Only the Epistles...

...is this a common teaching in IFB circles?

Not in the circles that I am associated with. I'd say this pastor is an isolated incident. Most of the my IFB preacher friends preach extensively from the Old Testament and the Gospels. I recently finished a series of messages from the Book of Judges myself.

 

What a an awful and ignorant thing to say. What ever happened to preahing the whole counsel of God? And Paul preached pretty much from the OT being that was all he had!

If one passes over the OT he is missing a great deal of biblical truth. Currently I am taking some classes to enhance my ministry (harder than I thought to juggle between my deputation schedule and study ). One of them is an OT class and it has been such a blessing though much of the material is repeat for me.

 

If you are looking for examples of how to run your church, the epistles should be the first stop, and they should be given plenty of weight.

But there is plenty of very applicable Biblical truth in the OT and the Gospels, I mean, really the Gospels give us who Christ is, and the OT points to the event that was his incarnation with huge neon arrows. It is all meant for our edification, even the parts that are not specifically written to us.

I guess that gentleman's position would be some form of hyper-dispensationalism, but I am not personally familiar with any IFB preachers who either hold to that position or practice exclusion of certain portions of scripture as irrelevant, that is a slippery slope for sure.

 

For whatsoever was written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.
(Romans 15:4)

"...was written...for our learning..."

Myself, I can't see where this guy is coming from.
It is God's word-from Genesis to Revelation.

 

That pastor does sound like a hyper-dispensationalist. I have not found that to be a common view among IFBs. I certainly HOPE it is the exception.

 

God bless all of you. I couldn't agree more.

Like 4His, this reeks of ignorance. I'm not familiar with hyperdispensationalism, but if this is an example of it, well ... I suppose there's no area Satan has not taken advantage of, when offered the space.

Imagine the shallowness of the NT, as wonderful as it is, without the OLD.

 

I've read about hyper-dispensationalism, and read a few who supported it, but have never run across a "real live" hyper-dispensationalist. E. W. Bullinger is probably the one name most frequently associated with the idea. Some of them (but not all) believe the church did not start until Acts 28. I doubt it is very widespread in IFB churches.

To read more: Ironside addresses it in his "Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth"; David Cloud has an article here - http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/bewareof-hyperdisp.html

According to Cloud some of the characteristics are:
</font>

• The four Gospels are entirely Jewish and contain no direct teaching for the churches.</font>
• The book of Acts is largely Jewish.</font>
• Only Paul’s writings are for the church today.</font>
• The gospel preached by Peter in the early part of the book of Acts is different from the gospel preached by Paul.</font>

Of course, all hyper-dispensationalists do not agree on all points.

 

Not in my church and we are IFB

 

The four Gospels are entirely Jewish and contain no direct teaching for the churches.
The book of Acts is largely Jewish.
Only Paul’s writings are for the church today.
The gospel preached by Peter in the early part of the book of Acts is different from the gospel preached by Paul.

I think I have had discussions on this board with some who hold at least some of these views.

 

Isn't this the largely held "Church of Christ" view as well?

My dentist is a Church of Christ man, and while he works on my teeth, he asks about my sermon last week all the time. Most of the time, he'll say things like, "that wasn't written for us...it was written for the Jews."

 

Wasn't it the Apostle Paul who said something like

"I have not failed to declare unto you the whole council of God."????

And then the Apostle Paul tells Timothy to "Preach the word"----How was Tim suppose to preach the word if the word was only the epistles which were still on the mind of God at the time??

Men--we are to preach the "whole council" of God---where does it start??

Genesis 1:1

Where does it end??

Revelation 22:21

Blackbird

 

"that wasn't written for us...it was written for the Jews."

He'd be right if he changed one little word, for to to and I could agree. Of course it has also been said that if my aunt had different body parts, she'd be my uncle.

Much of the OT was written specifically to the Jews, of course, two letters to Timothy were written TO him as well, not FOR us. The epistles were written to real live first century churches, not written allegorically to the beleivers of the Church age. That doesnt mean that the principles are not meant for us to adopt. The Epistles have to be interpreted properly because they were not written TO my church, but that gives them more breadth of application, not less. Same thing with the OT. You have to be careful, but the truth applies still.

 

Well said.