming fundamentalism. All I will ever be is a burr in their saddle, an irritation to be put up with should I continue identifying myself with them – not my idea of purposeful existence. I don’t need to be identified with the Fundamental Baptists, the Reformed Baptists, the Southern Baptists or any other group. We can exist in happy obedience to God’s Word and in fellowship with anyone else who is striving to do the same That is truly independence!

I encourage you to read the whole post, as he has some more to say. But I wondered what my readers thought of his judgement of the IFB movement. In my blog’s subtitle for the last several years, I’ve had the phrase “Reforming Fundamentalism (IFB) through Reformed Theology”. Will hasn’t been a full-fledged proponent of Reformed Theology, but he has been a reforming fundamentalist. I maintain a Reforming Fundamentalists Blog Network, which I need to update, but still includes a list of like-minded IFBs & former-IFBs intent on working toward positive change. That was the idea behind Re:Fundamentals, which also needs updating. One could also argue that the large fundamentalist forums and blog, Sharper Iron, has as one of its aims, the reformation of the IFB movement.

Will brings up the question though, is all this worth it? Will the IFB movement change? Does it want to change? He says it doesn’t. But I think that depends on where you are in the IFB spectrum. Still the recent brouhaha over Chuck Phelps and ABC’s 20/20 show, and the revelation of what many (myself included) consider to be a misuse of pastoral authority, teaches us something. That even in the “sane” wing of fundamentalism, a top-down leadership style, and certain views on authority and sanctification, continue to have drastic consequences. Pastor Bob Bixby, who like Greg Locke, has also walked away from the IFB movement and the Baptist label, recently shared some of his thoughts about continuing problems in the highest ranks of BJU-style fundamentalism. Will and I could give you some stories of other fundamentalist groups that would raise the hair on the back of your neck. I don’t know if I’ve recounted horror stories, but the personal stories and testimonies I’ve shared will give you an eyeful. Here are four accounts for you: a distraught mother, Becca’s story, Greg’s story, and another reader’s story. For a wild ride through the heart of the most extreme version of fundamentalism, you should pick up James Spurgeon’s book The Texas Baptist Crucible: Tales from the Temple.

Over my nearly six years of blogging, I’ve received on average one or two emails a week, it seems, from people appreciating my blog or sharing their own story of journeying through fundamentalism. Hundreds have shared their thoughts in the comments on my blog, but many more in private conversation to me. Many of these have found a new church, some are IFB churches which are much better than where they were before, but many walk away from the movement altogether.

Is the movement really changing? Are such stories decreasing in frequency? Maybe. I know this happened in other generations. Two of my uncles walked away from the IFB movement in the early 80s. Perhaps the internet is helping to escalate the problem. More and more have walked away or have awakened to the issues.

Does this mean we can write ICHABOD in bold across the moniker IFB? I don’t actually think so. Kevin Bauder and Dave Doran, represent glimmers of hope. This conversation between them and Mark Minnick, reveals the heart of these new fundamentalist leaders. Sharper Iron is a place where many IFB pastors and thinkers are discussing issues and seeking positive growth. The Preserving the Truth Conference, even though I don’t agree with some of it’s central values, nevertheless represents a positive movement in fundamentalism. As does Calvary Baptist’s Advancing the Church conference. Standpoint Conference is a mix of those still holding the IFB name and those who are past it, but it is working for a positive expression of fundamentalism for the new century.

Historic fundamentalism is still needed. Independence can be a good thing, as long as healthy interdependence with other like-minded churches is sought out. And Baptist doctrine and practice has hundreds of years behind it, and has proven to be a faith that aims to be as Biblical as possible. So Independent Fundamental Baptists are not a bad thing. What needs to be improved upon, and ejected from the movement, is the man-centered, pragmatic trappings and the baggage from the last 80 years of the movement. One-upmanship, strong-arming, political maneuvering, grand-standing, arrogance and an abrupt dismissal of any church group besides your own — these are all too common in the IFB world. Along with these problems is a fear of education, a resulting ignorance of doctrine, and a love of piety over theology — these problems have conspired to spawn eccentric doctrines and shallow Christians completely cut off from the rest of Christianity (as Will describes). Finally, and most importantly, a legalism silently pervades the movement. Often good intentions mask this legalism: we want to please God and obey His Law, but this is not our means to being accepted by God (either for our salvation or our sanctification). A recovery of the Biblical concept of grace and of the Gospel as being the A-Z of the Christian life (not just the entrance exam) is desperately needed.

There remain many faithful IFB churches who stand on the Word of God and love people. May their tribe increase. To try to reform those who bristle at the mention of the problems I stated above, however, is pointless. I trust, however, that more and more IFB pastors and leaders are willing to admit the problems of their movement. May they be encouraged to reform and renew fundamentalism for the 21st Century and beyond.

Greg Locke, Fundamentalism and the “Baptist” Label

~ Bob Hayton ~ 42 Comments

Recently, Pastor Greg Locke, a well known speaker among both Independent Fundamental Baptists and some Southern Baptist churches, announced that he is removing “Baptist” from the name of his church. Instead their initials GVBC will now stand for Global Vision Bible Church.

Removing the word “Baptist” from the church name is not an uncommon move. The argument is that removing the name makes the church more accessible to some who would shy away from the Baptist label.

In Locke’s case, it means more than dumping the baggage that the title Baptist holds. Instead, he views it as a departure from the IFB movement as a whole. I wonder how much of this is in part due to the recent 20/20 expose on the IFB movement? Perhaps other pastors and churches need to think through this issue themselves. Understandably, this has caused some shockwaves and Locke’s Facebook page was all abuzz with comments good and bad.

I wanted to share his reasoning for removing the name Baptist, and then ask others to chime in on your thoughts related to this. Personally, I’m a deacon at a Baptistic church, that doesn’t have the word Baptist in our name. Yet I’m not necessarily ashamed of it either. That being said, I do think that “being all things to all men” can definitely include modifying the church name (to some extent). And I’m a Christian more than a Baptist anyway.

Here’s the excerpt from Locke in a letter written for his church, explaining the change:

Here is a list of reasons that I feel this is a very important move:

1. Because of our geographic location (Nashville) 95% of any Baptist church is automatically associated with the SBC. While I have many friends in the Convention, we are not affiliated as a church. I preach in some of the greatest Southern Baptist churches in the country but I believe GV should remain Independent in our structure and governance.

2. The IFB “movement” as a whole is totally out of control and I do not personally wish to be identified with it any longer. Legally, our church will still be Global Vision Baptist Inc., Practically, I am worlds away from where I was even 5 years ago and I cannot in good conscience give my full support to a movement that has become nothing more than a mini controlling denomination. I understand that every “camp” of churches has it’s own issues, but I am unwilling to have GVBC submitted to the dictates of a legalistic mindset of man-made regulations. I preach in dozens of IFB churches, but we desire to be truly Independent, even in our identity.

3. The type of families/people we are reaching could care less about such an issue. I have come to realize that people’s lives are so much more important that the name a church has on the sign. We are the church and if we are not healthy as a body it doesn’t matter what the sign says. So many of our people are brand new Christians or are healing from an experience in the same type of church we are distancing ourselves from.

4. Because of our strong emphasis on Powerful Preaching, the term BIBLE would be much more in line with our DNA and overall vision. People say that to remove “Baptist” will take away our identity. Exactly! I want our identity to be nothing but the Word of God. We didn’t start a church so people “like us” would show up. I want a church that is solely built upon the radical principles of the Book. If people know that there is a place like that, they will flock to it. However, if they merely think we are the same kind of church they grew up in, then we won’t even get them in the door. I don’t want our church identity sabotaged by a loyalty to denomination, movement, camp or tradition. I want all my allegiance to God’s Word.

5. Personally, I’m a very hard guy to put in a box. I feel like I have not been true to who God made me to be and it has caused me much frustration. If I were to start the church over again tomorrow, this would be something I would do from the very beginning. God has done so much in my heart these last few years. But overall, I have allowed this constant “identity crises” to become such a focus that it has greatly affected my judgment and my family. I say “NO MORE”. How foolish I have been to seek so much of man’s approval. I am at a point in my life and ministry that if I can’t be who God made me at GVBC, then I must go somewhere that God can use me without the restraints of others that have nothing to do with our church. However, I know this is where God has placed me and I am positive that this is His leading. I’m not dying on the hill of being “Baptist”. But I will gladly lay down my life for the truth of the BIBLE.

We are going to remain as fundamentally sound as we have ever been. We are not changing Bibles or compromising truth. We will continue to keep a red-hot pulpit and build our congregation on expository preaching, soul-winning and world missions. I am grateful for my IFB heritage, but it will not be my future. If others interpret this as an attack on IFB churches, then they have clearly read between the lines. “Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind”. This is not easy, but I know for us it is right. I love you all. Now, let’s change the sign and reach this town for Christ.

[SOURCE …link now not working…]

What do you think? I for one, commend a man who doesn’t walk a party line but is willing to follow God’s leading and stand on his own two feet. I also predict the reaction to this may just prove once and for all that the IFB movement is in fact, a de-facto denomination. Reactions such as this one by Pastor Gary Click, indicate that to remove the name and distance oneself from the IFB movement is taken (by the supposedly “non-movement”) as “separation”, with the result that the true IFBs will then respond in kind.

For more on Greg Locke, you can read an interview that Re:Fundamentals did with him back in 2009. Please, let me know what you think about this. For the record, I don’t necessarily endorse bailing from the IFB movement as the solution for everyone and every church. But it’s hard to argue that the label is falling on hard times.

Harold Camping and a Replay of “The Great Disappointment”

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

On a special day, everyone felt on edge. An influential Bible teacher with numerous followers had prophesied that this very day would be the day Jesus returned. That day came and went leaving his followers severely disappointed.

Sound familiar? I’m not speaking of May 21, 2011 and Harold Camping, but October 22, 1844 and William Miller. The Millerite movement (no they weren’t known for beer drinking), were followers of William Miller’s Adventist teachings about Christ’s Second Advent (or arrival/coming). Using the most influential medium of his time, newspapers (similar to Camping’s use of radio today), the Millerites spread an “end-times” message far and wide. Their movement fractured eventually and spawned numerous other Churches and cults (or sects). The Seventh Day Adventist church directly rose from the Millerite movement, and the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ founder Charles Russell was influenced by Miller’s movement as well.

October 23, 1844 was known as “The Great Disappointment” because the predictions concerning October 22 didn’t happen. The dates had been shuffled and reshuffled around already prior to October 22, so they really couldn’t come up with a new date. Eventually, many of the Millerites simply changed their view of what was to happen from being a physical coming of Christ to being only a spiritual event.

Today, the Seventh Day Adventists continue to teach as an article of their faith that on October 22, 1844, Jesus entered the Holy of Holies in Heaven to begin the final phase of his work: the investigative judgement. Jesus is investigating every man’s work and accomplishing atonement for some and not for others. He’s reviewing the books, and wow, there must sure be an awful lot of books for the omnipotent Son of God to view since it’s been almost 170 years since he started! [See this link for more info on “the investigative judgement and the SDA church.”

Yesterday night, I listened as Harold Camping, today’s William Miller, explained away his failed prediction. The Judgement Day predicted did actually happen. It was a spiritual judgement, however. He did make a mistake. He took the prophecies too literally. Of course, October 21 will still be the physical end of the world, in Camping’s book. But this is no setback now. He reached for a card from the Seventh Day Adventist’s playbook. But I wonder if his followers will buy it? Will they continue to be greatly disappointed?

History repeats itself. End-times hysteria has been running rampant in America for more than 250 years now. It’s allowed cults like the Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses to flourish. Other groups with seriously defective teaching have emerged, like the Seventh Day Adventists. Doctrinal systems have also arisen which have not helped the church. Disputes over extreme variations of dispensationalism or hyper-preterism have an end-times factor behind them.

What exactly is it that contributes to the end-times mania? And why can’t we see past it? I hope to explore some of these issues in a series of posts spread out over the next couple weeks. But feel free to share your thoughts here in the comments.

The chart above was taken from the Wikipedia article on “The Great Disappointment”.