Home > King James Only, Mallinak, Truth > Jack Schaap, Jeffery Fugate, and the Ditch on Both Sides

Jack Schaap, Jeffery Fugate, and the Ditch on Both Sides

February 13, 2009

Our theme for the month is on the issue of truth, in particular on the subject of ranking doctrines.  And, one reason that this issue has achieved the rank of “controversy” is because of inconsistencies within our worldviews.  If we believe that God is the truth, that truth exists because God truly exists, and that all truth proceeds from God as both flowing from His very nature and as absolutely known by Him, then we have no choice but to say that all truth is equally essential.  We can know the truth because God has revealed it to us, and whatsoever God has revealed is essential to us.  And never is this more true than in the realm of God’s Special Revelation, as found in the pages of Scripture.

A Biblical, Trinitarian worldview demands that we acknowledge the sufficiency of every word that proceeded out of the mouth of God.  Mankind is morally obligated to accept every word as it is in truth, the very Word and Words of God.  And furthermore, mankind is morally bound to seek a full understanding of every Word, and to seek to fully apply that meaning to every area of life.  This obligation excludes any sort of “cafeteria approach” to Scripture, whereby a man determines for himself what is essential and what is non-essential, or perhaps more accurately, what is more to his liking and what is less to his liking.  The reason should be plain enough: when I shop the pages of Scripture the way a housewife shops the Pop Tart section of the grocery store, choosing this flavor and that one, and none of the others, I make myself the master and judge of Scripture, of what is important to me, and what isn’t.  I become the judge.  And if I am the judge of Scripture, then I will not be judged by Scripture.

In all of this, we see the necessity of a Trinitarian Worldview as the basis and foundation for all thinking, including all thinking about God’s Word and God’s People.  A right approach to Scripture is defined, not by what the current big-shots in Fundamentalism and/or Evangelicalism say it is.  It is not defined by what the Blog-o-Maniacs say it is.  A right approach to Scripture is defined by God, and we must receive that instruction, or we will be judged by that instruction.

And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.

It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.

For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.  And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.  We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.

But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

Scripture is very clear on this, that every word is essential.  We get our doctrines, our standards, our convictions, and our practices from God’s Word, then.  Scripture is sufficient.  And while there will be controversies until the day when Christ sets all things right, we must strive to draw all our theological and doctrinal boundaries Scripturally.  Will there be some fuzzy boundaries?  The fuzziness is not because Scripture is not clear.  Fog is the result of sin, and our fogginess about Scriptural boundaries is the effect of fallen men interpreting the infallible Word of God.

To Separate or Not to Separate

Nevertheless, while there certainly will be disagreement, we still find that in every case, the line where confusion becomes blatant disobedience is clearly marked.  Our churches must labor to identify those lines, and then to apply them in the realm of fellowship.  When a church is clearly disobeying Scripture, we must separate.  The Bible teaches this plainly in Romans 16:17, in 1 Corinthians 5:9-11, in 2 Thessalonians 3:6 and 14, in 1 Timothy 6:3-5, in 2 Timothy 3:5, and in Titus 3:10.  This separation principle applies both personally and from church-to-church.  It is the duty of every God-fearing New Testament church to clearly identify where those lines are, and to seek to apply the separation principle, found so frequently throughout Scripture, within their church and surrounding community.

But, that being said, this does not mean that churches have a Scriptural right to separate for “light and transient reasons.”  Unfortunately, much of the separation practiced by churches in this day and age is over trivialities, personalities, and so forth.  One glaring example of this comes from the Evangelical side of things, in particular from the kinds of churches represented by men like Frank Turk of Pyro-Maniacs, and Phil Johnson of the same.  These men, who openly ridicule the kind of separation principles held by those in the more Fundamentalist-oriented circles, practice a kind of separation of their own choosing.  They don’t separate on Scriptural grounds, that is for sure.  But they do separate on personal grounds, as has been well-documented already by Kent, and has been punctuated by their public separation from Kent.  Make no mistake about it — these men practice separation.  They separate from every brother who does not follow their “big-tent” philosophy.

Similarly, we find this kind of separation, on a practical level, being practiced by those in the broader movement known as the Fundamentalist Movement.  It is a separation that consists, not in convictions and standards set by Scripture, but by Camps and Circles.  “I am of Bob Jones,” says one.  “I am of the Sword of the Lord,” says another.  “I am of Jack Hyles,” says still a third.  “I am Unaffiliated,” says still another.  And thus the lines are drawn.

I will not tire, any time soon at least, of pointing out that we are not following Scripture in all of this.  What is the standard?  What determines right and wrong?  Who gets to draw the lines of separation?  If not God, then who?  We are not a law unto ourselves, drawing our own lines and marking who we will be avoiding and who we won’t.  Unity is a church doctrine, but 1 John also requires God’s people to love all those whom God has saved.  If God loved them enough to forgive their sins, we are to love them.  But, if they walk in a way that is disobedient to the plain teaching of Scripture, we are to mark them and avoid them, to have no fellowship with them.

Get Your Own Ditch

The recent controversy between Jack Schaap and Jeffery Fugate illustrates this point very nicely.  In the January/February, 2009 edition of the Church Bus News, Jeffery Fugate very publicly announced that he is separating from Jack Schaap.  Or at least, that he will not be speaking at Pastor’s School 2009.  Now, I will not be speaking at Pastor’s School 2009 either — just in case any of you were wondering.  I won’t be speaking at Pastor’s School 2010 either.  But I don’t feel a need to take out an ad in the Sword of the Lord, or publish my own magazine for the sake of announcing that little tidbit of information to an anxiously awaiting world.  But Fugate needs to inform all of us who are fortunate enough to be on his mailing list that he will not be speaking at Pastor’s School — that, in essence, he is separating from Schaap.  Fugate says,

Until Dr. Schaap makes plain the fact that he believes that the King James Bible is the Inspired Preserved Word of God and stops sowing doubts about it I will not speak at Pastor’s School or in any ministry of First Baptist Church.  I will not send my preacher boys nor recommend any others to HAC.  The Church Bus News will no longer give bus scholarships to HAC.

So, he is separating from Schaap, and doing so in a very public way.

Now, this blog has been fairly vocal on the issue of Jack Schaap and Jack Hyles.  And, I for one am not at all surprised by any of this on the Schaap end of things.  In case you don’t recall the earlier series we did on the Hyles issue, I would remind you of something we said in our post, “What You’ll Find Beneath Peach Trees:”

Schaap, in my not so humble opinion, preaches heresy for the same reason Hyles did. Sure, he twists a different set of texts than Hyles did. But he does not bend texts for the sake of bending texts. Rather, he does this to force us to make a choice about him. Are we with him, or are we against him. Which one? Make your choice. Take your stand. Fall to the right of him, fall to the left of him, or stand with him. Those are your choices.

I still say that Jack Schaap is all about having a following.  He wants to be the Rick Warren of IFBXdom…  The Church Growth Guru of Fundamentalism.  And, I have long predicted that he would lead the First Baptist Church of Hammond into a more neo position.  In fact, I believe that, considering how enamored Schaap is with the Charismatic movement, and the historical position that FBC Hammond has taken on the Holy Spirit, Schaap will likely lead that church into some kind of hybrid “Fundamentalist/Charismatic” movement.  I won’t be surprised.

But is Jeffery Fugate separating from Schaap because he has violated Scripture?  One has to wonder, on the basis of the published material in the January/February 2009 issue of the Church Bus News.  For one thing, the magazine features a prominent article on what Jack Hyles taught about the King James Bible — and have no doubt, that is as close to being inspired material in the minds of Hyles’ followers as Scripture itself.  The magazine also features an article by Gail Riplinger, “7 Infallible Proofs,” and then an article by Fugate, “The Inspired, Preserved Word.”

Having read through each of these articles, it is very apparent that Fugate, like Riplinger, is an English Preservationist.  The Riplinger article is abridged from her upcoming book, Greek and Hebrew Study Dangers: The Voice of Strangers, The Men Behind the Smokescreen, Burning Bibles Word by Word. Riplinger offers a somewhat disjointed proof that the English Bible is equally inspired with the originals — for example, since the Ethiopian eunuch was reading a translation of Isaiah, and since the book of Acts calls this translation Scripture, and since 2 Timothy 3:16 says that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, therefore “vernacular editions are given ‘by inspiration’.”  She further argues that John Wycliffe and Miles Coverdale say that God, not them, was the author.

Fugate adds these thoughts:

Let me go a step further.  Breath is tangible, which means you can feel it, smell it, etc.  Spirit is non-tangible.  The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance – all are non-tangibles.  Do you see the difference between breath and spirit?  It’s important to understand because some conclude that the Bible was God-breathed, or the words were spoken and only when they were spoken were they inspired.  However, the Bible says inspiration means His words are given by His spirit.  I had someone tell me recently that there is no way the English version could be inspired because God doesn’t speak English.  He spoke Hebrew and Greek.  I wanted to tell the young man, “Maybe when you get to Heaven you can teach Him English, and He’ll appreciate that.”  God is not limited by language!

He says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God…” I want you to understand something that is very important.  It is not just the Originals that are inspired.  Deuteronomy 17:18 says, “…he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites.”  Joshua 8:32 speaks of writing a copy.  Proverbs 25:1 says, “These are also proverbs of Solomon, which the men of Hezekiah king of Judah copied out.”  If only the Originals are inspired then what happened to the copies.  Don’t believe the statement that says, “Only the Originals are inspired.”  If I didn’t believe that I had a copy of the inspired, living, preserved Word of God I would quit.  God promised He would preserve His inspired words.  I believe if God can create and sustain the world, He can give and preserve His Bible.

The word “scripture” or the usage of the word “scripture” in the New Testament never refers to an Original.  The word “scripture” simply refers to copies of the Word of God.  Acts 17:11 says the Bereans searched the Scriptures daily.  Did they have the originals?  No, they didn’t have them.  They were reading copies of the Word of God.  Acts 18:28 says Apollos was showing the scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.  Matthew 21:42 has Jesus asking the question, “Did ye never read in the scriptures?”  In Matthew 22:29 Jesus rebuked, “Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures.”  If the scriptures were only accessible in the Originals then why would he chide them for not know(sic) something that wasn’t available.  Do a study of the word “scripture” in the New Testament and see how many times it appears.

And here is the point of quoting all this.  Fugate takes a wrong position on preservation.  There is no Scriptural warrant for placing a translation on the same level as what was inspired by God.  Nor does Fugate give any.  Nor does Riplinger.  Instead, they both play Gumby with texts and words in order to force their position on the Scriptural doctrine of preservation.  I feel very sure (having had this discussion with more than one English Preservationist) that Fugate would deny that we have the very words that God spoke in the very language (Hebrew and Greek) in which they were spoken.  The promise of preservation only works after 1611.

Fugate exemplifies the modern-day practice of taking a position because it “makes sense” and then separating from all those who disagree.  Schaap has, apparently, joined the ranks of those who deny that we have a preserved Word today because we don’t have the originals.  But then again, the Hyles camp has never attempted to take a Scriptural position on this.  I found it ironic that Fugate made the statement that

“Admittedly, there are some that have had a wrong disposition in their defense of the King James Bible.  There are also those that have taken a stand that goes to the right – such as saying that you must be saved by the King James Bible or you are a two-fold child of Hell.”

Actually, didn’t Jack Hyles say that?

But I digress.  My point in all of this is two-fold.  First, what we have here is an example of two men who have yet to identify a Scriptural position on the issue of preservation, and as a result, both stumble into the ditch.  But Fugate has now determined not to be in the same ditch as Schaap, has announced to the world that he is leaving the Schaap ditch and going to the ditch on his own side.

And secondly, we have two men who have never made an effort to identify what the grounds would be for separation.  At what point should we separate on the issue of Preservation?  No Scriptural warrant is given for why this should be a separating issue between Fugate and Schaap.  Although indeed, among the English Preservationists, there is no sin like the sin of not being an English Preservationist.

The doctrine of perfect preservation is an important issue.  But one of the reasons that we can’t even have a rational debate about it is because the English Preservationists have never attempted to get their position from Scripture.  As a result, our opponents on the Critical Text side of the issue have gone the same route.  On the English Preservationist side, we have fideism — they believe what God says, and they could care less what history shows.  But on the other side, we have evidentialism.  James White might be a presuppositionalist in other matters.  But when it comes to the textual issue, he is most certainly an evidentialist.  He and his side looks at the history as more weighty than the promises.  So, on the one side we have those who hold to the promises, and ignore the evidence.  On the other hand, we have those who hold to the evidence and ignore the promises.

And this is why we can’t even conduct a rational debate on the issue.   When we get back to taking a stand on Biblical grounds on this issue, we might once again see the pure Words of God preached with power and effect.  We pray for such a day to come again.

Advertisements
  1. February 14, 2009 at 9:27 am

    The funniest thing about this to me is that when I was at HAC (nearly 30 years ago) they shipped students for spreading the same King James Only teaching they now espouse. Dr. Hyles routinely “corrected” words that “should have been” translated as something else and said he didn’t place his faith in the “bunch of baby-sprinkling Anglicans” who translated the King James.

    Things have sure changed. Now they’re fighting over who’s more pro-King James and who says shibboleth wrong.

  2. February 14, 2009 at 4:07 pm

    Both of these guys are so out to lunch and so irrelevant when you look at the big picture. The only waves they’re making is in the little pond they have separated themselves to….long removed from the vast ocean of Christianity and the rest of the body of Christ.

    • November 8, 2009 at 3:25 pm

      The only wave Dr. Schaap made was one defense called the King James Summit. He has not written in publications denouncing his allegiance with Dr. Fugate.

  3. February 16, 2009 at 7:38 pm

    to add to that, what makes me laugh is that you write about them as if you take them seriously.

  4. February 17, 2009 at 1:13 pm

    Reforming Baptist, if they are so irrelevant, why do you write about them on your blog too? Do you also like to write about the irrelevant? 🙂

  5. February 17, 2009 at 1:23 pm

    why do i write about them? To show people who are still following these clowns, just how rediculous they are.

    • November 8, 2009 at 3:27 pm

      How do you know they’re ridiculous? Have you heard both sides of the argument in order to make that “just” analysis? I do not think you have.

  6. February 17, 2009 at 2:34 pm

    Will,

    It made me laugh to read Don’s response. And it made me laugh to read your response to Don. And then, it made me laugh again to visit your blog and discover what you wrote. Do you seriously hope that these guys “divide themselves into oblivion?” You write about them as if you take them seriously.

    I’m being serious here in this criticism — one of the reasons that we have the troubles that we have today is that we don’t take these guys seriously. Someone should have taken them seriously years ago, and maybe we wouldn’t have the circus side-show that we have today.

    Another reason that we have this mess is because, rather than take the time to take error seriously, all we can do is say things like “you make me laugh.” And, another reason is because we don’t take the time to define preservation Biblically, instead relying on the reeesearch of textual critics, who have told us that God preserved his word through forensics and CSI Erasmus down at your local DNA lab.

    • November 8, 2009 at 3:29 pm

      The one that started this whole thing was Dr. Fugate. Dr. Schaap has his beliefs and teaches them and bothers no one. Then someone comes along and starts trouble. The only thing Dr. Schaap did was give one response called the King James Summit to show what he actually believes to dispell rumors. Where is the wrong in that?

  7. February 17, 2009 at 7:10 pm

    Dave:

    Thanks for the post. You illustrate your point perfectly using Schaapp and Fugate.

  8. Greg
    February 19, 2009 at 11:00 pm

    Well much has been said and to what point. This world is going to hell and men are not willing to stand in the gap. Ok you have your own gap I understand you have your own view I understand. What is the single most important issue to a child of God? Your answer will be salvation and trusting Christ, ok, or it will be faith, or it will be the perfect will of God, shall I go on. No I will not.
    You and I came to know Christ How? Through the Living Word of God, through this Holy Bible I have here on my desk. This is the God I serve, this is how I came to know Jesus as my Saviour, this is what thousands and milloins have died for over the years. This is why our for fathers left England to come to America.
    You can write all that you want about Bro Jeff I know him personally, I like him, agree with his stand against this rising ecuminical mentallity coming from HAC, this denial of the inspiration and preservation of Gods word. You believe in all the accounts in the bible all the biblical stories from Adam to Moses to Daniel to Noah to Jesus, and you want to argue about the inspiration of it, you believe these are inspired stories right , our school master right,so why don’t you get off the fence take a stand for the book and believe what GOD said,that he preserved it, complete ,every word just as it is for the english speaking people. Why so that one day the world who needs God, would be evangelized by english speaking missionaries , who are fulfilling that great commission to Go ye therefore, and teach all nations,
    how? through this english KING JAMES BIBLE! GOD ‘S plan is working out just the way he wanted it, then the smart guys come along and decide they know more than God and they’ll sraighten out his word for him since he makes so many mistakes,(lol) I’m sure he appreciates all the help. Now you want to doubt the inspiration of it, why then do you believe any of it the (Bible) if it’s not inspired then nothing is.
    I know that you will have some thing really profound to say, but atleast Bro Jeff Fugate is willing to take a stand for something that he believes, not his ditch, his belief is in something that you have not settled. As for Jack Schaap he has moved far left into a place that only a cultish movement will follow, will he be drinking the coolaid next and if so how many will follow?
    I am a Fundamental Independant, KING JAMES ONLY, pre millenial, dispensational BIBLE BELIEVER.

    • November 8, 2009 at 3:32 pm

      You say you know Dr. Fugate? Have you listened to Dr. Schaaps’ side of things from his own mouth? I have. Justice says “Let me hear both sides of the story.” I understand you like Dr. Fugate. But have you heard the King James Summit on the Hyles-Anderson Web site. You may have heard what others have said, but have you heard it from his mouth? Until you have, you are unjust in saying anything about what he believes that is wrong.

  9. reglerjoe
    February 20, 2009 at 12:01 pm

    Greg: “You can write all that you want about Bro Jeff I know him personally, I like him…”

    So, then you’re being objective here…right?

    Greg: “As for Jack Schaap he has moved far left into a place that only a cultish movement will follow, will he be drinking the coolaid next and if so how many will follow?”

    Far left? Koolaid? Cultish?

    Oh, the irony hurts!

  10. Following the Money
    February 21, 2009 at 1:14 pm

    I am wondering, did Fugate take this stand because Russell Anderson bankrolls him? Follow the money honey, and you will find out where this is all coming from. I read Anderson’s letter, a really freakish one, where he writes to Dr. Jack Hyles, dead for many years, as if he is alive today. I think the cheese fell off of their crackers a long time ago.

    • Greg
      February 23, 2009 at 8:49 am

      News flash Bro Anderson has sent out a letter stating that he will no longer support HAC. He says that he is a King James only Bible believer and he will not endorse the college untill Jack Schaap gets it right.

    • November 8, 2009 at 3:36 pm

      First of all, I’m floored by hearing that Dr. Anderson also is breaking ties with HAC. I’ve heard him speak at Chapel and in Pastor’s School. But have any of you watched the King James Summit on the Web site, http://www.hylesanderson.com ? It gives a detailed insight into what exactly they believe. Dr. Schaap is still a King James Only man, still believes that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, etc. He nor I understand where these rumors came from. Listen to the videos on their Web site.

  11. February 21, 2009 at 2:22 pm

    Oh, did Russell Anderson give some people some money ($$$$$$$)? How did we ever know that? And if you start them, you might have a college named after you. Or maybe it wasn’t the twelve million dollars ($12,000,000) that caused that, but the brotherly relationship with Hyles. Maybe I should start businesses so I could have an influence too. Is the message that we need men to start businesses so that they can make money so that they can support indigenous missionary works. Oooops. Does that support the indigenous principle?

    How is it that we so consistently get comments like Greg’s (above) from supporters of those types of men?

    • Greg
      February 23, 2009 at 9:06 am

      Explain what you mean by this statement. I will support the God in whom has given me eternal life, I will support and follow the Word of God that he has inspired and preserved unto this day, and I am willing to die for him as well, as for men I am not a man pleaser nor a man follower in the sense you are implying. Men of God who stand upon the principles and the doctrines of this book and who fight for the old paths that we are told to seek and to follow these men will I stand beside and encourage and fight with, did not David say is there not a cause that is worth fighting for! I stand with the side of right and faith and truth and for all those who have died for the same thing that men all over the world are fighting for, not just for Jeff Fugate not for Mr Anderson but for my pastor and for my sons and daughters that will one day have pharisees of this world take away, the truth.
      We need men that will take a stand against these visious attacks on the Word of God, if not you and they will stand before almight God at the judgement seat and give account of the thousands of lives that were lead astray by the lies and false teachings of men like Jack Schaap.
      I believe that not one man alive is one hundres percent correct on everything but I can stand one the one thing that is and that is the Word of God preserved within the KING JAMES BIBLE.

  12. James Brown
    February 22, 2009 at 5:08 am

    Apparently Jack Hyles lives on. Who knew?

  13. February 23, 2009 at 8:15 am

    Greg,

    I would respond to your tirade, but it hurts too bad to read what you wrote.

    Apparently, it hurts you to read what I wrote as well. Because you didn’t.

    But, for the sake of other readers who read my post and Greg’s comment, and perhaps wonder if they are seeing things… (1) We believe that God inspired His Word. Every Word of it. In Hebrew and in Greek. (2) We believe that God has preserved the very Words He inspired. (3) We believe that the Words we have are the Words God preserved — in Greek and in Hebrew.

    • Greg
      February 23, 2009 at 9:11 am

      So they are not preserved anywere else? So then God has Lied.
      How many people in this world have the Greek and Hebrew preserved word today? And how many different Greek and Hebrew text are there and in which one is the preserved in? Are you limiting God and saying that he isn’t capable in preserving it in our English? Are you saying like many that God does’t speak English? What kind of God do we serve?

      • Christian Markle
        February 23, 2009 at 9:50 am

        {I guess I need to work on my HTML coding — that last post was a mess. . . I will try to clean things up on this post. . . the blog owners are welcome to delete my original “mess”!}

        Brother Greg,

        You have claimed that the position of these men (on this blog) indicates that they see God as a liar. You go on to reveal what appears to be a belief that God has made an expressed promise to preserve His Word in the following ways:
        1) For a majority of people – based on this question:

        How many people in this world have the Greek and Hebrew preserved word today?

        2) In one Greek and Hebrew manuscript – based on this question:

        And how many different Greek and Hebrew text are there and in which one is the preserved in?

        3) In the English – based on this series of questions:

        Are you limiting God and saying that he isn’t capable in preserving it in our English? Are you saying like many that God does’t speak English? What kind of God do we serve?

        It is my understanding that calling God a liar would be based on a denial of of the truthfulness of His very words. What very words would you cite as being promises of the things you seem to suggest in your questions?

        Please do not make any assumptions about my own position. . . I have not revealed anything about that accept the fact that I believe we should take God at His Word and be careful not to expect more (or less) than what He has actually promised. If in fact there is divine truth revealed in the Scriptures from the mouth of God that demonstrates the promise of God to preserve His Word in the manner you indicate by your questions, then I will readily join you. . . however, if there is divine truth that indicates differently, I will have to take another position. Again, I remain silent as to my actual position on preservation.

        For His Glory,
        Christian Markle

  14. reglerjoe
    February 23, 2009 at 10:10 am

    Greg: “Are you saying like many that God does[n]’t speak English?”

    Are you saying, like many, that God doesn’t speak Greek and Hebrew? pfft.

    Why is denying double inspiration of any translation denying that God speaks the language of that translation?

  15. Mike
    February 23, 2009 at 7:39 pm

    We have to have the inspired words of God somewhere here, or we can all go home. I believe the KJV is it. I have read some of Dr. Schapp’s books, and that concerned me enough to route a grandchild away from HAC. I know Jeff Fugate’s church and camp, and doubt he would do this without plenty of prayer and soul searching. I love Dr. Schapp’s preaching, but some of the things he puts in print are very hard to understand, or support. I know all preachers say crazy things at times, so who knows?? I would like to read the Church bus news article and the Russell Anderson letter.

    • Greg
      March 1, 2009 at 6:45 am

      I have it and I am willing to send it to you,

      • amanda
        March 26, 2009 at 2:49 pm

        can you please forward me this letter?? my email adress is glorybound02@hotmail.com

        and I am sorry if I sound like an idiot, but did Bro Hyles believe you could only get saved from the KJV, and what about Bro Schaap?? I am confused by it all, I thought the scripture on a two-fold child of hell would be the people who believed that working their way to heaven is what got them there. I mean people have gotten saved through hymnals, songs, testimonies, stories, not always using scripture, does this mean that they aren’t saved either, since they didn’t use the KJV. I don’t know your stance on it, because I didn’t take the time to read all of it, but I would like to know what Dr Anderson’s letter was about, and what Bro Hyles, and Bro Schaaps views are on this….. Thank you

  16. Steve
    February 24, 2009 at 12:21 am

    I would encourage everyone that hasn’t to read the article on this same blog entitled “Not all KJVO’s are the same”.

    I have since come to the conclusion that I am not only a preservationist but also an original language preservationist. If you read the article its all but too plain that English language preservationist have done innumerable harm to KJVOs.

    I believe ,although I can be corrected, from what I have read Bro Anderson and Fugate are ELPs. This is a shame. I support Bro Hyles and Schaap only because I haven’t yet seen irrefutable (audio of them speaking) evidence that I should separate from them yet. I said all that to say that its a shame because I really didn’t figure anyone or thing that came out of FBCH could be all that bad.

    Lastly, I am not fully gone yet. I would separate from that “faction” ,if you will, I just haven’t seen the irrefutable evidence yet. I know that Bro Schaap isn’t infallible. Thank you Jackhammer again for helping shed light on my position and Greg for the entertainment.

    R/S

    Bro Steve

    Gal 2.20

    • Greg
      March 1, 2009 at 6:47 am

      Glad to amuse you, Brother.

  17. artdunham
    February 24, 2009 at 5:55 am

    I would suggest that everyone purchase Kent’s book, “Thou Shalt Keep Them.” It is the best and most important book I have ever read on the subject of the Perfect Preservation of Scripture.

    I taught a series at my church on this subject, and my people were excited about it.

  18. reglerjoe
    February 24, 2009 at 6:51 am

    Mike: “I know Jeff Fugate’s church and camp, and doubt he would do this without plenty of prayer and soul searching.”

    Mike, no one’s questioning Fugate’s sincerity in this, but he’s sincerely wrong. Soul searching and prayer does not orthodoxy make. I’s sure Schaap’s supporters would say the same thing.

    Mike:“I love Dr. Schapp’s preaching, but some of the things he puts in print are very hard to understand, or support.”

    I agree. This is why we need to be objective. Schaap has said/written quite a few doozies, but in this matter, he’s more correct than Fugate.

    I went to HAC. I recently reviewed my Bible Doctrines class notes (Hyles era). HAC hasn’t changed on this matter, and Schaap hasn’t changed it. Fugate is out of line, and so is Anderson.

    • Greg
      March 1, 2009 at 6:49 am

      Then Hac doesn’t agree with Jack Hyles stand on this issue or they have dooped everyone for many years.

      • reglerjoe
        March 1, 2009 at 2:37 pm

        You’re right, Greg. I can’t believe Hyles, Anderson, and Fugate have been duped all these years by those wily faculty members of HAC. How they’ve managed to hide this heterodoxy for the past 36(?) years is beyond me. I am thankful, though, that Fugate and Anderson have finally discovered the truth.

        Hyles and Anderson – duped by Hyles-Anderson!

  19. February 24, 2009 at 7:46 pm

    Greg and Mike,

    First, Christian asked some great questions — you guys should try to answer them. To boil it down, you should try to give a Scriptural defense for what you are arguing.

    Preservation didn’t begin in 1611.

  20. Deron
    March 2, 2009 at 7:13 am

    My personal beliefs concerning preservation are that inspiration is carried on through proper translation, and that the KJV is a proper translation. For men like me that have not taken the time to learn Hebrew or Greek, our opinions are often the result of parroting back what we have been taught. Unfortunately, many of the so called Greek experts also only have the ability to parrot back what they have been taught as well, and do not possess any real knowledge either. I am not so impressed with many of the Greek scholars of today. I had dinner with a self proclaimed, institute trained, Greek-educated Pastor person. I differed with him on the infallibility of a Spanish translation. He challenged me and went on to explain to me about the Greek “originals” and how the KJV was wrong too. I started to probe him about his Greek knowledge, and when the waitress came to take our order, I informed her of my dinner partner’s great intellect and language abilities, and told her that he would be ordering for both of us in Koine Greek. He looked puzzled. Then he looked embarrassed. Then, in the spirit of brotherly love, I lowered my expectations and just asked him to greet her in Koine Greek. (He couldn’t do that either!) Then he was angry with me. I used this opportunity to show him that he is not qualified to make judgments about translations from Greek to English with his lack of expertise of the Koine Greek language and also his general lack of good sense. He did not care for my method, but I believe that he understood my point which was, if you are not an expert (or at least functionally fluent) in a language, YOU are not qualified to give an opinion based on YOUR expertise. Having said all of that….

    In my mind, changing the words from Greek or Hebrew into English does not change or remove the inspiration. For simple minds like mine, I give the example of a restored car. The color of the paint on the restored car is different, but the car itself is the same, (and obviously superior to any of the junk coming out of union corrupted Detroit these days). Therefore, if the mode of translation was of a literal bent, and intellectually honest, the translators would not have to be inspired, yet the translation would preserve the original inspiration. I understand that this relies on human logic, but this logic, mingled with the promises in the bible, (and dare I say, my personal faith and experiences also influence me here), land me to a comfortable trust in the KJV.

    For the purposes of preservation, I do not think it adds any value to discuss what God can or can’t do, because it seems clear from scripture that He can do anything, except lie. The real question lies in what DID God do.

    In my heart, the assurance that I have in the KJV is derived from sitting under the preaching of a Godly man who has proclaimed it and lived it, observing his life and the lives of others in the churches that use a KJV, familiarizing myself with the history of all of the translations and translators, and looking at other historical proofs around trends in Christianity for English speaking peoples when the KJV was the option vs now when the basic argument is that all translations are correct except for the KJV.

  21. JD
    March 4, 2009 at 1:23 pm

    A good 4 set series of sermons on inspiration here:

    http://www.sermonaudio.com

    Go to find speaker; J Hanson Smith

  22. JD
    March 4, 2009 at 1:24 pm

    A good 4 set series of sermons on Preservation here:

    http://www.sermonaudio.com

    Go to find speaker; J Hanson Smith

  23. small town
    March 18, 2009 at 6:46 am

    I’m still amazed (in a way) that this has festered this long. Schaap has very plainly and thoroughly stated (and re-stated) his position. It hasn’t changed. It’s the same as Dr. Hyles’, which is evident if you read his whole book and sermons – not just rip out a few words here and there. I’m not a HAC person, just went up there a couple of times for meetings. I have however heard numerous Fugate sermons, and I’ve never heard anything that didn’t come right out of the Bible.
    This fued, however, is embarrassingly stupid. Pastor Fugate used his PERSONAL publication to attack Schaap. Why? First Baptist isn’t his church. He has his own college. Why couldn’t he quietly advise young people he didn’t agree with Schaap. Why did he have to write a 16-page attack on the man. I think Pastor Fugate has enough things to worry about in his own church.
    The Anderson influence might very well have something to do with it. I believe things changed for Dr. Anderson at 1st Baptist after Dr. Hyles went to heaven. I heard Anderson moved his membership to Clays Mill.
    I’m embarrassed for Pastor Fugate. He’s a wonderful preacher and a good man, but making this a national issue, trying to force pastors to take sides, is foolish and self-serving. I’m afraid he’s gone so far on this silly attack that his pride won’t let him back out of it.

    • November 8, 2009 at 3:55 pm

      Well said. I agree. I read Dr. Andersons’ letter just now. He quotes two things out of Dr. Schaaps’ book that I have. But I can’t find it right now because my closet is dirty and it’s buried somewhere. But I’m curious to know if Dr. Anderson took what he said out of context.

  24. Lisa
    March 18, 2009 at 8:02 am

    Can you help me with something? Where do you find that Pastor Schaap is merging with some Charismatic teachings? Is it in his books or newspaper? I would like to read that.

  25. CJ
    April 7, 2009 at 4:57 pm

    Very interesting site glad I came across it. I used to attend FBC

  26. 1983 & 1984 HAC Alumnus
    May 17, 2009 at 3:51 pm

    I am saddened that all believers can do is to fight one another. And, as far as Hyles and Schaap, shame on those of you so hung up following mere men. Both have idiosyncrasies, both have preached heresy, and both have, apparently, covered up sin when it benefited them (or their families). Let it go. Get back in the Word, look to our Lord, and stop letting the world laugh us all to our own shame. God is God and Christ is the Savior…and God does not share His glory with anyone, not even Hyles and Schaap. Suck it in, realize we were misled and even lied to, then give to Jesus. I learned some things from HAC but I have learned most from the hypocrisies. Stop fighting among yourselves and start letting the world see Christ in you.

  27. Concerned About Critics
    July 6, 2009 at 1:37 pm

    I have grown weary of critics. No matter what is said, right or wrong, there is always a critic. You get a group of disgruntled former FBCers and former HAC students or teachers; what do you get? A group of ultra-critical people who wouldn’t know any more about what they believe than the average church member who never reads his Bible or walks with God. Honestly, if we were all busy walking with God and winning lost souls to Christ, would we really have time for all of this nonsense? Common, let’s get real. I’ve grown tired of a bunch of wimpering, tired old gossips, who have nothing more to do than read each others websites and blogs. They then begin commenting about things they have no good facts to support. They don’t even take a clear stand themselves. True Christianity…I don’t believe I see it exemplified here. How many souls have any of you led to the Lord this week? How many people’s lives have you sought to touch and change this past week? Hmmm…too busy writing gossip? Now I understand true Christianity.

  28. September 15, 2009 at 12:46 pm

    you might not need a church bus news mag, or big church to get your words out but your making good use of the Internet, so quit acting holier then thou.all of US are part of the same gossip hypocrisy. with mush baptist love,

  29. Christopher
    October 12, 2009 at 2:38 pm

    David Mallinak said…”There is no Scriptural warrant for placing a translation on the same level as what was inspired by God.” WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT!!!
    I think more then Jack has slipped from what true Christians used to believe.

    “The Orthodox Creed of 1679 was written by a group of General Baptists in England, with a desire to emphasize doctrines that were held in common by all Bible-believing Christians. The following is what they believed about the Bible:” Cloud

    “And by the Holy Scriptures we understand the canonical books of the Old and New Testament, as they are now translated into our English mother-tongue, of which there hath never been any doubt of their verity and authority in the protestant churches of Christ to this day. All which are given by the inspiration of God, to be the rule of faith and life.”

    The Westminster Confession 1646
    1:2 Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testament, which are these:
    Old Testament
    Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, I Samuel
    II Samuel, II Kings, II Kings, I Chronicles II Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs (Song of Solomon), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi
    New Testament
    Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, I Corinthians, II Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, I Thessalonians, II Thessalonians, I Timothy, II Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, James, I Peter, II Peter, I John, II John, III John, Jude, Revelation
    All which are given by inspiration of God to be the rule of faith and life (Luke 16:29, 31; Eph 2:20; 2 Tim 3:16; Rev 22:18, 19).

    It seems to me these old believers believed the English KJV was inspired.

    Christopher

    ” Unbelievers emphasize man’s part in the writing and preserving of the Bible. Believers emphasize God’s part.”Dr. Bruce Lackey

    • October 15, 2009 at 1:29 pm

      Christopher,

      I just saw your comment. You have quoted one creed and one confession. That is fine. Give me a Scriptural warrant for saying that a translation is inspired in the same exact sense as the Greek and Hebrew.

      By the way, I am in agreement with both statements from the creed and confession that you quoted. My point in the post was that we are claiming that God inspired a whole new set of words — English words — from what he originally inspired.

      What would be the Scriptural arguments for claiming this?

  30. October 16, 2009 at 3:49 pm

    This was in the paper today

    “Marc Grizzard, pastor of Amazing Grace Baptist Church in Canton, N. C. said his

    church believes that all versions of the Bible other than the King James one

    are ‘satanic’ and ‘perversions’ of God’s word, so members will burn those

    translations on Halloween.”

    • November 8, 2009 at 3:22 pm

      Every other version was put out by the texts of the Catholic Church, the great whore according to the Bible. A version of the Bible is either from God or the Devil. I agree with Pastor Grizzard that they should be burned, Halloween notwithstanding.

  31. November 8, 2009 at 3:13 pm

    I listened recently to the King James Summit on the Hyles-Anderson College Web Site. My argument is that anyone who would accuse Jeff Fugate, Jack Schaap, or Jack Hyles should listen to all sides before making a decision. That is what we call justice. I happen to side with Dr. Schaap because I have researched his philosophy according to the Bible and history and find him to be right.

    Have any Jeff Fugate followers listened to these seminars? They were made and put on the Internet to show without a doubt what Jack Schaap believes. Have you given him a fair hearing without twisting words and phrases. I recommend the seminar that Ken Schaap taught. It is available for free on http://www.hylesanderson.com

  32. November 8, 2009 at 3:20 pm

    According to Ken Schaap, he believes that most of the changes made to the Bible from 1611 to the 1800s are technical changes such as grammar that do not change the context or subject of any verse. If you believe you have a 1611 version of the Bible in your hands today, you would have to know the English that was spoken in that day or have access to the original language in some way because it is not in the present day Bible. But does that mean that it changes what the Bible says? By no means at all.

    This is what Dr. Hyles warned about one day. Independent Baptists always find a subject to fight over and destroy each other instead of going soul winning and reaching the world for Christ. If Jack Schaap and Jeff Fugate went out soul winning door-to-door, this subject wouldn’t even come up. It would be about soul winning. Jesus told us to reach the world not fight with each other.

  33. Louie
    February 13, 2010 at 1:25 pm

    I did not remember myself being subscribed to this site…
    Anyway, as I read again on all this controversy I only can think that in the midst of all this issue we are watching people dying and going to hell today.
    The old songs says “It will be worthy at all, when we see JESUS…” I wonder if it will be worthy getting in all this fight and mutual accusations. Can we just agree to disagree and go on serving the LORD and fight the good fight, majoring in the majors?
    When we look at HIS face could be possible that we’ll “wish (we) had given Him more?”
    Let’s all be faithfull to the end! It will not be long…

  34. keystone
    March 6, 2010 at 12:07 am

    I enjoy reading the English Standard Version. My question is this. If the King James Version is a good english translation, then does that mean that any other english translation MUST be a bad one? Also, if the original KJV translators were directly inspired by God, then why did they submit their versions of the texts they were translating to a committee for final approval for the KJ text? I don’t recall the apostles Paul or Peter or James mentioning anywhere in their letters that they first sent their letters to the editor before calling it Scripture. I understand that the translators for the 1611 project took great pains to be accurate in their work and allowed for cross-examination and peer review. This seems clear to me that they did not take their role to be writing Scripture as “God-breathed” but rather to be meticulous about not using the wrong words or phrases. The word of God had already been revealed, there was no new revelation in 1611 and there is no new revelation today. There is only new understanding of how God’s word applies to my life.
    It’s a translation, and a good one. But there is no Scripture that prevents me from taking whatever tools are at my disposal and using them to understand my copy of God’s Word. Whether it be a concordance, another translation (English, Greek, or Hebrew, Spanish, etc.) or doctrines held throughout church history. The joy of studying God’s Word is the discovery and having the Spirit speak to me through it. God help me in my passionate pursuit of the knowledge of my God and Saviour!

  35. March 6, 2010 at 11:53 am

    Keystone,

    I’m tired enough of this type of comment that I’m not going to tip-toe for the 1000th time with people who are so careless as you. You are an ignoramus. Nobody here believes in the inspiration of the King James translation, so you need to find someone else to come with your heat seeking missile—fire first and then look later. We believe in the historic doctrine of the perfect preservation of the original language text. The problem with the ESV, just to clue you in, is that the New Testament of that translation comes from “evolving” words that were not available for over 1000 years, that it wasn’t even a text until the 19th century. It is 7% different in its underlying text from the text received by the churches. Did you know that when you study God’s Word that it is revelation? That is mutually exclusive from “discovery.” Revelation is by nature non-discoverable. God reveals it to us. If the Spirit is speaking to you through it, then you are not discovering it. Did you know that is a contradiction? And if you really do trust God, then why not trust Him to preserve His Words, Hebrew and Greek, like He promised? If God could create and then sustain His universe, then why could He not preserve every one of His Words? Think about it.

  36. March 6, 2010 at 2:09 pm

    Thanks, Kent.

  37. keystone
    March 7, 2010 at 7:52 pm

    Kent,
    Just curious who you mean when you say “we” as referring to the perfect preservation of the text. The Schaap camp, the Fugate camp or both. Sorry to offend you by being such an ignoramus/ fellow Christian, but what do you mean by “evolving words” as well? And 7% different than the text received by which churches? BTW, I did not say anywhere that I think the KJV is a bad translation, I grew up using it and still do often use it. I didn’t know I was firing a missile by asking questions and giving my testimony.

  38. keystone
    March 7, 2010 at 10:22 pm

    Another question: For those that say you must be saved out of the King James Version if you are English speaking (as I have heard Hyles and Fugate say personally from their pulpits), is that not a form of legalism? The whole book to the Galatians attacks this whole type of argument. For them it was false teachers telling them to believe in Jesus and be circumcised. That was just as important to the Jews as the King James Version to many Christians today. There is definitely a danger in saying that there is more to salvation than just putting your faith in the redeeming work of Christ. Is Paul’s warning to them the same as it would apply today?

  39. March 8, 2010 at 2:02 pm

    Keystone,

    I don’t think you are greatly threatened in your anonymity. And don’t say now that you were just “asking questions.” Questions are the strongest form of affirmation or negation. For instance, what if I asked you, “Are you stupid?” Hey, I’m only asking questions. I’m happy to let the readers judge. You’re an ignoramus because you make accusations with your questions and statements that are false. You didn’t check first to see if what you were saying was true. You just fired away.

    I don’t know if you are a fellow Christian. Nothing you said explains that.

    The critical text (the basis of the ESV) is constantly mutating and being changed. It differs 7% from the textus receptus.

    If you read this blog at all you know we don’t support Hyles or Fugate. We’ve written more against them than anyone, more than any fundamentalist or evangelical. And we’ve never supported their view that you can be saved only through a particular translation. So again, perhaps you should actually be more curious and ask questions before you start. Or maybe read what we’ve written.

  40. March 8, 2010 at 2:38 pm

    I was going to reply to Keystone, but then I saw that you had already replied, as adequately as one can. Looks to me like the keystone is missing, and, if we all get on the bridge and bounce a few times, we can probably see it all collapse. Just, I’m staying near the edge, cause I don’t wanna fall in the riva.

    Keystone, do yourself a favor and read what we have actually written before you come on with guns-a-blazin’.

  41. keystone
    March 8, 2010 at 8:06 pm

    Sorry guys, I don’t read your blog. I was just trying to get info on the Fugate/Schaap scandal and your site came up first on google, so I started reading the threads. I am not a blogger, a Greek scholar or any of the sort. I am just trying to learn and discern. I have an old friend who goes to Fugate’s church and my brother used to go there while in college. My sisters went to Hyles-Anderson several years ago. Kent, I agree with what you have said about their positions. There are also posts in this thread, however, that were saying other translations are from Satan and the like. Those are the ones which I disagree with and have big problems with. It appears that the main readers/contributors to this site are KJV only supporters, and that is fine. I love the Lord Jesus and know that He loves me and gave His life for me and saved me. The Spirit testifies of it in my heart and I can rest in the promises of God’s Word. Questions are not always meant to be barbs. I could be one of your parishioners, and your responses to me have shown no grace or Christ-likeness. The translations debate is obviously one that brings as many questions as answers, like election and free-will. I would like to have things explained clearly so I can better understand. I won’t clog up your blog any more, since I clearly ticked you off by mentioning that I use a different translation. After you finished blasting me, Kent, you mentioned you have had many problems with Hyles and Fugate. That corrollates with the qualms I am having with what they are saying about salvation, so thanks for that. I understand you have written extensively on the subject of the supremacy of the Received Text. Perhaps in the future when someone questions your position, just post the link to your writings on the subject. I would be glad to read them as I have been reading many articles in the last few days about textual criticism and such. Sincerely, Clayton (Keystone is my business)from sunny South Carolina (I am not, but I know I AM!)

  42. March 8, 2010 at 8:57 pm

    Keystone,

    If I were in your situation, and I came on like you did, and then found out that I had totally misrepresented the people to whom I’m talking, I would be embarrassed and apologetic, rather than defensive and accusatory and lecturing and playing the victim. People at our church would never say anything like you are saying, so it was very clear that you weren’t one of them.

    I’m happy if you’ve gotten things cleared up about who we are. I’m not convinced of it, because of these statements:

    “There are also posts in this thread, however, that were saying other translations are from Satan and the like.”

    “I clearly ticked you off by mentioning that I use a different translation.”

    I’d like you to point me to anything we’ve said like the first statement. And then my comment to you had very little to do with you saying you liked the ESV. I felt sorry for you on that. But your accusations about our position on the preservation of Scripture, the untruths, that was the problem. Perhaps you could admit that.

  43. keystone
    March 11, 2010 at 9:06 pm

    The post I was referring to was from phil and then John Carroll on October 16, 2009. That is the one that got me annoyed.
    You are right, I did not go check out who all the authors of this site are before I wrote my comment. I will apologize for that. As I’m looking at your last reply, I don’t recall ever accusing you of any “untruths” about the preservation of scriptures. I do believe God has preserved His word. And I do have a lot of questions about the whole preservation debate; I do know just enough to be dangerous! I applaud you for your work in studying how He did it through the KJV. I was reading another site where a guy said your book was the best defense of that position he had read.
    Even though I use 3 main versions to read and study (ESV, KJV, and NASB), it has been my experience that God reveals His truths to me and speaks to me in the use of each of them. You may agree with that too, I don’t know.
    For the guys who want to burn Bible: if the simple gospel of Jesus Christ is given, in a book or a testimony or a version of the scriptures, which reveals that He is the only begotten Son of God then I have a problem calling it of the devil. I hope you would agree with me on that. One does not have to be a textual critic to understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
    In my opinion, the “big lie” of Satan is trying to convince the world that Jesus was just a “good person”, but he was not the Son of God. Even if other mainstream versions are not as accurate translations as the KJV, they still proclaim the clear and simple gospel of who Jesus really is. If they don’t do that, then I say “Burn ’em!” I John helps me understand that point as well. It also tells me how to test the spirits and that is how my faith is confirmed.
    Sorry again, Kent, my original beef was not with you. I reponded poorly to the comments of Phil and John. Then I was annoyed that no one answered my sincere, albeit ignorant, questions.
    I know I said I would quit posting, but I do have another question in regards to the preservation of scripture. Actually, a couple. I have been thinking about whether there is a distinction between the preservation of all of God’s words (verbal) mentioned in scripture vs. all of His recorded written words (scripture itself) and how they are kept for us. And how does the New covenant as affirmed in Hebrews 8 factor into the preservation of God’s Word? It stating that God’s law will be put in our minds and written on our hearts.
    Again, you’ve probably written about this already and it does not reflect directly on the original article on Schaap/Fugate, but if you have an old article, feel free to attach a link. I would sincerely appreciate it.

  44. March 11, 2010 at 9:22 pm

    keystone,

    I think you percieved my coment wrong. I saw that in the paper around the time

    this post was new. It is actually embarrasing for these type of IFB to get media

    attention. John comments were way of base and he percieved my comment as good( I

    just giving the information for humor and what Pastor Mallinak says as take these

    nut cases seriously. That church actually did not burn them. It rained there on

    holloween so they made a Youtube video of them just ripping them apart and

    yelling “It’s a Lie!”. Again my comment was nuetral just giving information that I

    saw in my city paper. I don’t belive the KJV is inspired.

  45. March 11, 2010 at 10:22 pm

    Keystone,

    I’m going to try to answer your questions. I’m on the road right now and so I don’t know when the window will open it. Thanks.

  46. keystone
    March 12, 2010 at 9:20 pm

    Phil, I see you were just reporting the article and were not supporting it. The other guy’s response is the one that is off the wall along with the church who was possessed to do that. What other debate is their where one can claim to be so devoutly doing the Lord’s work and yet doing so much damage to the testimony of Jesus Christ? The only things I can think of are the Inquisitions and Crusades gone amuck. Thanks for replying.

    On a side note, I run a landscape maintenance company around Greenville. We maintain several convenience stores around our area. Sometimes people will leave a tract in the restrooms on top of the sinks and even the urinals and toilets! They usually then end up dirty, on the floor or we see them on the ground. I always feel some sense of a quandary as I debate whether to leave them for some poor soul or remove them so that God’s word is no longer defiled by where it was placed. I usually get rid of them because I think about the Mosaic laws about being unclean and I don’t want people to come into contact with the word in that way! Especially since some of them are the “corniest” tracts I’ve ever seen! Anyway, I guess I’m sharing this because it is just another example of how some don’t respect the word of God and don’t desire to keep it holy. A good example of a good idea and bad execution! 🙂

    Kent, I look forward to reading your thoughts and do appreciate you taking the time to respond. I sense you are busy with a lot of responsibilities. Also, I think you are right on about expository teaching and preaching. There is nothing better! I learn so much from my pastors and that style seems to put things into proper context so much better. Also, it is hard to skip the “sticky” passages when you are consistently covering them all.

    Thanks again, Clayton

  47. August 23, 2010 at 11:27 pm

    1. Do any of you speak Greek or Hebrew
    2. If you do, who cares? God gave us everything we need in English in the KJV1611.
    Textus Receptus. If you can understand and read English, you don’t need it watered down.
    3. Instead of carrying on with these rumors why not just keep serving God and trying to win souls. What the devil wants is all this arguing and bickering.
    4. This should be the last comment on this page. Dont keep sowing doubt in the minds of people. Dr. Schaap is doing what he feels God wants Him to do and so id Dr. Fugate. Encourage these men dont sow doubt. LET GOD BE TRUE AND EVERY MAN A LIAR.

  48. August 23, 2010 at 11:30 pm

    Dr. Schaap preached and I went forward to surrender my life to be a preacher at 15, im close to 30 now. Why don’t you all get off his back? He’s a man of God trying to follow God. Dr. Fugate is doing what he believes is right. These men and YOU and ME will all give an account for our good and bad actions.
    There is no need for rumors and discord. Sow righteousness, not doubt. Thats satanic. I love Dr. Schaap and Dr. Fugate. And I pray all of these rumors end now. Let these men keep trying to follow God. And let us keep our mouth shut and do the same.

  49. A Baptist Preacher
    August 25, 2010 at 9:40 am

    We will get off his back when he gets some things right.

    Have you checked the website for First Baptist of Hammond?
    You don’t even have to be a Baptist to join the church, simply give a testimony of salvation and immersion and join by “Christian experience.”
    What is that? Where is that found in the Bible?

    Then there is the heretical matter of Schaap’s views on the Lord’s Supper. I won’t even give any details since they are so sexually perverted.

    Add to that, his support of that which is just plain wrong.

    So sorry, the rest of us don’t have him up on some pedestal, but rather don’t even take him serious as a Baptist preacher. Numbers don’t impress us, rather sound doctrine and separation do.

  50. dan
    October 12, 2010 at 5:39 pm

    Have you read your english King James Bible when it says in Hebrews 4:12 the word of God is “quick.” I guess we should just say in 2011 that it’s fast instead of the the Greek word ζῶν for alive. How are you going to interpret that? How about the English word “conversation” in the King James Bible that the underlying Greek word in 1611 meant “conduct or behavior” in 1 Peter 1:15 and “citizenship” (a totally different word in the textus receptus) in 1 Peter 1:15? Are you going to interpret that as your speech? Or how about the word “servant” in Matt 10:24 and 23:11, which has two underlying Greek words altogether. One indicating a bondslave and the other a teacher. How about the word “world” in the King James Bible? Are you going to interpret that as the planet earth as many do, how about consistancy throughout the King James Bible. In Matt. 28:20 (age); Jn. 3:16; Rom. 5:12 (humanity). What about Fear in 2 Timithy (timidity) and in 1 John 4:18 (terror); being totally two different underlying Greek words. All of these and hundreds more throughout your King James Bible have several underlying words that give different definitions and meanings throughout the Bible. If you fail to do as Paul told Timothy and STUDY you are no better than those that add to and take away from the Bible. Why should we hold a possition from a translation that says to fire the predecessors of the King James Bible, namely the Textus Receptus? And the verse you are using from the King James Bible in 2 Timothy 3:16 doesn’t say that the words of God are inspired but that they were “given” by inspiration. You are giving your audience a Greek interpretation with the absence of the verb but if you are going to stand as a King James Dogmatist you don’t get your cake and eat it too. By holding your possition on the King James you are making God out to be a respector of persons by giving interpretations that were not graspable to the early church up to 1611. It’s not the King James your magnifying its Noah Webster. Your using a dictionary to preserve the words instead of the Bible itself. We have the Textus Receptus as a guide post so we wont get out on a limb as many King James Dogmatist do. Noah Webster himself did not approve of your method. There is no magic with the King James Bible. It, sitting on the shelf is doing what it has always done, nothing! However, if we find the truth and study the truth it becomes a very powerful tool in the hand of the Spirit. I wonder if this is the big cop-out of the independent Baptist church pastors, for not studying the Greek and Hebrew. And why in the World is Gail Riplinger a voice in our movement anyway? Pastors and guys like yourself following her just shows where you went to college to learn how to study the Bible. Ripplingers’school for Lazy pastor’s which get grandfathered into everything. That’s why so many of the Independent Baptist Pastors have Doctorates. They get grandfathered in. Life Credit. I’ve been fighting hard for my female hero Gail Ripplinger, I deserve an honorary doctorate. This Christianity makes me sick. I would challenge the perversions of that individual and all who follow her any day. Lastly, it’s sad that as an individual with freedom and one who supposedly has all the answers and knows all the Bible all you can put on the web is this heresy. One more thing, there is no danger at all for those who study the Greek and Hebrew. Everything can be used wrong. The biggest problem in America is not those who study the Greek and Hebrew but those who don’t study the English. Dan, Independent Baptist Preacher

  51. dan
    October 12, 2010 at 5:48 pm

    quick note on the previous letter I sent you. I put 1 Peter for citizenship instead it should be Philippians 3:20 and the reference for fear 2 Timothy 1:7.

  52. Joshua
    October 12, 2010 at 6:46 pm

    Dan,

    Your post is one giant straw man. You haven’t actually figured out where the owners of these blogs stand. They are for studying Greek and Hebrew. They are against Riplinger. Most of your arguments have been answered (or even advanced and propounded) by these men in detail and in passing many times.

    In short, you’ve jumped in guns blazing without understanding the issue or your opponents, and it’s making you look very foolish. If you ask them, maybe they’ll delete it for you.

  53. Randy Langford
    December 18, 2010 at 11:59 am

    A dollar bill and two cereal box tops and you can get a doctorate like these clowns have. They know enough Bible to be dangerous and dangerous they are. They are so far from the teachings of the Bible whether it’s KJV or NIV or whatever. The Spirit of Christ is absent from their dialogues and diatribes. Most of them were educated at HAC where there has been decades of in-breeding. Ignorance produces more ignorance which produces what we see on the landscape of “FunDAHmentalism”. God deliver us from this silliness.

  54. emmygarate
    January 31, 2011 at 10:39 pm

    Dear Father,
    Please lead us to unity and protect us from the evil one who is filled with glee over our divisions concerning Your Word. Forgive us for treating each other discourteously and without love. Bless those who seek to understand You and live in Your way. Holy Spirit, help us desire a relationship with you instead of defense of our personal positions on doctrinal topics. Remind us that we were made to worship You, Three-in-one, in all our ways and in doing so we will lead others to you. In the name of Jesus,
    Amen

  55. Dallas
    April 29, 2011 at 11:27 am

    enjoyed your posts and comment by various authors. allow this please. looks to me like unless you believe the KJV is inspired, you really don’t have possession of the Word of God for english speaking people. Also as to original languages it was not all in hebrew and/or greek if we can believe the linguists.As to the kjv versus other english translations, it is very easy to find heresy in the others. There are no proven errors in the kjv. oh,one other thing, so far as i can tell there are at least 33 TRs differeing in places. There are also at least 4 MTs differing in places. Now tell me, which Bible, if any, do you actually believe?

  56. August 2, 2012 at 12:01 pm

    KJV is the only Bible to believe…… Now look what happened at Id. college …. Dr. Schapp , if he had been a man of G0D in his pulpit , he would not have sunk to sin…… It showed 10 year ago….

  57. James Turner
    August 13, 2012 at 9:51 am

    For the record: I am NOT a fan (at all) of Gail Riplinger or Peter Ruckman or any of the frothing “special revelation” crowd. I AM committed to the King James Version, because I am convinced from my own study that it is the only reliable translation of the Textus Receptus and Masoretic texts. The average church member in a Bible believing church, even in an independent Baptist church, has little or no knowledge of Greek or Hebrew. They MUST rely on honest scholarship by their pastor/teacher to “rightly divide the word of truth.” THAT man must have confidence in what he’s preaching/teaching – not having doubts, himself, or sowing doubts in the hearts of his flock by casting doubt on Scripture. Do I believe that the KJV is the preserved Word of God for the English language? YES, because God PROMISED to preserve His perfect Word “to all generations.” IT has to be somewhere for me (and you), It is obviously NOT in the Alexandrian crowd of money makers today. There are NO other honest, reliable English translations of the “Originals”, so if God promised, and He keeps His promises,the conclusion is obvious.

  1. March 13, 2009 at 7:11 pm
  2. March 14, 2009 at 7:18 pm
  3. September 18, 2010 at 4:25 pm
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: