Home > Brandenburg, Jack Schaap > Schaap and Hyles and the Presence of God

Schaap and Hyles and the Presence of God

October 3, 2007

About three months ago I saw the buildings that hold the operations called First Baptist Church of Hammond, Indiana (FBC).  I got a mini-tour of the surroundings by someone who grew up a few blocks from there.  Besides the church buildings, the area looked like a war zone in a third world country.   If FBC got the results they claim, I would have expected a drastic change in the neighborhood surrounding where they work every day and assemble every week.  My tour guide says that it has changed—for the worse.

In this first article about FBC, I want to keep it simple.  FBC does not represent the God I see in the Bible.  The God.  My God.  The One and True God.  They don’t manifest God in the way they believe or practice.   FBC is supposed to be about God.   They say they are about God.  Of course, so do the Mormons and Sikhs.  Churches are to be about God.  When they are not about the God of the Bible, then they aren’t about God.  And since FBC misses this absolute essential, it stands as a monumental failure.  FBC hasn’t just failed in some ineffective, passive way.  They have franchised their failure all over the world and especially in the United States.

You will not find the methods used, taught, and spread by FBC to market their god found in the Bible.    FBC blasphemes the one and true God by its circus-like, worldly environment.  It perverts the right understanding of God with its syllogistic, humanistic sales techniques it calls evangelism.  It tears down a proper view of Almighty God with its man worship.  It perverts the worship of a Holy God with its profane showmanship.  It distorts the truth of God with its lack of church discipline, its twisting of repentance, its disrespect for Biblical qualifications of leadership, its false teaching on the true nature of spirituality, and its awful practice of the presentation of Scripture that it calls preaching.

FBC has slaughtered Biblical discernment in its people and many others.   We understand God with our minds.  We learn, know, and understand God’s Word with our minds.  FBC has created a fraudulent form of religion that first depends on feelings and tradition, what Paul calls philosophies, traditions, and vain deceit in his epistle to the Colossians.   Its beliefs and practices were developed and packaged over decades by a corrupt leader (Hyles) and passed on to his hand-picked succeessor (Schaap), weaving a new hybrid perversion out of his own home-spun concepts.  In so many ways, FBC is closer to Industrial Light and Magic than it is a church.  They have reduced the church to a handbook written by men.

Sometimes we hear a voice.  We may not know if it is our own conscience, our selves speaking to ourselves, the actual Holy Spirit, or a demon.  We can judge by means of Scripture.   Some people who claim to have experienced the presence of God have not actually done so.  To discern God’s presence, we must compare what we think we are experiencing with what the Bible objectively reveals about God.   Based on the Bible, FBC misses God in exponential ways with devastating results for its member and adherents.  If you are part of its web of deceit, leave before it is eternally too late.

Categories: Brandenburg, Jack Schaap
  1. October 3, 2007 at 11:17 am

    Brother Kent,

    You realize, of course, that you are being Scripturally discerning in your comments, therefore you can expect:

    1. Hate mail from these so-called spiritual giants
    2. To be ridiculed by these spiritual and mental giants
    3. To have my respect.

    Either the Word is everything or it is not. If I need to add tradition or personality to the Word to make it work, then it isn’t the perfect Word, is it?

  2. October 3, 2007 at 3:03 pm

    If FBC got the results they claim, I would have expected a drastic change in the neighborhood surrounding where they work every day and assemble every week.

    This was an interesting point, and worth consideration. All of our churches should have their biggest impact on their immediate neighborhood, and the neighborhood should start to reflect that impact. The more successful we are, the more the neighborhood should reflect that.

    I spoke with your “tour guide” just a few minutes ago, and he mentioned that the surrounding cities know almost nothing of this “soul winning bastion.” All very interesting.

    Little dogs bark the most.

  3. Gary Johnson
    October 3, 2007 at 9:08 pm

    Just wanted to let my support be know publicly.

    I heard Mr. Hyles preach once in 1988. It was bad to put it nicely.
    I listened to a few more tapes given to me by some of his groupies. More of the same. Sadly as you said, the franchises keep popping up, and spreading the error.

    In case any of his defenders are reading, my issue is simply with the errors he taught and practiced.

    Hammer away brother.

  4. October 4, 2007 at 8:40 am

    This isn’t EXACTLY in response to the article, but it fits with the whole Hyles/Schaap discussion. You may have heard of the new repentanceblaclist.com site. Well, here is my response to his claim that the Bible doesn’t contain the quote “repent of their sins.”

    Since this is Hylesology he is promoting, then I think I’ll post this here. If you don’t want it, feel free to delete it.
    The editor of repentanceblacklist.com states that the phrase “repent of their sins” is “never found in the Bible.”

    But, the following is found in the Bible:

    Jer 8:6 I hearkened and heard, but they spake not aright: no man repented him of his wickedness, saying, What have I done? every one turned to his course, as the horse rusheth into the battle.

    Eze 14:6 Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Repent, and turn yourselves from your idols; and turn away your faces from all your abominations.

    Ac 8:22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.

    2Co 12:21 And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed.

    Re 2:21 And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not.

    Re 2:22 Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds.

    Re 9:21 Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.

    Re 16:11 And blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and repented not of their deeds.

    So, yes, there is no direct quote in the Bible of “repent of their sins,” but there is repent of wickedness, uncleanness, fornication, lasciviousness, deeds, murders, sorceries, thefts, and idols. Now, that sure sounds like repenting of sin to me, unless those things are not sins!

    Following is a quote from the website of the church I pastor. It can be found at http://www.midcoastbaptistchurch.com/goodnews.asp I hope it is sufficient to get me “blacklisted” by the editor. I may be “blacklisted” but it will be for what I’ve found in the Old Black Book, the Holy Bible, A.V. The editor has many names to add, and they must include John Bunyan, C.H. Spurgeon, B.H. Carroll, Harold B. Sightler, Oliver B. Green, Billy Kelly, Don Green, and others. Oh, and don’t forget, John The Baptist, Peter, Paul, John the Apostle, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and The Lord Jesus Christ.

    Here is the quote from our website: “The Bible simply says that you must repent and believe the gospel. Remember what Jesus said, ‘Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish….’ To repent means to turn from your sinfulness, your selfishness, and your pride. You must be humble before Almighty God and admit that you are a wicked sinner who deserves Hell. Admit to God that you can do nothing to save yourself. Admit that your religion, your good deeds, and your self-righteousness cannot save you. Then, you must ‘Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ…’ (Acts 16:31). Accept the good news that He died in your place and suffered for your sins. Accept the reality that He rose again from the dead. Trust the Lord Jesus Christ as your only Savior. Receive Him as your Lord and Savior by calling upon Him to save you. ‘For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved’ (Romans 10:13). Don’t wait! Trust Jesus now and experience the good news for yourself!”

    I do not know who the editor of the repentance blacklist site is. Maybe he is ashamed of what he is preaching. I am not.

    Bobby Mitchell
    Mid-Coast Baptist Church
    Brunswick, Maine

  5. Level Headed
    October 5, 2007 at 6:08 pm

    A lot of investment has gone into this website. Much time and effort has been poured into making it what it is. Unfortunatley, you are wasting your time. It seems that you spend much time tearing down men and organizations when you should leave something for people to build them up. The potential to spread a hateful spirit is great.

  6. October 5, 2007 at 6:11 pm

    Level headed, perhaps you should try reading and believing the Bible. New Testament writers gave warnings about specific people that were a hindrance to the cause of Christ – in fact, Paul names 10 different people by name in his pastoral epistles. Obviously, Paul (and God) do not share your “lovey-dovey” approach to truth and separation.

  7. October 5, 2007 at 6:49 pm

    Level headed, have you noticed that 8 out of the 10 commandments are negative? Where time and money is being wasted is in Hyles and Schaap philosophy of ministry—the ones doing it and the ones following their example. We could call this month’s articles—how to avoid wood, hay, and stubble. We could also call it—how not to be accursed by another gospel.

    Jack Hammer, Out of the ten reasons why not to write on Hyles and Schaap, you left out a “waste of time” and “tears people down instead of building them up.” There are probably 1000 reasons, so they probably come later.

  8. October 6, 2007 at 7:16 am

    I think that was the point of Jack Hammer’s post. We can’t think of all the reasons that the Hylots will think of, but we can give a sampling.

    This is the point. The Hylots will never answer any argument we make. The only thing they have is this kind of “tearing down men and organizations, spreading a hateful spirit” argument.

    Ironically, they also see it as incumbent upon themselves to “tear down men and ministries and to spread a hateful spirit,” something they do quite well when it comes to men they count as heretics.

    And it is interesting to watch how the Hylots apply their “philosophy” on these things to Schaap.

  9. Level Headed
    October 6, 2007 at 4:16 pm

    I appreciate the rebuke, really I do. I also read and belive the Bible. I think your logic is flawed in attacking my devotional life. Why include that first statement Jerry? Why attack me? That is not the point. Take Dr. Paul Chappell for example. He has an uplifting email sent out from his ministry everyday. It helps a lot of people out and he does that without attacking individuals. (With the number of those devotionals that went out, there are bound to be some in which he names names-I understand that) However, it is more benificial (and efficient) to tell the people what the Bible says about certain issues and principles rather than identifiying people and telling them every little thing that they do wrong. In other words, you don’t need to know everythng that is wrong in order to spot it-you just need to know what is right. Instead of saying, “Muhommad, Buddah, Confucious, The Catholic Church, Scientology, etc, etc, are wrong.” Say, “The Bible is Right.” It’s logical. Did not Hyles and Schaap do some good things? Are you communitites sold out for Christ? Have you declared that certain things are complete fact when the Bible is vague on those items? By the way, Brandenburg’s comments are probably the most level headed, logical arguments.

  10. October 6, 2007 at 7:58 pm

    “Instead of saying, “Muhommad, Buddah, Confucious, The Catholic Church, Scientology, etc, etc, are wrong.” Say, “The Bible is Right.” — Level Headed

    But, LH, you are forgetting that much of the message of the Bible is that Baal, Ashteroth, Pharaoh, Amalek, Moab, Egypt, Balaam, Jezebel, the Nicolaitans, Judas, the Anti-Christ, the Pharisees, the Saduccees . . . . are wrong!!!! So, to say the Bible is right one would have to teach the Bible and the result would be that they would teach against every false way.

    The Bible does not teach your philosophy. It is the wisdom of this world. It is “earthly, sensual, devilish.” The wisdom that is from above is first pure! (See the blessed Epistle of James.) James, in wisdom, said, “But, wilt thou know o vain man, that faith without works is dead.” In chapter one of that letter he stated, that a man who had no control of his tongue had vain religion. Note that he pointed out false religion. He does it all through the Epistle. That is pure. It brings about true peace.

    We are commanded by the Lord to “earnestly contend for the faith” and the context of that command is the detailed description of false teachers (see the blessed Epistle of Jude). Jesus spent much time giving explicit descriptions of false prophets because He loved the souls of men and He cared for His church. Paul constantly warned of the same. Read his Epistles with an open and honest heart and you will find this to be true.

    Your thinking (or logic as you call it) is not biblical. It needs to be brought captive to the Lordship of Christ.

    You have set yourself up as a teacher and yet you are revealing your woeful ignorance of the Word of God. You are attempting to discourage men of God from crying out against idolatry and a false gospel. You are in great folly.

    Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures.

    LH, I pray that you will come to the truth. I do not hate you, but I despise the false notions that have bewitched you.

    LH, we are not appealling to the statements, examples, or teachings of men, but to the Word of God. I pray that you will perceive the difference.

    Please do not take this as in the spirit of malice. I am concerned for you. I am not angry at you, but I hold a righteous indignation for the error that has ensnared you.

  11. Level Headed
    October 8, 2007 at 8:29 pm

    I agree. Jesus did name people, and that is the right thing to do in some situations. However, I am afraid that the tone and spirit is done in hatred.
    No matter what the truth is, if it is not given in love, it does not do any good whatsoever.
    I appreciate your blog. It is by far the most intelligent and calm spirited. That makes me seriously ponder your words.
    Excellent rebuttle Mr. Mitchell

  12. October 8, 2007 at 9:43 pm

    However, I am afraid that the tone and spirit is done in hatred.

    1) The Bible tells us not to judge the motives of others – which you have just done here.

    2) Funny how the motive/manner is always wrong when someone doesn’t like what is posted!!

  13. October 9, 2007 at 1:11 pm


    I’m not a big fan of Schaap or FBCH. However, I would like to point out a few things here.

    1. Your blog post here is not much more than rhetoric that seems designed to inflame one’s passions rather than engage the intellect. You’ve made an egregious error here in not filling your post with actual substance.

    Allow me to point out some examples:

    FBC is supposed to be about God. They say they are about God. Of course, so do the Mormons and Sikhs. Churches are to be about God. When they are not about the God of the Bible, then they aren’t about God. And since FBC misses this absolute essential, it stands as a monumental failure. FBC hasn’t just failed in some ineffective, passive way. They have franchised their failure all over the world and especially in the United States.”

    How so? What specifically would you be referring to here? Can you back up the above statements with specific examples? Where specifically are these errors?

    “You will not find the methods used, taught, and spread by FBC to market their god found in the Bible. FBC blasphemes the one and true God by its circus-like, worldly environment. It perverts the right understanding of God with its syllogistic, humanistic sales techniques it calls evangelism. It tears down a proper view of Almighty God with its man worship.”

    Again, you should be backing up your statements with specific examples, then informing us about how this is improper. You’ve not done so. Your entire post is built on logical fallacies and ad hominem attack.

    2. Not only have you failed to solidify your argument with specific examples from Hyles/Schaap/FBCH, but you’ve failed to support your arguments with any Scripture. Where is the Scripture to support your points? Even though this is “your first article on FBC,” you’ve failed monumentally in not addressing specific situations and demonstrating from Scripture where it is wrong.

    Furthermore, I find the following statement disturbing, and deserving of further clarification:

    Based on the Bible, FBC misses God in exponential ways with devastating results for its member and adherents. If you are part of its web of deceit, leave before it is eternally too late.”

    Will Rogers

  14. October 9, 2007 at 9:15 pm


    I think that is a fair assessment of what I wrote. I say in defense that I wrote this as a kind of introduction to my next three posts. I’m also clearly separating myself from the Hyles camp. I wasn’t trying to prove anything, as you noticed. I didn’t give any illustrative examples and actually wasn’t attempting to do that. I did give bullet points that anyone who knows the Hyles movement would know about.

    Hopefully, I’ll stop disappointing you in the future. I think I could have done better and may have if I wasn’t on the road when I wrote that first post in an abbreviated period of time. I believe that some of your questions will be answered especially in my next three posts, the first beginning tomorrow morning when I do actually pick apart things Scripturally. I had that written previous to what I just read here. Thanks for your input and criticisms. You obviously put a lot of time into them.

  15. October 9, 2007 at 10:36 pm

    Thank you for your gracious reply Kent. I look forward to seeing what you have to say in future posts.

  16. Carrierwave~
    November 2, 2007 at 6:02 pm


    It was sort of hard for me to understand exactly what you are trying to to do in this article. If it was to defend the Bible against false teaching, or blasphemy of FBCH, where’s the beef? I kept waiting and hoping for the evidence to back-up your statements but to no avail. It seems more like you were rallying your team of Hyles-discontents for a pat on the back, which I see you got a few takers. So, you should be a little proud I suppose. After reading your response to Will Rogers, I think you have somewhat saved face, yet I hope I never get on your bad-side my brother!–I don’t think I would want to live after the smoke cleared!

    I also would like to respond to the comment about the repentance blacklist site. There is a “slight” misrepresentation or misquoting by one poster, a Pastor no less, who said:

    “The editor of repentanceblacklist.com states that the phrase “repent of their sins” is “never found in the Bible.”

    Now, to be fair, what did the editor of the repentance blacklist site actually say? Here is what it ACTUALLY says on the site:

    “The independent fundamental Baptist movement has been totally infiltrated by those promoting the false doctrine that in order to be saved one must “repent of their sins.” (This phrase is never found in the Bible.)

    This supposedly involves a change in lifestyle or a “willingness” to turn away from sin in order to be saved.
    This is a clear departure from the Bible’s teaching that FAITH ALONE is necessary for salvation.”

    The editor of the blacklist site clearly said “…. that in order to be saved one must “repent of their sins.” (This phrase is never found in the Bible.)

    And again here: “….this supposedly involves a change in lifestyle or a “willingness” to turn away from sin in order to be saved.”

    Now this changes the whole thing. The editor of the blacklist never said the phrase “repent of their sins” is never found in the Bible. He said that “IN ORDER TO BE SAVED” is it never found in the Bible. He stated this twice–“..a willingness to turn away from sin IN ORDER TO BE SAVED”.

    The verses quoted were good but do not relate to IN ORDER TO BE SAVED. I have to say I agree with the blacklist site in this case. Brothers in Christ, better watch ourselves when we choose to fight and devour one another. Our judgements become flawed and motives will be examined by our Lord. Keep your eyes on Jesus.


  17. November 2, 2007 at 7:28 pm

    Thanks for your comment Carrierwave. I encourage you to read my other posts on Hyles. This one was my first of four and I have three others that will back up what I have said in this number one. The other Jackhammers and I knew our audience started with a certain knowledge of Hyles.

    Regarding the blacklist, I didn’t say anything in my post about that. However, I have read what Jack Hyles and Curtis Hutson wrote about it, and they deny Scriptural repentance. In light of their methodological errors, we can see how their view of repentance fits in.

  18. Bobby
    November 2, 2007 at 9:26 pm


    The phrase referred to by Steven Anderson at the blacklist site is “repent of their sins.” That is the phrase that he has in quotes. Now, if he is not referring to that phrase when he says, “This phrase is never found in the Bible,” then he needs to take lessons in writing. It is funny that he has not stated a problem with my understanding of what “the phrase” is. If you agree with Steven Anderson then you are a preacher of another gospel that is not the truth. I encourage you to repent of the heresy that you are involved in.

  19. Carrierwave~
    November 3, 2007 at 5:41 am

    Bobby– Put two and two together, it is not to hard to do. He could have worded it a little better for those who wish to strain at a nat and swallow a camel, but the entire site is based on the premise that works are being added to the plan of salvation which is by faith alone in Christ Jesus. So I guess I will say that the phrase “repnt of their sins” IS never found in the Bible for your sake, and that IS correct. However, I am going to be a little more forgiving of the site editor, he is human as are you and I. I am confident if you email him he would set you straight.

  20. Bobby
    November 3, 2007 at 6:06 am


    Didn’t you know that Ithe poast that I wrote to which you refer (post #4 in this thread) was emailed to Steven Anderson? He did respond to it back when I first emailed it to him. You are wrong in your assumption that he did not mean what you are trying to say that he didn’t mean. He meant what he wrote– the phrase “repent of their sins” is not in the Bible. I showed him those Scriptures and he didn’t say, “That’s not what I meant!” He stood by his statement and he said that I would be on the blacklist.

    I think you are answering a matter before hearing it with this one. That is a shame and folly. I would suggets that you stop trying to defend him with an argument that he has not employed. Again, I did email him weeks ago and when he responded he did not “set me straight” because he meant what he wrote!

    Are you satisfied now that your idea designed to “help” him is not working?

  21. Carrierwave~
    November 3, 2007 at 6:18 am


    In all of my 36 years as a Christian and a lover of my brothers and sisters in Christ, and this includes you, I am completely shocked at your words about another brother in Christ and people with whom you have never met before in your life. I would like to see anything you have as vile written about Satan and your disdain for him that could match your vilification of a dead Christian brother who is standing before the Savior at this moment. I admonish you to stop this for your own sake. Our Lord Jesus even called Judas “friend”. Again, I admonish you for your own sake; Get your eyes focused back on Jesus and His commission.

    (1Co 2:2) “For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified”.

    “I wasn’t trying to prove anything, as you noticed. I didn’t give any illustrative examples and actually wasn’t attempting to do that.”

    Then, my brother, you shouldn’t have said anything.


  22. Carrierwave~
    November 3, 2007 at 6:21 am

    Then , Bobby, Anderson is correct, that phrase never appears in scripture; anywhere. (I speak in my FOLLY of course)


  23. November 3, 2007 at 2:45 pm


    Let me try to get you straight. You think that loyalty to people and institutions is more important than loyalty to God and His Word. It’s sad that after so long, you are shocked with someone who exposes false doctrine and practice. At this point, that should have been a regular feature of your life, since we see the same activity all over the Old and New Testaments. That you haven’t seen this says something about the kind of churches you have been a part of. The doctrine, practice, and methodology taught in the Bible should be defended. When they are twisted and changed, warning should come. Like all the other Hyles defenders, you haven’t dealt with any of the points that I made. None. That is perhaps because you believe like they do. If you do, we’d be glad to help you, but you won’t get any support here. In my opinion, Hyles has done far more damage than he has done good. You should care to defend Christ and the truth more than you do defending Jack Hyles.

    By the way, I wasn’t attempting to “save face” with Will when he wrote what he did. I was being gracious to him, like I have been with you. Since I wrote my three following weeks, Will hasn’t said anything. I would hope that he agrees with my evaluation.

  24. Carrierwave~
    November 4, 2007 at 4:25 pm

    “It’s sad that after so long, you are shocked with someone who exposes false doctrine and practice. At this point, that should have been a regular feature of your life,”

    My brother,

    A regular feature in my life is winning people to Christ. How many souls did Christ use you to win and baptize for Him this past week? I had four. Cody and Lori Sparks Seth and Shianne Sparks.

    “The doctrine, practice, and methodology taught in the Bible should be defended.”

    Well, I am exposing your ungodly methods, and will be glad to help you with this with the scriptures below.

    1. Have you ever *personally* confronted Hyles before his going to Heaven about any of this? (Matt. 18:15) (Matt. 7:3-5) (Romans 14:10) (1 Tim. 5:1) (Eph. 4:31,32) (1 Tim. 5:19)

    2. What false doctrines and practices did you expose in this article where you used scripture to back it up? (2 Tim 2:4)

    Will Rogers was correct:

    “Your blog post here is not much more than rhetoric that seems designed to inflame one’s passions rather than engage the intellect. You’ve made an egregious error here in not filling your post with actual substance.”

    Again, I admonish you to stop this for your own sake. Our Lord Jesus even called Judas “friend”. Hyles is in Heaven forgiven of all his transgressions. I admonish you for your own sake; Get your eyes focused back on Jesus Christ and His commission.


  25. Gary Johnson
    November 4, 2007 at 9:34 pm

    Just could not stay out of this one any longer.

    I wrote in response to a different post concerning the main concern about Mr. Hyles, and that being numbers to report. And so it goes with his followers. The Lord was not interested in numbers, but rather fruit that remained. When the reports are that tens of thousands were saved and baptized, but no where to be found a month later, the comment needs to be made “supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.”

    I have watched the defenders come on and never address the issues, and the vast majority hide behind the made up web names. Are you afraid to let it be known who you are? Anyone can make up stuff on the internet.

    A little Bible lesson for you, Carrierwave~
    Matthew 18:15-17, the context is the church. If Mr. Hyles is not a member of the church I am a member of, there is no obligation for me to go to him and address his sins. For I would not be able to tell it to the church, and therefore follow through on the matter. But I do have a responsibility to warn those in the church I pastor about men that teach contrary to the scriptures.

    Romans 16
    17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
    18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

    The men on this blog are simply doing what they are scripturally allowed and commanded to do when confronting false doctrine.

    And by the way, I am not hiding from my true identity

    Gary Johnson
    Pastor of Mohave Baptist Church
    Bullhead City, Arizona

  26. Carrierwave~
    November 5, 2007 at 7:27 am

    Yes, Pastor Johnson, you are under the obligations of the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ in Matt.18:15-17. (2Ti 3:16,17) “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good work.

    Are you saying one can make accusations against another brother in Christ just because he is not a member of your church and you do not not have to listen to the Word of God in Matt.18:15-17? You ARE under the obligation of Christ’s command because the accused is a member of a local new testament church, (a pastor in this case, which puts you under further commands by the Word of God dealing with elders and pastors.) and his people, your brothers in Christ, have a right under Matt.18:15-17 that you do it scripturally. Because the brother is not at arms length gives the accuser no right to violate Christ’s command. I am not just talking about accusations of false teaching, but a spiteful, inflammatory attitude by the accuser. Will Rogers is right about this article.

    You can fight false teaching without slander or name calling, and maligning members of another church you don’t even know. This needs to stop! Since Hyles is gone to Heaven it seem as though it has been open-game by unscrupulous individuals to vent their hate and spite, him being a convenient target. Yes, Hyles was a sinner, but he stands TODAY before The Lord Jesus forgiven of all his tresspasses, and sins while articles like this are being splashed over the internet and in other villifying publications.

    Now, I notice I am being accused of hiding my identity. Pastor, if you want to know who I am JUST ASK. Here again is that same accusing spirit.

    (1Ti 6:5) “Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.”

    If this is what you believe about Hyles, do what God commands you to do, “withdraw thyself”. That would include “withdraw” from writing spiteful, articles designed to inflame about them, don’t buy or read their books and sermons, ect. This is good in Romans 16:17 “mark and avoid” Avoid their teachings, writings, books. This would include “avoid” writing articles written to inflame and get pats on the back from fellow jackhammers.

    God bless you, My brother Pastor

    Harold R. Green Jr.

    Free Indeed Reasearch.

  27. November 5, 2007 at 9:47 am


    Hyles, during his lifetime, famously went after several pastors, as do many of his followers today. Among those villified by the Hylots would include John MacArthur, Billy Graham, Jack Van Impe, Jerry Falwell and others.

    While a student at Hyles, I regularly heard pastors named from the pulpit and villified for their opposition to Hyles. I remember one notable sermon preached by Jack Schaap in which he said, “Go ahead… (name named here), crucify my preacher and in three days he will rise again. I happen to know one of the preachers named in that sermon, and I happen to know that Schaap never called him.

    It has never been the custom of Hylots to call the men they villify. But it is always the custom of the Hylots to use this defense of Hyles. Whether we called him or not, our critiques of his published materials should be answered. You are welcome to do this, Harold. In fact, I would welcome you to a debate on the issue of repentance and salvation if you like. We could debate it right here on this blog. E-mail me if you would like to do so. We can arrange the format to accomodate a one-on-one debate. I would extend the same invitation to Stephen L. Anderson. Either one of you or both of you can bring it whenever you like.

    But as far as whether we followed Matthew 18 (or should have) in this issue, that really is a non-issue, a diversion, a distraction, a convenient way of avoiding the issues we have addressed.

  28. November 5, 2007 at 10:19 am


    I’ve never been in fellowship with Hyles with which to separate. I don’t call the Mormon bishop when I wish to criticize Mormonism and I don’t call the pope or the local Catholic priest when I deal with Roman Catholicism. I touched only the tip if the iceberg as to the Hyles teaching that Scripture rejects. I would have liked to have dealt with more, but when we have already named at least 6 false doctrines and practices that no one has yet dealt with, you have reason enough reject his teaching and him as a teacher.

    In Jack Hyles’ public, published materials, available online (and linked to by me), he presents his false doctrine and practice. In bullet points, here are the ones I exposed:

    *He leaves the Lordship of Christ out of the Gospel, contradicting Scripture and in so doing preaching another gospel.
    *He calls worship an enemy of evangelism, contradicting Scripture.
    *He perverts the doctrine of repentance (change of mind about belief) and in so doing preaches another gospel.
    *He spreads a false view of sanctification and spirituality (second blessing,etc.).
    *He presents salvation professions minus baptism contrary to the Scriptural pattern.
    *He promotes unscriptural church growth methodology.

    Pastor Mallinak has also named several others still not answered.

    I would love to believe that four people were converted this week under your ministry. I’ve been Scripturally evangelizing every week for over 20 years and most of the time door-to-door, so I am obedient in this matter of boldly proclaiming the gospel. However, I am preaching the gospel, not some twisted easy prayerism that has been offered by Hylots. Based on your defense of Hyles, I hope that you study Scripture to ensure you have the everlasting gospel, the one preached by Christ and the apostles. I don’t rejoice in another group of people being exposed to the deceit of the false gospel of easy prayerism.

    Harold, I hope you take up Pastor Mallinak’s generous offer of a debate. It could be a learning experience for many.

  29. Carrierwave~
    November 5, 2007 at 7:48 pm

    Brother Kent,

    You are misrepresenting me. I am not defending anything of Hyles. I am confronting you about your scurrilous article. I am not a fan of Schaap or Hyles, but I am for being decent, fair and being scriptural when one has a dispute with a fellow christian. If that wasn’t what Hyles did, then he was wrong too. Are there not scriptural guidelines for disputes with another brother in Christ? Yes. Then why don’t you obey follow them? Because Hyles didn’t?!

    I perceive this is about revenge. ‘Since Hyles did this and said that about so-and-so, then it is my right to do the same back to him’. That is childish and a complete departure from the teachings of the Lord Jesus our Saviour. If someone is christian brother or sister or even a non- believer, that you are at odds with, you are still commanded by God to be Christ-like to them. However, because of your article, you stand in danger of being guilty, if not altogether so, of the very thing you accuse Hyles and Schaap of.

    Brother, while you are, reproving, and rebuking another for their sin, you are commanded to do it ..”with *all* longsuffering and doctrine”. (2Ti 4:2) You have not obeyed this command of the Lord, my brother. Your article was not done in the fruit of the Spirit nor with doctrine, and you want me to debate? You haven’t won this one, brother and you want to start another!? What “generous offer” is there in fighting in the spirit of the flesh about “repentance” with someone who is former HAC student motivated by bitterness over the sins of Hyles and Schaap? And for what?–a learning experience? I say it is pride! Your motivation is not right. I admonish you to seek the Lord about your bitternesses. Get your eyes back on the Lord Jesus. I Beg you to do it my brothers, before you consume yourselves in hate.

    Have mercy,

    Harold R. Green Jr.

    (John 13:34) “A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.”

    (John 13:35) “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.”

    (John 15:12) This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.

    (Rom 13:8) “Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.”

    (Gal 5:13) “For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.”

    (Eph 4:32) “And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you.”

    (1Th 3:12) “And the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward another, and toward all men, even as we do toward you:”

    (1Th 4:9) “But as touching brotherly love ye need not that I write unto you: for ye yourselves are taught of God to love one another.”

    (Heb 10:24) “And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works”:

    (1Peter 1:22 ) “Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:”

    (1Pe 3:8) “Finally, be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous:”

    (1John 3:11) “For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.”

    (1John 3:23) “And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.”

    (1John 4:7) “Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.”

    (1Jo 4:11) “Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.”

  30. November 6, 2007 at 9:50 am


    Not sure how you know all this about our motivations, though I’m sure you can tell us how.

    The false doctrine has been published and spread all across our country. Many blindly follow this false doctrine, and like it or not, it seeps into our churches. It is therefore important that we address it.

    As far as whether or not we are in the spirit of the flesh, motivated by bitterness over the sins of Hyles and Schaap, I’ll let you be the judge of this. I say that this is a common tactic used by those who follow Hyles. There is never a willingness to defend a position. Just that those who speak out against the Hyles position are (obviously) bitter. Anyone can see that. Especially you, Harold.

    Meanwhile, I’ll stand by the plethora of Scriptural examples of the sort of exposure we’ve given the Jacks… (I Timothy 1:20; 2 Timothy 4:9-15; 3 John 9-10; Revelation 2:6 — to name a few).

    Given, no doubt, in the flesh, motivated by the spirit of bitterness.

    And here I am, pining away for a debate – for just one Hylander to stand up for the doctrines they hold dearest – and no taker.

    We’d enjoy it just because we don’t believe that the Hylot has yet to be invented who can defend what he believes.

    But of course, Harold has “noble” reasons for declining.

  31. Gary Johnson
    November 6, 2007 at 10:44 am

    We live in a day because of mass media, that many men’s heresy can be spread quite easily around the country. If I was going to personally approach all these men before I marked them so that those in our church could avoid them, I would have a full time job. The fact that they feel it necessary to publish and promote their beliefs so widely puts the burden on those zealous for pure doctrine to expose the error. Two hundred years back, we would not have had such issues to contend with.

    To get upset with someone trying to do what Jack Hammer is doing is puzzling. But since the majority of “fundamentalism” seems to accept the Sword of the Lord and all of the listed preachers in that publication as sound in the faith, our job to contend for the faith once delivered to the saints has become even more urgent.

    I still have not seen any evidence of any of the three contributors to Jack Hammer having “attacked” Jack Hyles. They simply show what he wrote, and then show the error compared to the scriptures. If they were doing this with Pope John Paul II, would we have the same response from those professing to be saved?

  32. Carrierwave~
    November 7, 2007 at 12:00 pm

    Dear brother Johnson, Pastor from Bullhead, AZ?

    Is brother Frank Combs and his wife at your Church? ; the Native American missionary? They had a couple of children who are graduates from Hyles/Anderson and members of FBC I believe.

    I want to draw your attention back to the issue, that is this; the outrageously, scurrilous article by brother Kent Brandenburg.

    Turn the tables for a moment. Let’s suppose it was you, my brother, and your church people who were the target of this venomous piece of literature.

    1. According to Brandenburg, you don’t believe in the God of the Bible. You claim it but you’re no different than Mormons or sikhs who claim it.

    2. You and your church people are a “monumental failure”, not just locally, but you hold the franchise of it around the world (globally) and not just in the U.S. (overt humiliation and exaggeration)

    3. You and your church people are blasphemers of the true God with your services that are worldly, circus-like.

    Now Pastor, just these first three or so aught to be enough to raise your ire, and inflame your people- and I can’t believe you would not be upset yourself. This is purposeful defraudment and designed to cause controversy, strife, and hatred; NOT instruction–(because there was NONE.) Please don’t excuse this as a method to correct false doctrine–it is NOT, if you are honest about it. It would have been only right and proper to have called or to have met with you first, don’t you think? However, this kind of “method” is not God’s way of doing things, so I would not expect it to be done in a scriptural to begin with; which it wasn’t. Please don’t excuse this as one being “zealous for pure doctrine to expose the error.” What about the “doctrines” and commands of God that were trampled upon? It is never right to do wrong to do right. Read just a few of the verses I posted about christian brotherhood and christian love and tell me Kent was in harmony with this doctrine!

    As I stated before, my brother, refuting false doctrine does not have to be done in a slanderous, spiteful, condenming fashion. There are guidelines given–“with all longsuffering and doctrine” (2Tim. 4:2)

    (2Ti 2:5) “And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully.”

    If you are going to contend for the faith you MUST do it scripturally. (If that is what you are *really* doing.)

    The Holy Spirit through Paul made it clear *how* one is to deal with false teaching. Let’s see if this article in question passes the test of God:

    (2Ti 2:24) “And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
    (2Ti 2:25) In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
    (2Ti 2:26) And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.”

    Brother, who can agrue with the above? Brother Brandenberg gets an “F” in contending for the faith. I challenge him to scrap his article a write a new one using God’s methods.

    You have the same modern technology to rightly contend for the faith and spread it just as rapidly as “they” do; however this does not give license to disobey the Christ command to love the brethern. And yes, as a Pastor it aught to be a “full-time” job to do the right thing.

    Harold R. Green Jr.

    “Free Indeed Research”

  33. November 7, 2007 at 12:30 pm

    May I jump in? I’m going to anyway.

    There has been more Scriptural argument and true contextual honesty in the blogs by Brother Brandenburg, etc, than all the preaching of several dozen tapes of Jack Hyles I have listened to.

    False doctrine is false doctrine. If a Lutheran preaches false doctrine, it is damnable, and when a so-called “Fundamentalist” does it, it is doubly so.

    The verses you mentioned are in the context of the local church, and you have forgotten the times that Paul mentioned men by name in a less than pleasant way. You must compare Scripture with Scripture. Proof-texting is another problem that Hylots have.

    Brother Kent does not need or request a defense from me, but I appreciate him pointing out the truth.

  34. Carrierwave~
    November 7, 2007 at 12:32 pm

    Dear Brother Pastor Mallinak,

    I perceive you have a deep, desire and longing to have the wisdom, authority and Spirit of the Apostle Paul, however, you are no Apostle Paul.

    Rom 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, DEBATE, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

    Harold R. Green Jr.

    “Free Indeed Research”

  35. Carrierwave~
    November 7, 2007 at 12:42 pm

    Dear brother Art,

    (2Ti 2:24) “And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto *ALL* men, apt to teach, patient,”

    I am questioning his methods in the article, sir. I admonish you to follow these scriptures also, my brother.

    I Love you in Christ, Art

    Harold R. Green Jr.

    “Free Indeed Research”

  36. November 7, 2007 at 1:56 pm

    Brother Green,

    When you call an article written by Brother Kent “outrageously scurrilous”, how is that being gentle?

    You are questioning more than the method, in my opinion. You are not only questioning his motives, but you are judging his motives.

    I guess Paul shouldn’t have mentioned Demas by name, and he even stated the problem with him “having loved this present world.” Isn’t this being unkind of Paul to label him to all?

    And may I answer your rebuke of Brother Mallinak? Who exactly do you think you are? There is nothing kind nor brotherly about condescending like that, Brother.

  37. November 7, 2007 at 2:48 pm

    So Harold, are you saying that you are AGAINST debate? Because it seems to me that you are doing an aweful lot of it on here. Or is it just debates you cannot possibly win?

    Hey, I understand, my dearly beloved brother, why you wouldn’t want to take up your own issue in any sort of serious format. After all, the rhetoric that men like Stephen L. Anderson and Jack Hyles use on the issue of repentance really is indefensible. I understand that it would be difficult to make the case. And so I understand your desire to insult me rather than debate me. It is, after all, easier.

    But again I say, with all sincerity, and as lovingly as I can, that you and yours are yella~

  38. Michael Marshall
    November 7, 2007 at 7:56 pm

    “Brother” Harold, would care to share your Testimony? How exactly, did you get saved?

  39. Carrierwave~
    November 7, 2007 at 8:24 pm

    Dear Brother Mullinak,

    Are you really insulted? Then I apologize, my brother. May the Lord Jesus Christ grant you peace.

    Harold R. Green Jr.

    “Free Indeed Research”

  40. November 7, 2007 at 9:35 pm


    But I’m more interested in why you’ll debate me on here, but won’t debate the repentance thing.

    And I’m also interested in some of the conspiracy stuff I came across when I googled “Free Indeed Research”. Especially that part about sueing for Libel.

    Maybe you could enlighten us?

  41. Michael Marshall
    November 7, 2007 at 9:37 pm


    I have never been one for sitting on the sidelines, and my patience for this kind of poppycock has expired.


    Most people who start to dig themselves into a doctrinal ditch have sense enough to put down the proverbial shovel. But instead, you get an industrial backhoe. You have demonstrated in your posts that you have no concept whatsoever of the Local church, of church discipline, and so on.

    You add insult to injury with your spiritualist Rodney King style “can’t we all just get along” concept of God’s love. NO HAROLD WE CANNOT ALL JUST GET ALONG. What fellowship hath light with darkness? You give us a nice sanctimonious selection of scriptures on how we should love each other, and how ungodly we are for calling evil evil, but you neglected to quote that Jesus said he came not to bring peace, but a sword. You failed to mention that He turned over the tables of the money changers. You failed to mention that John the Baptist called the Pharisees snakes and vipers, or any number of Old Testament Prophets who cried out against the religious powers of the day. You completely skipped over the warnings in Peter about evil men creeping in unaware. Have you not read Jude? Was Stephen wrong for his rebuking sermon to the unbelieving Jews? It as apparent that you do not understand what it means to earnestly content for the faith. You cannot do it without being contentious.

    I was not being sarcastic when I asked to hear your testimony, I was quite serious.

    You spiritual perceptions are as off-base as your conspiracy perceptions. I am still on base, so I am not worried. By the way, Governor Granholm said hello.

  42. November 7, 2007 at 11:11 pm

    Brother Marshall, no offense at all to anyone that you get your jaws on, but you crack me up. I get a good belly laugh from you, especially since I have met and talked with you. It makes my leather chair shake in my garage office. Anyway. I’m more than chuckling. I know you’re serious, but it’s the way you’re putting it.

  43. November 8, 2007 at 1:13 pm


    The answer of course is (in the grand style of Lloyd Bentson), Sir, you’re no John the Baptist.

    We do need to remember what we are dealing with here. The Hylots take their debate style straight from Ricky Lake and Maury Povich. They can’t help themselves. They were taught to do it that way. Ray Young taught us that when you face someone that you don’t know how to deal with, just tell him that you love him… as many times as it takes. He told us about a kid who was out of control in Jr. Church, and how he held the kid down and said “I love you” over and over and over until the kid finally settled down. So, this is a Hyles debate tactic.

    We can keep prodding Harold. Next thing, he’ll be making up stories about how he silenced us. This is the Hyles way. You don’t have to actually win the day. You can always just say you did tomorrow.

    And, while I’d like to debate him, I guess I kinda know how it would go.

    Better go. I just heard a black helicopter outside my window, and I think I heard a camera shutter clicking. Maybe it was Harold.

  44. Michael Marshall
    November 8, 2007 at 2:27 pm

    Pastor Mallinak, thank you for the tip. I think after spending some time on this blog I will be able to spend a Hylot a mile away. By the way, is there a subtle meaning the word Hylot? It is very reminiscent of another word just like it…….

    As for Harold, he’s still at home in Grayling. We planted RFID tags on him to track his movements. I called some old friends at the NSA and they said he you were safe. The Helicopter must have been Paparazzi.

    Oh, and the Al Gore “I invented the internet” statement – boy it cost us a lot of money to get him to say that! Kept the focus off the real purpose though. Since my military boys developed it, it has been working exactly as planned………and I love it when a plan comes together.

    Pastor B, glad to hear you get a laugh.

    Gotta go, Elvis and Jimmy Hoffa are coming over for dinner.

  45. Carrierwave~
    November 17, 2007 at 9:06 am

    (Pro 16:27, 28) “An ungodly man diggeth up evil: and in his lips there is as a burning fire. A froward man soweth strife: and a whisperer separateth chief friends.”

  46. Christopher Nelsen
    November 17, 2007 at 1:45 pm

    I wonder what Kent,Art or even Daves neighborhood looks like? I think your too busy contending for the wrong things….Hyles never excluded repentance from salvation,but rather fought against those who attached the turning away from all sins as a condition to salvation.He knew the danger of that false doctrine almost always leads one to have faith in ones own works instead of the finished work of Christ on the cross,..I myself have seen this in every church (at least in my neck of the woods) that holds to this false doctrine.All who believe this repenting of sins as a condition of salvation;…as a result also believe one can lose or forfeit or give back their salvation….having the appearance of godlyness but dening the power thereof.I agree and so does Hyles that we must repent of our sins but not as a condition of our salvation but rather,it is awork of our salvation…let us work out our own salvation with fear and trembling.Like baptism,must one be baptized in order to be saved?If thats what you believe then you miss the clear teaching of the bible…It is something that should accompany salvation but it is not a condition…if it is then it is no longer of faith but of works.You said repentance is a gift and not a work of rightiousness,I disagree it is a gift But one that is attached to the working of rightousness.Paul confessed this in Romans.We are also taught that we war against the members of our own bodies because our hearts are desperately wicked.There are other gifts given opon the salvation of Christ,….like the gift of helps,if one is given this gift and does’nt exercise this gift is he no longer saved?If not then why would the gift of repentance of sins be different?Now I am not saying that one who is saved won”t repent of sins….The Holy Spirit would not allow this…I myself am convicted of the simplest things that would have never bothered me before I was saved.However,when I got saved I was not taught what all was considered sin…I did know I was a sinner and that I could find my redemption in the blood and as time passes I exercise this gift called the repentance of sins and continue to be transformed to the likeness of the Christ who has redeemed me by my faith.

  47. Carrierwave~
    December 1, 2007 at 2:12 pm

    “These 6 things doth the Lord hate . . . a proud look, a lying tongue . . . and he that soweth discord among brethren” (Prov. 6:16-19).

  48. Alvaro Loaiza
    January 29, 2008 at 12:55 pm

    Pastor Brandenburg, I have never read such brilliant and inspiring words in my life. I think you should take Brother Schaap’s place as Pastor of the First Baptist Church of Hammond, Indiana so that you can show us the God that you see in the Bible.

    Member of First Baptist Church of Hammond since 1988
    U.S. Army – Kuwait

  49. January 29, 2008 at 2:59 pm

    Good comeback, Alvaro. I’m sure everyone here now agrees with your exegetical and extremely biblical rebuttal of Pastor Brandenburg’s post. Can we come to your place so that you can teach us now?… On second thought, maybe it would be better if you study your Bible and actually read what Kent has to say, then give us a studied opinion of what is wrong with what he said.

    Until then, thanks for your service to our country. Doctrine aside, you are providing a special service in favor of freedom of religion and conscience.

    PS – How many Kuwaitis have you led in prayers to be saved? Is there now a First Baptist of Kuwait City now? Is the pastor’s name Mohamed Al-Jack Hylziri? 🙂

  50. January 29, 2008 at 3:14 pm

    Carrierwave, please stop spreading strife and sowing discord on this page. Improper applications of Scripture sow discord. Try earnestly contending for the faith once in a while. Bible obedience may do you some good.

  51. Doctor evil
    April 10, 2008 at 11:42 am

    Boy, I’m sure glad nobody asked Jesus about having a “devil” on his staff. You people all hate each other, and the world is still going to hell. Hopefully the 1 or 2 people you have all witnessed to “make it” to heaven someday. This is sad, no wonder nobody will come to church anymore…..nice job. Next time you look in the mirror, there shouldn’t be anywhere else to look for blame. good luck with the self-destruction, I forecast it will come true very soon……

  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: