181 thoughts on “Hating Beer (and Logic)”

    1. I think maybe the words “I know a pastor” were true.

      But everything after that was likely a complete fabrication.

    2. I wonder what would happen if, after the service, someone asked him “hey, what was the name of your pastor friend? Can I get his phone number? I’d love to interview him for my blog. What an incredible story!”

      If he says “oh, my friend wouldn’t want to be interviewed” the next question would be “why? Is he afraid to speak out against the dangers of alcoholism?”

  5. Ya…and cheeseburgers kill more people than beer…but yet Fundamentalists are the most unhealthy people I know.

    The bible says do not be drunk…not…DO NOT DRINK.

    Same with a cheeseburger…you can eat one…but DO NOT EAT TOO MANY. 😯

    3. But that is how Baptist Logic works:
      You can’t get drunk if alcohol never touches your lips. So, the required safe-zone is set so far away from actually taking a drink that brown and green bottles are prohibited for appearance sake.

      You can’t cause a pregnancy if you never even touch a member of the opposite sex so there is complete segregation of the sexes. Of course this only heightens the sexual tension to the point of nuclear meltdown but it is the appearance of impropriety that really matters.

      Now the same logic, for some unknown reason, does not apply to cheeseburgers… at least for males. Women, on the other hand, cannot gain any weight or they risk driving their man to the arms of a younger, thinner, more vivacious female… and it will be the wife’s fault for not staying the same weight as the day they got married.

      Yep, the rules of Baptist logic are very particular and require its followers to have advanced legal training in order to be properly prepared as a “Member in Good Standing.”

      1. Ya gotta love that iterative approach to self-anointed sanctity: “We’ve got a hedge about the hedge about the hedge about the hedge about the Torah – but we’ve got room to squeeze in a few more!” Guess they were all about the FP….

    4. “Ya…and cheeseburgers kill more people than beer”

      Oh, gosh, excellent point! Cheeseburgers are just way, way worse than alcohol! 🙄

      I hate to rain all over your super logical parade here, but tell me please how many innocent people were killed due to another person’s excessive cheeseburger consumption? And how many innocent people have been beaten, emotionally damaged or killed by other people’s excessive alcohol consumption?

      Yeah. I don’t even think there are statistics for cheeseburger-related beatings and car accidents. But wtfever.

  7. Baptists of any stripe are largely suspect.

    In our search for a church home after exiting Fundyland, we discovered that pretty much every evangelical church is just fundy-lite. Landed in the Episcopal Church and have never been happier.

    1. pretty much every evangelical church is just fundy lite

      This. I grew up in a non-denominational fundy church, and in trying to find a new church, I’ve just sworn off evangelicals altogether – they’re still fundy enough to be very triggering for me.

      1. Yep, they are, aren’t they. Not quite as out there, but the logic (or lack thereof) is the same.

        Had ol’ papa Francis been on the scene as I was making my exit, I might have ended up in the Catholic church, to be honest. But there’s a wide swath of fundy Catholics too, so I still can’t quite go there.

        The Episcopal Church welcomes you. 🙂

        1. Absolutely, Clara! But you really don’t have a choice, because of your surname.

          After all, the Anglican Communion has its roots in Merrie Olde. 😀

        2. I’m Episcopalian now too! And I’ll tell you, I was shocked my first Easter, when I got to the back to shake the priest’s hand, and one of the ladies greeted me the a tray of glasses- of really good champagne! There was also sparkling cider for those who don’t imbibe But first the first time I felt like I was in a church populated with *adults*. Does that make any sense?

        3. Haha!! Yes, I’ve wondered how much my English heritage had to do with feeling comfortable in the Anglican Church. I do have a decent amount of German heritage though, and might have ended up Lutheran if the local Lutheran Church hadn’t been so snobby the day we visited. 😉

        4. Yes, Liutgard, yes! That is an apt description. Finally in a congregation of adults. We can live and let live, disagree gently, love thoroughly, and enjoy and adult beverage.

          We just had a retirement party for our (female) only deacon. There were mixed drinks, wine, and sparkling grape juice. For the new year, we had mimosas. I love it. 😀

        5. Well, the first Sunday I walked in the door, I was greeted with a warm smile, people asked my name and what I did, and they were ok about my saying ‘I’m just visiting’. I didn’t tell them that I’ve basically had PTSD about church. It helped that James was with me.

          Dunno why, but the next week, I decided to go back, even though James had gone home to Ashland.

          PEOPLE REMEMBERED MY NAME. One of the ladies sat with me to help me figure out the hymnal/prayerbook/bulletin juggling, and she explained some of the stuff, including that is was all optional and if I wanted I could just sit in the pew.

          Can you imagine that happening in an IFB or A/G church? I can’t.

        6. Here’s a good explanation of what happens in an Episcopal Church. Each church is a bit different but in general we don’t have long sermons, solo singing, long “pastoral prayers” and other characteristics of fundy-land.

          And yes, the clergy are educated. A Master of Divinity degree from an accredited seminary is the standard. The classes are NOT easy.

          Clergy must pass a physical exam (many of the “heavier” guys you see in the SFL videos wouldn’t pass muster), a psychological exam conducted by a sho-nuff psychologist or psychiatrist, meetings with the diocesan Committee on Ministry, and the dreaded General Ordination Examination.

          Ordination is by the diocesan bishop, NOT by an individual church. 😯

          http://ecww.org/resources/what-expect-when-you-visit-episcopal-church

        7. I landed in the Episcopal Church, too. I am very happy to be there.

          Not that the past doesn’t still haunt me. Healing comes slowly. But the Episcopal Church is helping me to heal.

        8. We are tee-total, except at communion, at my ECUSA church because good booze is expensive. But that one guy who bakes awesome things manages to spin one bottle of rum out into about a year’s worth of rum cakes . . .

      2. I feel the same way. I sporadically attend a non-denom evangelical church but the overall POVs preached there remind me of a lighter version of my fundy church. I didn’t see it at first, but the longer I’ve attended the more I’ve realized that they’re very similar, and I can’t say that I agree with it at all.

    2. I agree. Evangelicals are “fundy lite”. Well said. Funny story: A non-Christian co-worker confided in me that she has learned to be wary of the people in our workplace who talk about “being a Christian.” “They are the ones who stab you in the back!”

    3. I think this is my conclusion, too. I was never associated with IFB; I attended a Baptist church that was probably ‘new evangelical’ – NIV, Alpha Course, somewhat charismatic, no real dress codes or ‘standards’, occasional social drinking tolerated, women in the leadership team (but not as Senior Pastor), some end-time wackiness but lots of good ‘social gospel’ mission amongst the poor and refugees too.

      And yet, so many of the things covered here are nevertheless familiar to my experience: ultimately, I found the whole evangelical system so narrow, shallow, fake and manipulative. It took me years to realise that there’s more to Christianity than evangelicalism.

      Thank God for John Shelby Spong, Marcus Borg, John Dominic Crossan and Winnie Varghese – and Mark Vernon and Richard Holloway too.

  8. Hmm. Of course, he doesn’t mention that when the Bible was written, beer (and other high-octane beverages) was a very common drink- in fact a very common way to get a lot of nutrition. (There’s a reason why it has been known as ‘liquid bread’.) There’s been found vessels in Egyptian tombs with remnants of beer in them.

    So what is ‘separated and sanctified’ about not drinking beer? You might as well quit milk products, if separation is what you’re after. They can make you fat, and gluttony is just as much a sin as drunkenness…

    1. Short and simple answer: Because at about the time when American Baptist leaders were throwing their support behind Prohibition, totally coincidentally, the national beer brands were all owned by undesirable types. You know. Immigrants. Germans and other foreigners out to steal our women. Catholics, even. And on top of that they were city people.

    2. Well, Liutgard, you have just hit upon the real reason why beer is so evil: it is the drink of Egypt. And we should all know the fundy trope that as long as you can stick “of Egypt” on the end of ANYTHING, that is a fortiori proof that the thing is eeeevil. 😈

      1. According to BULL GIPP that is exactly why the “Alexandrian Texts” are inferior to the “majority Texts.”

        Baptist Logic is hard to fathom sometimes.

      2. Of course it was more than Egypt. I was just thinking of a recent find. There’s evidence of alcohol production and consumption all through the Fertile Crescent- aaaaand they were all peoples who teh OT God said were evil but he was not above using them to do his dirty business, punishing Israel for Iniquity #3462…

        1. Really conveniently, IFBs and other alcohol-banning types have consistently ignored that “strong drink” grenerally refers to beers of various kinds, which would remove the pagan stigma from beer consumption.

      1. I think Liutgard is closer to the truth here. While ancient water sources could be contaminated, the ancient NE used primarily wells and cisterns for water collection – it’s harder to get significant sanitation-related water issues in well-based systems. Alcohol as water sanitizer seems to come more from post-Roman Europe, where people drew water from the same rivers that others threw raw sewage into, frequently downstream.
        Food, on the other hand, spoils rapidly. Preserving food can mean preserving life. Fermentation was one way of preserving the value of food after its initial freshness has been compromised. Bread and beer can both be thought of as attempts to circumvent decay by means of related chemical processes.

  9. My Baptist church is nothing like this. At all. Well, a bit. But they don’t preach against alcohol. Just liberals. And gay people. And scientists.

    Truth be told, if you ask me in ten years, I’ll probably not still be attending a Baptist church. Sadly, this kind of stuff seems to go with the territory. #sigh

    1. Yeah, Southern Baptists / evangelicals are no less anachronistic and reactionary culture warriors than the IFB. It’s just that they manage to pick some of their battles in (slightly) more contemporary areas. But, yeah, both groups are:

      anti-liberal
      anti-Democrat
      anti-Obama
      Islamophobic
      Homophobic
      conspiracy theory embracing
      Constitutional Originalists (they read the Constitution the same way they read the Bible)
      ETC.

      1. That’s a really interesting point: people who read the Bible literally also read Constitutions literally. I wonder how this association travels outside of the US: do Canadian, or Irish, or Dutch, or Norwegian, fundies read their Constitutions more literally too? I expect not. There’s something about the sacralisation of the US Constitution that makes some people treat it as if it were a sort of ‘scripture’ – as if the Founding Fathers were Moses.

        Double irony – the Canadian, Irish and Norwegian Constitutions all refer to God as the founder of rights or to Christian principles as the basis for their systems of government – and yet, their Constitutions are not treated as ‘sacred texts’ in the same way that the US Constitution is. Maybe the USA just hasn’t gotten over its Puritan ‘New Jerusalem’ complex yet.

        1. To be an originalist does not mean that you read it literally. Rather it is a hermeneutical approach to a text that says the meaning is determined by the author and does not change. Application of that meaning may change, but the meaning of the text is forever fixed.

        2. I should also point out that the Bill of Rights should be read to some degree as sacred because that was the intent of the framers of the Constitution, to enshrine what they considered to fundamental (not to be confused with fundamentalist) human rights or freedoms (at least from a Deist perspective). Granted we have the right to amend the Constitution if we believe it is not current or addressing the governing concerns of the nation, so in that sense it is not ultimately sacred.

        3. “do Canadian, or Irish, or Dutch, or Norwegian, fundies read their Constitutions more literally too?”

          Possibly more accurate question, at least for Canadians – do Canadian fundies read their Constitution? Most of us, I daresay, don’t, fundies or otherwise. We talk about what the law says, but the constitution is rarely to never mentioned except in history courses, and then only briefly. Possibly gets studied in law courses. I speak as one who took almost no history or law courses, but I think that may make me a pretty typical Canadian 😉 😀

        4. The problem, thlipsis, is that neither the Scriptures nor the Constitution can be read with the “original intent” of the author as a guiding light. Both documents were composed by a number of individuals (the Bible over a much greater span of time, of course) who had all sorts of reasons for writing those documents the way they did. While the Bible at least can be said to have God as its ultimate author breathing some level of consistency into its pages, the same cannot be said for the United States Constitution, which is a collection of compromises designed to capture enough votes to ensure ratification. Even hyper-textualist Supreme Court Justice Scalia admitted that one simply cannot look to the “intent of the author” when interpreting a text that has the contributions of multiple authors (and even more voters). The irony is that this is why Scalia rejects the judicial doctrine of looking to legislative intent to interpret statutes but yet he applies this same practice to interpreting the Constitution! (But he reads the Constitution in a very Protestant way, in spite of his Catholicism: namely, he views it as something of a sacred text that is meant to be read literally – so long, of course, as the literal reading supports core conservative values. WASP-influenced elitist legal education at its best!) Bottom line: “original intent constitutionalism” is a fallacy that is nothing more than a smokescreen for reading one’s own views into the text (something that IFBelievers also do with the Scriptures).

          As for the point raised about other countries, I’d just note that for many of those countries, the constitution is somewhat less important than it is in the American legal system and thus merits less frenetic attention and devotion.

        5. DS

          Intent versus meaning are two very different things. The rules of language, such as the definition of a word, its context, the tense, mood and voice of a verb, the literary genre and multiple other factors, do allow us to understand the meaning of what he writes. If I write, “The sky is blue,” you can easily determine the meaning of what I have written. That is straight forward. As to why I wrote that, my intent, you are right, that cannot be determined, at least with 100% certainty. So while we may not understand Paul’s intent or Thomas Jefferson’s, we can with a high degree of certainty determine the meaning of what they wrote, otherwise the basic laws of communication are meaningless. I may not like what an author writes, I may disagree or maybe not understand, but as the reader it is my responsibility to come as close as possible to understand the objective reality of what is written. Admittedly there is always a bias on the part of the reader, a subjective reality, but I do not have the right to let my subjective reality trump objective reality.

          Correct me if I am wrong, but part of what frustrates so many of us with the IFB movement is they superimpose their own agenda onto a biblical text and fail to understand the truth of what is written. Jesus didn’t turn water into wine, he turned it into grape juice because he wasn’t a bartender. That totally violated that historical context and language of the text. And to focus som much on the alcohol content of what was in those jars in some ways is meaningless because that totally misses the point behind John telling the story of what took place, and in this instance he makes his intent quite clear: so that Christ might be glorified and that his disciples might believe in him. In fact John reveals the intent of writing his gospel quite clearly in 20:31, so that those who read this might believe Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God.

          I guess my point in all of this is if you ignore meaning and basic hermeneutical rules, then you can end up with the kinds abuses that we mock on this site or are frustrated with.

    2. Yes, it takes a while to get up and leave, even though you know it is the right thing to do.

      It took me about 6 years. Even then, it was only me and one of my sons who left. My wife, daughter, and two other sons stayed.

  10. IME, the is no such animal as a non-fundy baptist. And southern baptists tend to be among the worst.

    1. Phatchick, I would consider the Baptist church I attended overseas to have been a non-fundy, conservative, Bible believing church. With that said, unlike mathematical terms, there is not a strictly defined and universally agreed upon definition for “fundy.”

      Personally, I don’t even entirely regard the word “fundy” to be simply a shortened form of the word “Fundamentalist.” To me they are two things that differ at least in degree. In any case, what follows is my opinion of the meanings of the words. You’ve got your own understanding of course:

      One thing that separates Fundamentalists and fundies from other sects seems to be a lack of accountability and oversight. In churches that are merely Fundamentalist, the form of church government may, in extreme cases, resemble that of a monarchy with the senior pastor as its earthly ruler. In a full blown fundy church, the pastor is not only the unquestioned sovereign, he is as Moses, answerable only to God– to oppose him is to invite God’s wrath. Unlike Moses, however; very few fundy pastors are actually meek and humble. In my opinion, there needs to be some sort of check on pastoral authority. Whether this should come in the form of an elected group of elders or from the congregation itself, I couldn’t say. It just seems that absolute power is not only harmful to the body of Christ, but it tends to mar the one wielding the authority.

      Also, in the case of fundies, there almost seems to be an artificial and unbiblical distinction between clergy and laity: the pastor is the “Man of God,” the “full time Christian workers” are perhaps regarded more like the Levites, and the people are the sheep. With churches that are merely Fundamental, the caste system is unofficial, but the senior pastor nevertheless is on the top rung of the social class while the peasants occupy the bottom rung.

      One thing they probably both have in common is a certain opaqueness when it comes to finances. In either case, it would be difficult for the average church member to learn the value of the compensation package of the senior pastor. At the same time, church budgets would likely be aggregated in such a way as to obscure just how woefully the individual teachers and staff are being underpaid.

      Furthermore, while individual Fundamentalist and fundy churches may be correct in their understanding of soteriology, they both seem (at least in practice) to have a legalistic doctrine of sanctification by works. Fundies in particular appear to have a penchant for adding commandments to the word of God.

      Finally, when it comes to separation, true fundies will separate to the nth degree from those they believe are disobedient.

      Actually, I thought of another finally: collectively, the two groups often do a poor job of ministering to the physical needs of both those within and those without the congregation.

      Well, that wasn’t worth much, but it was free.

  11. So in all his preaching against beer and alcohol…he’s never had a member die because of or be arrested for DUI?

        1. I don’t know if you are kidding or if you are referring to the IFB nonsense regarding John the Baptist. Our pastor actually taught that Jesus was a Baptist because he was baptized by John the Baptist!

      2. Fun fact – it was the Methodists who invented pasteurized grape juice, so that congregants with a history of drunkenness wouldn’t fall off the wagon.

        So not entirely “Baptist” there.

    2. I’ve heard that one a few dozen times. And it doesn’t hold up under modern scholarship.Wine keeps- grape juice does not. In fact, thanks to the endemic yeasts in the air, grape juice begins to be wine in a matter of hours.

      For all their fuss about the infallability of the 1211 version, why do they make exception for the word ‘wine’. Are they saying that words don’t mean teh same then as they do now? 🙄

        1. Dang it, George! You know I meant 1611!

          You know, probably could find a 1211 version if I dug long enough. Probably one of the editions of the Latin Vulgate. Not digging right now though- I’m home sick with the flu. Even skipped church today.

      2. What’s interesting to me is that when you reject wine as evil, you lose out on a lot of the Scriptural imagery and symbolism of wine as a preserving agent. Trust fundies to convert a Biblical symbol for the blood of Jesus into a kid’s drink.

  13. The Baptist Dictionary defines Separated and sanctified as being a Victorian Moralistic Teetotaler. A-men??

    1. I’m pretty sure the Bible says we have been separated and sanctified. I get tired of all the human effort trying to do things already done in Christ. And of course the list of characteristics defining it is whatever the local Mog says it is

      1. ^This!^

        but, but, but Capt’n you know we have to additionally separate ourselves from the world and worldly appearances and add additional sanctification to ourselves if we want Jesus to love us more better! That’s the Baptist way isn’t it? I mean we’re only saved by Grace right? We have to prove how much grace we got by how much we do to make ourselves more separate and more sanctified right?

        /removes tongue from cheek, shakes head knowing so many who try to live that very description.

        1. hearing that sermon was the point where I realized I could no longer stay. My relatively tame upbringing was nothing compared to my later forays into less thinking and more radical fundamentalism, and when I heard the Mog actually say God loved people more who obeyed better I just shook my head and began implementing the exit strategy…Oh foolish Galatians! Who hath bewitched you!

  14. Much of baptist conviction is actually cultural opinion that has more in common with the KKK than it does the Bible. I think there are a few us baptist out here that aren’t fundy. I’m part of a baptist church where beer and wine are often found at church dinners. I often get asked to test beer, ciders, etc that some of my church friends have home-brewed. I want to hear a fundy sermon about Deut 14:26. I teach our church that Holy Spirit-filled people are the only ones that should be drinking. OF course, even this is an oversimplification of the affects of alcohol. Some people are hardly affected. I’m the lead pastor.

  15. You have to admire the art with which they take a harmless statement like “its ok to have a beer” and translate it to saying the preacher has condoned drinking and driving. Its a skill to so badly bear false witness about someone that people cannot even recognize it as bearing false witness.

    And this being separate–do they even bother to read Scripture? Paul states that the circumcision is to be of the heart–so its not a separation which can be measured so easily by outer works. Instead it is an attitude and life style of the heart. But I guess that is proof texting for you…you don’t need to find the scripture within the story of the entire bible.

    1. “You have to admire the art with which they take a harmless statement like “its ok to have a beer” and translate it to saying the preacher has condoned drinking and driving.”

      This. I don’t know anyone – even seasoned alcoholics – who thinks that driving under the influences is a good idea.

  16. How many Baptist children have died in unsafe church buses and vans? Because nothing says how much Baptists love their kids than making them ride around in a 20 year old school bus.

  19. How much of a douche of a guy is this preacher if he gladly proclaims he’s less genteel and nice than the out & out a hole that pulled that stunt?

  20. I haven’t heard this guy since he’s been at the church, but visited once when the old pastor was there. It’s definitely a more “old-fashioned” southern baptist church than the other large SB churches in the area. It struck me to be very similar to large IFB church in the “feel” of it as a visitor, but the choir sang 20 yr old CCM.

  21. I was brought up Southern Baptist. They come in different flavors.

    Some are more mellow than others, some more legalistic than others.

    Southern Baptists actually agree with Independent Baptists on doctrinal stuff quite a bit (it seems to me), but are not nearly as stringent about “separating” as Fundies are, or not as obsessed with “separating” – not meaning to say that SBs are into ecumenicalism, because they are not.

    Southern Baptists are usually very anti-alcohol, which did not stop my S.B. dad from having an occasional beer, or my SB mom from having a glass of wine now and then.

    I am a teetotaler but only because I don’t like the way alcohol tastes.

    I don’t think people should drink to the point it damages their health, can lead to drunk driving (and thus kill someone), and I don’t think people should use it as a crutch to get through life, but I’ve never had anything against people casually drinking.

    (My not drinking is not based on religious reasons.)

    I have one or two Southern Baptist family members who won’t drink due to religious reasons.

    Some SB preachers give anti- alcohol sermons. (Even though Jesus turned water into wine.)

  22. I live in a predominantly SBC area and all of them preach against all alcohol of any kind. I grew up in a dry county to boot.

    Here’s my experience. For people who grow up believing that alcohol is evil and that “good” people never drink there is no such thing as having a beer or two. Either you never touch alcohol or you’re an alcoholic. There is no in between. Period.

    The result of this thinking is that when these folks get off the reservation they don’t have a glass of wine or a cocktail or a few coldies. They get knee-walking, parking lot puking, pants peeing, toilet hugging wasted. Because that’s the only alternative to tee totaling. No alcohol or all you can funnel. Most people would call this binge drinking. Binge drinking is indeed dangerous and can in fact have disastrous consequences.

    So, to give this guy a fair shake, that probably is his experience with drinking. In his experience there’s no such thing as social drinking. In his experience–I would wager–he only knows two types of people–tee totalers and drunks. So, I’m inclined to cut him a break.

    Peace,

    1. I actually agree with this. Especially in Southern culture, where alcohol is associated with nothing but dingy bars, slutty women, and puke-encrusted sawdust on the floor. Crossing the line to being a drinker is tantamount to selling one’s soul to Satan. Thus, taking that first drink of an alcoholic beverage represents buying into the whole entire evil lifestyle that is culturally associated with it. That’s the problem with teaching excess (offering a choice between total abstinence or total degradation) rather than moderation.

      1. Not to get too off topic, but they do this with other things too. Like sex. Particularly sex of the “same sex” variety. If you discover yourself to have feelings for the same sex, you either “turn it off, like a light switch” (a la the Book of Mormon, the musical), or you end up being flamingly promiscuous, taking drugs, and doing all sorts of other harmful things. And they don’t see how this creates a self-fulfilling prophecy, just like it does with alcohol.

    2. He’s calling himself a teacher. He has a responsibility to do research rather than simply regurgitate his own experience.

    3. What’s the difference between a Lutheran and a Baptist?
      The Lutheran will say “Hi” to you at the liquor store.

  23. I’ve read your blog for several years and I was raised in a Southern Baptist church until college and I can confirm there is only about 1% difference between (many) Southern Baptist and Indy/fundy Baptist churches.

    1. I don’t know. I was raised SB too, but it varies from SB layperson to SB layperson, SB church to SB church.

      Some SBs are more laid back than others.

      Many IFBs hate SBs because they think SBS are too liberal and don’t separate enough.

      It says something that IFBs think that SBS – who are pretty conservative – are liberals (they’re not).

      SBs are just not as extreme / legalistic as IFBs on some issues, so to the average IFB, SBs come across as flaming, compromising liberals.

      Some individual SBs or churches are very judgmental.

      I’m not saying you won’t or can’t find very rigid ones, but as compared to the IFBs I’ve seen online and in videos, they’re not as legalistic, usually.

      Some SBs can be doctirnally rigid (which is not necessarily bad, IMO), but can also be warm, friend, and personable to shoot the breeze with on a personal level.

      I don’t remember SBs being as harsh about secular entertainment, either, as IFBs are.

      Sometimes Southern Baptists will write editorials saying today’s rock music is raunchy (and they wrote those sorts of editorials when I was growing up), but they don’t usually outright forbid people from listening to secular rock, watching movies and TV, whereas IFBs do condemn all that stuff.

      1. My fundie-ex-husband and I were SBC for awhile. We had a pastor that was calm, loving, dedicated to the church and to the education and edification thereof, moderate and non-judgmental. So of course he was run off. (Yes, okay, I’ll admit to some bitterness about that.).

        What was left was a power vacuum that several in the church immediately tried to fill, and the loudest and most legalistic of them all came out the “winner”. All moderation and loving grace went out the window and we became an SBC-Fundy hybrid that thrilled my husband and killed any sense of church in me.

        1. That’s an interesting story and speaks to the American democracy style of running “independent” churches which often results in the most extreme viewpoint dominating others. (This occurs on both sides of the conservative-liberal spectrum. I was recently intrigued to learn that hyper-liberal UCC churches are stridently independent just like the IFB – it’s emphasized as one of their core tenets.)

          In my opinion, this is why we need the accountability that a denominational authority structure (with church authorities that are outside of the local body, i.e., bishops) creates.

    2. Our pastor used to do the following in a sermon:

      He would stand over by the piano on one side of the platform and say, THE INDEPENDENT BAPTISTS USED TO BE OVER HERE. Then, he would move to the pulpit and say, THE SOUTHERN BAPTISTS USED TO BE HERE. Then, he would move to the organ on the other side of the platform and say, AND THE METHODISTS USED TO BE HERE. Then he would return to the pulpit and say, NOW WE ARE HERE. He would step back to the organ and say, NOW THE SOUTHERN BAPTISTS ARE HERE. And he would wave contemptuously towards the door and say, AND THE METHODISTS ARE OUT THERE SOMEPLACE.

      Like all of his sermon illustrations, I found this to be informative and helpful. It really strengthened my faith and helped me see why we were the only true church. 🙄

  24. “Be not deceived. Wine is a mocker; strong drink is raging, and he that is deceived thereby is not wise.”

    1. “And thou shalt bestow that money for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, for oxen, or for sheep, OR FOR WINE, OR FOR STRONG DRINK, or for whatsoever thy soul desireth: and thou shalt eat there before the Lord thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou, and thine household.” Deut. 14:26

      So, basically, you could make a pretty good case straight out of THE LAW that it is a sin NOT to drink 😉

    2. A clearer translation: “Wine produces mockers; alcohol leads to brawls. Those led astray by drink cannot be wise.”

      And other mentions of wine in the Bible:

      Ecclesiastes 9:7 – “So go ahead. Eat your food with joy, and drink your wine with a happy heart, for God approves of this!”

      Psalms 104:14-15 – “You cause grass to grow for the livestock and plants for people to use. You allow them to produce food from the earth— wine to make them glad, olive oil to soothe their skin, and bread to give them strength.

      Isaiah 25:6 – “In Jerusalem, the Lord of Heaven’s Armies will spread a wonderful feast for all the people of the world. It will be a delicious banquet with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat.”

      1. Clara,

        We are forgetting that in any verse in which “wine” is positively mentioned, it means “grape juice” but in any verse in which it is negatively mentioned, it means “alcohol.” 🙄

    3. Didn’t some dude in the New Testament (Paul?) advise another dude, who was ill (maybe Timothy?), to take some wine to settle his stomach?

      (I’m a teetotaler who doesn’t see the problem with Christians or anyone being into casual, responsible alcohol drinking).

      1. You are remembering correctly- Paul did in fact give that advice.

        My Mennonite grandmother would never have partaken, but her doctor suggested that she have one glass of wine in the evening. I don’t know if she enjoyed it, but she drank that one glass- and only one glass, as long as I knew her.

    5. Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler,
      And whoever is intoxicated by it is not wise.

      Prov 20:1. Note that it is intoxication, drunkenness, which is condemned as opposed to wisdom.
      The key word is actually “mocker,” which ties to the sayings in Prov 19. Mockery and scorn are key characteristics of the foll in this passage of Scripture.

  25. Perry Noble is the dude who preached the Bud sermon. Perry is cool with you as long as you give them 10%… everything else is grace, baby.

    1. Perry Noble’s SC church website illustrates the point that evangelicalism is just another version of fundamentalism. It’s time, perhaps, that we examine both fundamentalism and evangelicalism as twin sons of different mothers. Then, do we need to decide where we do we need to go from there?

  26. What bothers me most is that this guy is blowing smoke and that there is absolutely no truth to his story, or, at the very least, he has added elements that are untrue for the sake of drama.

    I’m tired of being deceived by these pulpiteering bullies.

  27. I am still having trouble logging into the forum. I enter user name and password and it doesn’t log me in. The forum just comes up like I still need to log in.

    1. And what is really weird is when you look at the member list, it shows my last visit as 6-21-13. As well as a few others.

      1. Darrell lost all the changes/updates/posts in the last 6 months. If you changed your password in that timeframe, try the password from 6 months ago.

      2. same here, I can sign in, and it says I’m signed in but it still treats me as a guest and I can’t post.

  28. I’m from a Southern Baptist family and their sermons are fiery indictments on the culture of… whatever… but what they say behind the pulpit is often pretty distinct from their personal lives.

    My dad probably gave a sermon or two about alcohol/weed, or involving them, but when I started smoking pot, we started talking about it and now he’s in favor of legalization. He’s been a lifelong Republican. A Ronald Reagan type. He is in favor of the legalization of marijuana. I think that shows you their flexibility on certain issues. Coincidentally, he’s also in favor of civil unions but not gay marriage.

    I’m queer, that’s bothersome, but whatever. I live in a gay marriage state now. At least he was thoughtful enough to offer us the same benefits of marriage with a different title. (Not that I would accept that, no way, gay marriage all the way!)

    Southern Baptists are very odd types. In church, they are pretty humorous types until they’re preaching, and then they are 110% serious. As soon as the intensity breaks, they’re back to being hilarious socialites.

    I can’t even say many of them judged me once they found out about my queerness/pot smoking/atheism. Most of the time, they just wanted to understand where I was coming from. I told them, we agreed to disagree, and they never tried to convert me or anything.

    All in all, I have a pretty positive opinion of Southern Baptist preachers. On a personal level, that is. In a lot of cases their politics are detestable because they prioritize stopping gay marriage/abortion over everything else. My dad was one of those types. As far as economics went, he was at least a Progressive Democrat, and would very likely be considered a socialist if you judged him on just those qualities. He would never admit that – his friends still view socialist as a dirty word – but it’s still true.

    Now Pentecostals, that’s a whole different type of crazy. They are generally nice people too but they are every bit as crazy out of church as in it. I think Pentecostals are the most fun denomination. They’re just so crazy you can’t help but enjoy their company. On the flip side, they are inclined to prosthelytize.

  29. A few have mentioned this, but I can speak from firsthand experience that not all Baptists or Evangelicals are fundy or fundy lite. As a graduate of a Baptist General Conference seminary (MDiv, Bethel) and pastor of a Baptist General Conference church, neither of the seminary nor the church are remotely close to what I see posted on this site. While some of my classmates and colleagues are socially and theologically conservative, none of them are guilty of fundamentalist extremism or absolutism. Strangely, the BGC is home to two pastors who in some ways couldn’t be more diametrically opposed: John Piper (Calvinist to the core)and Greg Boyd (advocate for open theism). I’m not sure if has something to do with living in Minnesota or what, but much of what you have experienced is foreign to me. I know there are a few IFB churches in Rochester and those pastors want nothing to do with the Evangelical Pastors Fellowship along with the pastor of the GARB church, so they’re around, but thankfully their sphere of influence seems to be rather limited.

    And for the record, I agree the guy’s logic is faulty as is the exegesis of anyone who argues that the Bible prohibits drinking. I generally don’t drink because I don’t like the taste of beer or hard liquor, don’t want the calories and am just too cheap to spend the money on it. But I have never been offended by or condemned anyone I know for choosing to have a drink with dinner or a beer while playing golf and I’ll occasionally have a Smirnoff of some kind. Matters such as these fall under the heading of Christian liberty which historically been a Baptist hallmark.

    1. Hate to break it to you, but Piper is a fundy. He may seem all nice and reformed (and deceived me for a while on the way out of FundyLand), but scratch beneath the surface and he’s plenty fundy.

      1. John “I will not suffer a woman to give driving directions to a man, unless she does it in full submission” Piper definitely pings my fundy-meter.

      2. I still think there’s a difference between people who self-identify as fundamentalists and those who do not. I also see a difference in people who would be accepted on the campuses and in the pulpits at Fundy U and those who would not.

        Conservative evangelicals are similar to fundamentalists because both consider the Bible to be the infallible Word of God. I still hold to the fundamentals of the faith. But I can’t call myself a fundamentalist because they reject me over issues like standards, separation, and music.

      3. John Piper’s message to abused women is atrocious. I don’t care if he’s fundy or not, he’s a monster.

  30. My dear Pentecostal neighbor (truly a dear person!!) once said to me, about our other neighbors, “I don’t think they’re saved. I’ve seen them drinking beer at cookouts.”

    I suppressed the urge to respond, “Well, what else would you drink at cookouts?”

  31. You as a SBC youth pastor with an IFB background the things that trouble me are the negativity to which the pastoral role is looked upon. Yes there are those that to some extent abuse their authority, but I would have to say their number is quite small to those who take their role seriously. Whether it be IFB, SBC, Episcopal, Lutheran,etc., I believe the leadership should warn of the dangers of many topics. Granted I did not watch the above video, but I tell my Studentz all the time that they should not drink. It is true you can never be drunk if you never drink. I do back it up as a preference but is it not sound advice? The same goes for dating, you are less likely to engage in sex before marriage if you do not kiss before marriage. I do not criticize the Studentz who do kiss, or even admonish them. I feel as if we set the goal high, the ultimate goal will be achieved, Studentz who do not have to worry about many of the same dilemmas as their friends. I will no doubt be mocked but anyway, my two cents.

    1. But anytime the religious leadership suggests a “good” rule it becomes a hard and fast law. And if we keep this law then we will never break God’s law… and that is the very definition of legalism.
      I will return again to Lord Acton’s Axiom:
      “I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men with a favourable presumption that they did no wrong. If there is any presumption, it is the other way, against the holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or certainty of corruption by full authority. There is no worse heresy than the fact that the office sanctifies the holder of it.”

      In their zeal to watch over their “flock,” pastors often become the moral weatherman and chief moral enforcer. (see the movie “Footloose” as a pretty accurate portrayal of this) They use their authority to drive their personal agendas. Moreover they get very defensive about their positions and their power. They set themselves apart and only fellowship with other so-called “Pastors.” In the IFB particularly they are taught as preacher boys that they can’t fellowship with the common pew dwellers because familiarity breeds contempt and undermines the Pastoral authority.

      There may be humble men trying the best they know how out there but the position is the seductress and the temptation of power is always there. In the IFB and other Baptist flavors where there is a one man ruler the position draws men of questionable character and enables all sorts of abuse.
      So, no, I have no respect for the single man ruler Pastor position. and that’s my ¢2.

      1. Don, you absolutely nailed this:

        “…They use their authority to drive their personal agendas. Moreover they get very defensive about their positions and their power. They set themselves apart and only fellowship with other so-called “Pastors.” …”

        It’s this CEO mentality. They fight for their positions and power, kind of like King Saul.

    2. “I feel as if we set the goal high, the ultimate goal will be achieved,”

      You didn’t set the goal high for us….

      “I will no doubt be mocked but anyway, my two cents.”

    3. “I feel as if we set the goal high, the ultimate goal will be achieved.”

      The problem comes when you set your standard “higher” than God’s. Such rules are unlivable, not biblically defensible, and inevitably get ratcheted tighter. Perhaps God said “don’t get drunk and lose control” rather than “abstain from all alcohol” for good reasons. He certainly could have said the other.

      The narrow way has ditches on *both* sides. If your goal is only to stay as far away from one ditch as you can, beware lest you fall into the other one.

  33. First time commenting on sfl. I pastor a nondenominational church that I suppose many on here would stereotype as fundy, but we are not. I grew up in fundy circles like many of you … cut from the Springfield, MO cloth. Thankfully, the Lord used a gentle pastor during my youth ministry days to help me see that the body of Christ is much bigger than what I was taught. My church partners with a plethora of churches and believers. One word of caution as we attempt to live by grace — I believe that sometimes, myself included, we can be legalistic about not being legalistic. We can be easily offended by someone who really shouldn’t ruffle our feathers anymore. You know how these guys think and the attention we give them (Yes, they read these blogs) fuels their unbiblical and legalistic teachings.
    Grace and Peace

    1. I hear you. I attend a church that could be described that way. The problem is usually one of jargon. People hear words or combinations of words and the meaning they hear takes them back to an abuse or misrepresentation of those words. Someone without a connection to a history of fundamentalism and its idiosyncrasies may use terminology that sounds fundy, but is not always meant in the same way.

      At times here on SFL there is a bit of broad brushing, even in the comments on this post regarding ALL Baptist churches, ALL SBC churches, or ALL evangelical churches. There certainly are plenty of similarities, but each church really has to be evaluated on its own merit.

      I have found a church that is remarkably familiar even in some of the ways that remind me of my fundy upbringing, but the leadership and the people are shockingly gracious and loving, their theology exudes balanced and tactful tension, and their approach to christian living is one of grace and acceptance, encouragement and safety. Its not common, but it is out there. I understand why some people struggle to trust and need something altogether alien to their background in order to heal and grow and feel safe, but it can be done in an evangelical setting, probably even in a Baptist one somewhere. I am doing those things in a place that works for me and that is enough.

    2. For those of us who are reeling with hurt from our church that we’re still half believing is a good church so the problem must be me, the words of this forum is so necessary. This forum helped me get out of an abusive IFB church, helped me form relationships, and helped me to heal. Of course there are people who are incapable of learning and won’t be helped by a forum like this, but there are many who need this encouragement.

  34. The difference between the IFB and the SBC seems to be one of degree rather than substance. The SBC will sing PW songs, read other versions and seems looser after you leave the IFB movement. However, much of what they teach is exactly the same.

  36. DISCLAIMER: unrelated to post

    Darrell, I keep getting an invalid username message when I try to log into the forum. And apparently I can’t copy the Captcha code properly in order to notify you privately. 😳

    Should I re-register? 😕 Or just be patient?

    Sorry for hijack.

    1. Obviously the result of unconfessed sin in your heart. Why don’t you please come forward to this altar so the Holy Server can move without hinderance.

    2. This sort of nonsense is why I never post on the forum. Clearly it is possessed by the devil!

  38. I’m SBC. And I will agree with those who say different SBC churches can be way different from other SBC churches, and some are far removed from Fundy. I have never heard of an SBC church pressuring their young people to go to Bible college. The seminaries run by the SBC are accredited. The SBC disaster relief teams in the United States provide disaster relief in major disasters second only to the American Red Cross – and my church is involved in that.
    Other than that, my pastor has made it a point to say drinking is not a sin, getting drunk is – and that’s the position most SB pastors I’ve known take. Also, most SB’s I’ve known do NOT think that other people of other denominations are “less Christian” because they are not Baptist!
    But it did take me a LONG time to trust the SB’s because I was abused in a pretty fundamentalist SB church by the pastor. And I do get EXTREMELY aggravated by the view of women taken by some SB leaders. So it is a mixed group.

  39. This is great day!!!! Having wondered for years who it is that drinks responsibly as the beer ads make such an effort to encourage. Now I know. Its Christians!!!

    Those wonderful people know we dont want to be drunk so they remind us to be careful.

    Boy there IS a good side of bad and the down side of up and everything between.

    1. You likely need to enlarge your social borders. I know many people, both Christian & non, who drink responsibly.

      1. Agreed. I know more people who drink responsibly than I know fundies who handle scripture responsibly…

  40. I think his “friend” was a yellow bellied coward for telling the “young man” to tell the other pastor he was horrible.

  41. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. His dad (who’s preaching style Brad has down very well) was essentially forced from his church about 7 years ago when the deacons and leadership found out he was plagiarizing his sermons and illustrations word for word from popular SBC preachers of the day. Wouldn’t be surprised if this illustration hasn’t been “borrowed” from a friend or embellished “just a bit” to make a point.

  42. Fundy preaching technique: where no real biblical authority exists for your point, create a dramatic anecdote that involves death and destruction for someone who transgresses your unbiblical pet peeve.

  43. I finally got around to watching the video (part of it) and this is what struck me: Person A wanted Person B to go tell Person C that Person C was a coward. Um, isn’t Person A also a coward given that he wasn’t willing to deliver the message personally?

    It was amusing to see the man stop after he said what apparently was a joke. All it reminded me of was the pauses in sitcoms for the laugh track.

  44. And I can’t log into the forum this morning. I was in yesterday. I think Deacon’s Son is right, the forum is possessed.

    1. “Obviously the result of unconfessed sin in your heart. Why don’t you please come forward to this altar so the Holy Server can move without hinderance.”

      How very fundy of you, Scorpio. 😉 When other people can’t log in it’s sin in their hearts; when you can’t, it’s persecution. Love it!

      1. Dear semp:

        If we do, will you be like Jesus and serve us real wine?

        Christian Socialist

        1. Dear CS,

          I have merlot, chardonnay, and zin. Which would you prefer? I also have some strawberry ale, apple ale, and vodka, if you prefer. Or I could just get you some grape juice (store brand, naturally).

          Prosit!
          Semp

      3. I lost my salvation in the forum. There is no hope for me, so I’ve given up and returned to the pub.

        1. I think I did too. Can’t get in this morning. Save a seat for me at the pub and order me a Fat Tire.

        4. Since the pilot is delayed, I think I’m going to see if I can’t get up to the cockpit & see if I can’t take this bird for a whirl!

  45. Dear SFL Reader:

    I wonder if anyone in that congregation has the courage to look this pastor in the eye and tell him that he is a manipulative jerk …

    Christian Socialist

  48. Several years back I heard a Calvary Chapel pastor on the radio spend almost half of his airtime railing against the evils of even a good Chianti with your favorite pasta and pasta sauce.

    1. The image of the grossly fat preacher railing from the pulpit about some (usually sexual) sin is so common because it has a firm basis in reality.

      That said, I suspect one of the enablers are those Baptist Church Potlucks. They like to eat hearty in the Former Confederate States, even after they’ve hit middle-age spread years. And when you’ve hit middle age and keep going for fourth and fifth helpings at those potlucks, there can be only one result.

  50. Study from Purdue about the eating habits and averge BMI of different religions. IFB are the fattest and in the worst shape.

Comments are closed.