Saturday, July 14, 2012
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
Here I am again--apologizing for our not posting anything new for many months now! Family, work, church, kid's sports, potty training, etc... have contributed to this most recent silence. I don't know that an apology is needed--these are far more important than any blog. Oh well, this is a short one but I have been chewing on it for a while now.
Here is what Pastor Jack Schaap, First Baptist Church of Hammond, and
"WE BELIEVE THE BIBLE is the Word of God. We believe in the King James Version of the Bible."
SCRIPTURES — "We believe in the verbal, plenary inspiration of the Bible. The Old and New Testament are definitely inspired word for word. We accept the Textus Receptus manuscripts from which came the King James Bible. The Scripture is the final authority in all matters of faith and practice."
REWIND APPROXIMATELY 100 YEARS...
Here is what James Gray had to say in 1909 regarding inspiration in The Fundamentals Volume 2 Chapter 1:
"Let it be stated further in this defnitional connection, that the record for whose inspiration we contend is the original record — the autographs or parchments of Moses, David, Daniel, Matthew, Paul or Peter, as the case may be, and not any particular translation or translations of them whatever. There is no translation absolutely without error, nor could there be, considering the infirmities of human copyists, unless God were pleased to perform a perpetual miracle to secure it."
One question begs asking--who changed their belief on the Holy Scriptures? Stay tuned for more to come...
Thursday, March 27, 2008
On a much lighter note, let's play a fun game of "You Write the Caption" for this photo. I have a few that I jotted down already, but I want to see everyone's creative side before I reveal them! Let's keep it clean and above reproach now people!
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
I didn't want to pass on this opportunity since I have recently received an invitation to attend Pastor's School (this is where I copied this gem from) and a DVD with information on the meetings as well.
Obviously we take issue with a lot of what goes on in Hammond--one of our biggest problems is with their incessant penchant for NUMBERS. If you read the following article by Jack Schaap you will see this fetish clear as day. First Baptist Church of Hammond today is the same as the FBCH of Jack Hyles. Their self love is nauseating to me personally and it is comical to hear them define ministry success. I am looking forward to watching some of the morning sessions when Jack Schaap pontificates on what has "happened" to all the large independent fundamental churches of yesteryear!
Little does Jack Schaap realize it but it is entirely possible for the LORD to receive more glory from a bunch of "little" churches than from one "mega" church. I frankly don't care about mega churches--IMHO any church over 1,000 should be starting other churches all over their area instead of building the "mother church". Take a look at what our self proclaimed expert on "church growth" has to say:
"In 1976 Dr. Elmer Towns, dean of the Church Growth Institute at
During the same decade, my predecessor, former pastor, and mentor, Dr. Jack Hyles, made a short study of growing Baptist churches across
At age 50, I stand over the midway point of my preaching career. Thirty-two years ago, I began my ministry amongst the most aggressive, growing, and influential pastors and churches. I have wondered to myself and asked my staff, “Where are independent Baptists 33 years later?” and the next obvious question, “Where are we going?”
I commissioned a team of my staff to do follow-up research on the same 14 churches that my predecessor researched over 30 years ago. I discovered that only one of the 14 still held the position of largest church in their state, and that is the church I pastor. I question not only where did the other 13 go, but also, what is the state of the church growth movement today? I do not make these statements to sit in judgment independent Baptists or of those who followed other church growth models, but rather to point out the obvious decline among those who over 33 years ago were very focused and successful.
It is my personal belief that Christ gave us the method and the model and the message. I am convinced that God would not give us such an important truth without giving us an example of how truth should be spread. Furthermore, there is both a consensus and confusion among church growth experts as to which model is successful, along with a tremendous hunger to find any method that will fill our pews. One of the most recent, oft-copied, contemporary models of church growth in
Nearly all Christian groups would agree that a deeper relationship with Jesus Christ is one of our foundational goals. If a comparison were made of Christian models, one would find a strong thread of commonality with that message. What is often the discrepancy is the method and model used.
I think it is valid to ask, “Where have we gone, and where are we going? Have we given up on building effective churches that pattern the book of Acts? Have we left the highways and hedges where the lame, the halt, the maimed, and the blind still await our coming?”
To those of us who diligently study church growth, we find that some vacillate between a prosperity Gospel and deeper life with an occasional visit to a soul-winning ministry. It appears we are never quite able to find the balance and cadence of the Great Commission.
Have our morals shifted along with our models? I fear some of us have become distracted by our brothers’ ministries and have found that acting as judge of our fellow-laborer’s ministry is easier than acting as a soldier performing our Christian duties.
This year’s Pastor’s School will be revelatory and relevant! Join me each morning at Pastor’s School as we examine the facts and search the Scriptures and exalt the Savior."
--Dr. Jack Schaap
Hope you enjoyed this little glimpse into the fundyism from which we have come.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
I found a very interesting article over at Sharper Iron. This young fellow by the name of Doug Smith hits the nail squarely on the head. We here at Bread and Circuses do not bash the KJV--it is a very good version that has been used by God, but we believe that there are other good versions with more modern language. We are wondering how long the false teaching of King James Onlyism will continue to be pushed among the hysterical fundamentalists. We are praying for a return to the historic and orthodox position on the Holy Scriptures--won't you join us? Check the article out here and enjoy!
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Voyle Glover is a friend of ours and has been a guest poster here at Bread and Circuses in the past. Here is a piece that he has recently finished and we thought that it would be a good read for everyone here.
Voyle Glover is an attorney in private practice in , . He’s a member of Lake Hills Baptist Church in , is married to Trudy, and together they have three children. Attorney Glover is the author of "Protecting Your Church Against Sexual Predators" (Kregel), and has authored other books, articles, and columns over the years. His website, Brevia Notes, contains a wide assortment of his writings. He teaches on Wednesday evenings in his church, and also preaches in various churches from time to time.
You can find his most recent article here on his Brevia website--a very compelling article indeed. Check out some of his other articles as well--one of my favorites focuses on Christ's Crucifixion.
**Recently Voyle has had some health challenges and he is still recovering from heart surgery. Please keep Voyle, Trudy, and the entire Glover family in your prayers.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
All that being said, I wanted to revisit a comment from one of our previous posts concerning "change" and make sure that it did not get lost in the comments section. I meant to post this back in August, but things got very busy at work and home so I never got around to it. I want to clarify what I have observed at FBCH/HAC concerning their view of "change".
A young man who calls himself Jeremy has some venting to do over our criticisms of HAC/FBCH. You can find his comments under the "Old-Timer Religion" thread. He begins by quoting a portion of my last post taken from the Reformers by way of Mark Dever in his book, The Nine Marks of a Healthy Church. Here is the comment in its entirety and I will respond to it at the end.
**Disclaimer: I am not attacking Jeremy nor do I wish to lash out at him in any way, shape, or form. I just could not allow his comments to go unchallenged as I see them flawed on many levels. If you feel compelled to comment here please be sure to do so in a Christ-like spirit. I believe that Jeremy is probably a sincere follower of Christ just like I am--I simply wanted to set the record straight concerning his accusation that we are "making things up".
“We need God’s Word to be saved, but we also need it to continually challenge and shape us. His Word not only gives us life; it also gives us direction as it keeps molding and shaping us in the image of the God who is speaking to us." "For someone that sat under the ministry of FBCH for multiple decades (and apparently can't get through one blog about anything other than FBCH)you'd think that you'd understand the difference between Mark Dever's explanation of "changing" and Jack Hyles/Jack Schaap's explantion. The former is a continual shaping by God to be in his image. The latter is the determination to never change from the "doctrines" that DO NOT change. Of course, a perpetual desire to degrade, attack, and diminish the work of FBCH needs more fuel. Sometimes, you just make it up if it's not there, right? In your epic quest to portray IFB as man-centered and far from the humility and meekness of Christ, not once do I read a humble experience of learning that you've received from God. Nor do you admit your short comings. Your persistent criticism makes clear the mental "ivory tower" upon which you've placed your philosophies and doctrines over those of people with whom you disagree. Jack Schaap's actions may translate as pride and gaudy number exaltation to you, but what do your constant criticisms translate about you to others? I can't wait until FBCH falls, or changes to your thinking ... whichever you desire. Apparently, thanks to the learning I received on this site, it's the whole point of Christianity. Godspeed. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Please understand that my comment is in no way an attempt to sway you, change you, or get back at you. I'm no better than you are. Consider it a friendly "venting". The best to you."
First of all I would like to address the assertion that the Reformers were talking about something entirely different than Schaap concerning "change". In all of my years at FBCH/HAC the great majority of the time that "change" was brought up it was in the context of changing from the "old paths". We heard places like Bob Jones University railed upon because of their "liberal" ways--can you imagine anyone thinking that a place like BJU is liberal? A casual survey of their website will prove otherwise to any reasonable investigator.
Nevertheless, to this day Pastor Schaap is throwing tantrums about Tennessee Temple University and how liberal they have gone--i.e. contemporary worship music, different Bible versions, and abandonment of certain dress standards. What many of the culturalists cannot grasp is that it is entirely possible for someone to be a sold out Christ-follower and not agree with them on music, Bible versions, the "old sawdust trail", dress standards, or a personality within larger Fundamentalism. Standards, associations, and preferences are NOT fundamentals of the faith--the fact that you don't change on silly cultural issues is not the same as not changing on the cardinal doctrines of our faith.
When FBCH puts up a billboard trumpeting themselves as an "unchanging church" they are referring to differences in worship style mostly and not to anything about doctrines that DO NOT change. If you think that this is not accurate you need only to listen to a few Sunday night sermons where Jack Schaap screeches about other colleges or ministries that are not still stuck in the 1950's like FBCH/HAC.
Pastors Hyles and Schaap usually reference "change" as a negative thing--rarely if ever are they talking about the core doctrines of our faith--usually they are referring to gray issues that although they may illicit bronx cheers from the rowdy Sunday evening college crowd they do not threaten the faith or Gospel that has been handed down to us.
I am saddened that this young man feels that we desire to see FBCH/HAC fall--I truly do not want them to fall but to reform. I desire to see them cease from their man-centered ways. I desire that Pastor Schaap begins to feed his flock by the expository preaching/teaching of the Word. I desire that those who attend FBCH would not need to get fed by radio preachers because of the spiritual malnutrition they experience from the pulpit ministry of FBCH. I desire that FBCH forsake the heresy of King James Onlyism in all of its forms and that they would go back to an orthodox position on the inspiration of Scripture that the original fundamentalists espoused. I do not have time to go on here--that is another post for another day.
The object of Christianity is not to see FBCH fall or change to my desires--the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. Our lives are about so much more than this blog--if you haven't noticed we can go months without posting anything new. This blog was established for those who are "on the fence" in Hammond--it is certainly not for everyone and we have attempted to make that point clear.
It is simply smoke and mirrors to pretend that since we operate a blog that takes issue with the hysteric portion of fundamentalism it must be all that we do in our spare time. It is more of the same IFBx defense mechanism that rears its ugly head when one encounters this blog and others like it. What so often happens is the offended reader then jumps to a non sequitur, e.g., since the blog is primarily dealing with the constructive criticism of IFBx it must be all that the blog operators invest their time in...? We are not perfect by any stretch of the imagination--just ask our wives and friends who know us well. I do not take lightly when someone accuses us of "making things up".
We do hope that those who object to this blog will continue to visit and comment as they feel led. We know that they have few places where they can voice their dissent--we want this to be a place where people are free to disagree with a gracious spirit. I hope that "Jeremy" will come back again and vent here at Bread and Circuses in the near future.
To the praise of His glorious grace,