Pastor Joel Webbin critiques Independent Fundamental Baptists for rejecting church history, creeds, and ecumenical councils while clinging to a narrow Sola Scriptura interpretation that dismisses fallible but authoritative sources like Augustine and Calvin. He argues their focus on cultural battles against artists overshadows urgent civil issues like election integrity and Marxism, labeling their isolationism akin to Tolkien's dwarves trapped in mines. Although he distinguishes Calvinism as a vital framework rather than the gospel itself, Webbin urges unity among Christians facing existential threats, warning that internal division hinders the broader battle against spiritual dangers. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
Time
Text
Scripture Authority Beyond Alone00:10:59
All right, listen, guys, I get it.
Many of you are unable to financially support this ministry because you're spending your cash and your lives on raising young children in the fear and admonition of the Lord.
Praise God for you and that endeavor.
However, algorithms are a thing.
Shadow banning, sadly, is a thing.
And one major way that you can help to expand the reach and effectiveness of this ministry that doesn't cost you a dime is by spending just a few moments leaving us a five star review.
Also, perhaps even more effective than that, you can share our podcast with a friend.
We hope you'll take the time to do so.
Thank you so much.
God bless.
Question from Gian the Baptist I am IFB.
Okay.
So, independent fundamental Baptist.
Here we go.
But I greatly appreciate your ministry.
All right.
Well, didn't see that coming.
Out of curiosity, can you name one thing you like about that I like?
Wow, that's tough.
Okay.
One thing.
That you like about independent fundamental Baptist?
Also, what is the biggest problem?
That one's easier with independent fundamental Baptist.
In your opinion, God bless you, Pastor Joel Webbin.
You know what?
Again, I like you.
Thanks.
That was very charitable and very kind.
So, independent fundamental Baptist.
One thing that, let me start with what I don't like.
Okay.
For one, I do believe that independent, so I should set the record straight.
Independent.
Okay, here's the one thing I like.
So I'll start with that.
One thing I like is that they preach the gospel of Jesus Christ.
And they preach that we are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, and Christ alone, according to the scripture alone, to the glory of God alone.
So, an independent fundamental Baptist would be able to affirm, and they may not even be aware, many of them, because it gets into stuff I don't like.
They kind of poo poo all over church history and creeds and confessions and anything like that.
Independent fundamental Baptist is your quintessential.
No creed but Christ, right?
And then you ask the obvious follow up question Who is Christ?
Well, Christ is the only begotten Son of God, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary.
He has two natures He's fully God and fully man.
You know, He suffered under Pontius Pilate.
You just wrote a creed, dude, right?
So, you know, so it's silly, you know, like just give me the Bible, right?
It's like, okay, but so that we don't have to quote all 1,500 pages of the Bible every single time we tell someone what we believe.
Could we summarize any of this?
Could we say that the Bible holds to this doctrine and this doctrine?
And for the record, independent fundamental Baptists are not against doctrines, but they're not big fans of historic doctrines.
I don't think that they give the proper credence to church history.
For the record, sola scriptura, right?
Scripture alone.
So in the five solos, sola scriptura, I'm reformed, confessionally reformed, historically reformed.
And so I would affirm.
Of course, Sola Scriptura.
But what do we mean by Sola Scriptura?
We don't mean, let me start with that, we don't mean that Scripture is the only authority.
Because Scripture itself tells us there are other authorities.
So when we say Sola Scriptura, Scripture alone, we're not saying Scripture is the only authority.
We're saying that Scripture is the highest authority and the only infallible authority.
All other authorities err, meaning they're fallible, they make mistakes.
And so Scripture is the only infallible authority, and it is Of course, the highest authority, but there are inferior authorities that are still authorities, subservient authorities to Scripture that err because Scripture alone does not err.
Scripture alone is infallible, but these other lesser authorities are still important.
We believe in the authority of fathers.
We believe in the authority of the civil magistrate.
We believe in the authority of pastors.
And independent fundamental Baptists certainly believe in ecclesiastical authority today.
They just don't believe in yesterday's ecclesiastical authority.
So they believe in the authority of their local pastor, Jim, who has been alive for a robust 46 years and has been preaching for 12.
But they don't recognize much authority when it comes to St. Augustine.
Right, or Calvin, or you know, whatever, Zwingli, or Luther, you know, go down the line.
So, things that I don't like about, you know, what I do like is that they absolutely affirm the gospel of Jesus Christ and they preach it, and I think they preach it faithfully.
And I think a ton of people have been saved in the independent fundamental Baptist world.
And so, I thank God for that.
But the problem is, I think that they detach themselves too much from the larger witness of church history that God has placed us in.
God doesn't place us in a vacuum.
One of the things that I've learned.
Over the years, is this.
You read the book of Acts, right?
And a lot of people, let's get back to the book of Acts.
You know, charismatics want to get back to the book of Acts because they want all the spiritual gifts.
And independent fundamental Baptists, you know, want to get back to the book of Acts because they want, you know, the pure, you know, biblical doctrine that hasn't been perverted by, you know, saints throughout the ages and those kinds of things and ecumenical councils and creeds and synods.
And, you know, and so people want to get back to the book of Acts for different reasons.
I don't want to get back to the book of Acts.
I don't.
I don't believe that we as Christians today in 2022 are the lesser sons of former sires.
I don't believe that that is God's overarching redemptive plan throughout history.
I don't believe that we nailed it in the first century and it's all been downhill from there.
I believe that the church is growing and not just numerically but in its strength.
As God, in his providence and sovereignty, raises up heretics.
He uses that for the church to sharpen its doctrine.
For the first 500 years of church history, the church sharpened its doctrine on the hypostatic union, theology proper, really the first thousand years, if we're going to pan out and talk about theology proper at a larger level, not just the hypostatic union and the two natures of Christ, but understanding the Trinity, Trinitarian doctrine, and processions of the Spirit from the Father and the Son and these kinds of things.
This has been nailed out because of.
Heresy that caused the church to go back to the scripture and sharpen its doctrine of God for a thousand years.
We nailed out theology proper.
The next thousand years, I think what we've really been nailing out, the Reformation being a big piece of this 500 years ago, but what we really nailed out was the doctrine of justification by grace alone, through faith alone, and Christ alone, according to the scripture alone, to the glory of God alone.
So you've got first thousand years, theology proper, doctrine of God.
Then you've got the next thousand years, salvation.
Gospel with the emphasis on justification, justification by faith alone.
And I think that as the church continues to grow, both numerically but also in its theological rigor and strength, its resilience, I'm hoping that in the next thousand years, one of the things that we'll nail out is a theological, you know, political theology, a civil theology, theology applied, particularly to the civil realm.
Which some of this has been done already for us.
Protestant resistance theory, the Black Road Regiment, John Knox, Calvin's done some work on this.
Luther did some bad work on this.
I'm grateful for Luther and his work with the gospel.
You know, he got the ball rolling, but everyone is a product of their time.
Nobody's doing theology in a vacuum.
That's what I'm getting at.
We've all been placed by God in a particular time, amongst a particular people, in a particular place.
We don't do theology in a vacuum.
And I don't think it's a benefit to the church to reinvent the wheel and to start from scratch with the work of theology in each generation.
The way that we progress is by standing on the shoulders of giants and going beyond them, not because we're bigger and better and smarter and holier.
But because they pave the way for us so that we can simply stand on their shoulders and go further.
I think that that is a benefit.
I think when we discount what has already been done and we have to do it all ourselves from scratch, start at the beginning, I think we waste our lives.
I really do.
And so independent fundamental Baptists, I think, have a poor view of church history, a lack of appreciation.
Solo scriptura means that scripture is the only infallible authority, so church history is not infallible.
And it's the highest authority, which means church history is subservient to the authority of Scripture.
But that doesn't mean church history being a lesser authority and a fallible authority doesn't mean that it has no authority.
And it doesn't mean that it's not immensely helpful because it is immensely helpful.
So their view of creeds, councils, synods, church history that's a problem.
And then, of course, their view of Calvinism.
Independent fundamental Baptists hate Calvinism, and many of them, not all of them, But many of them would say that Calvinism is another gospel and a false gospel, a heresy.
So they would actually say that R.C. Sproul is a heretic.
John MacArthur is a heretic.
Joel Webbin is a heretic.
So I'm not a big fan of that.
Independent fundamental Baptists, right, are, which is why the question surprised me because of the charitable tone in the question.
Independent fundamental Baptists are typically known as the least charitable people on the planet.
They're the only people that have the truth.
Everybody else is a heretic.
And that kind of gets in the last thing that I don't like about them.
So, what do I like?
The gospel.
They get the gospel right.
But, last thing that I don't like about them is the view of church history, the view of Reformed theology, Calvinism.
And then, lastly, I would say pettiness is maybe the way to say it.
And what I mean by that is that your typical independent fundamental Baptist is going to start a YouTube channel or just be a pastor in his church of 50 people.
But whether it's from the pulpit, you know, on the Lord's Day, or whether it's from, you know, a microphone on a podcast, or whatever it is, in whatever public platform he has, he's going to spend his blood, sweat, and tears railing, just railing on Lauren Daigle and why she's not a Christian, or Chris Tomlin and why him partnering with Joyce Meyer means that we no longer can do any Chris Tomlin songs.
Calvinism Paramount For Gospel00:11:14
I don't do Chris Tomlin songs, never have, because they suck.
Not because he partnered with Joyce Meyer.
That is a problem.
Don't get me wrong.
But I don't do Chris Tomlin songs because, well, C.A. I appreciate church history.
So I do Psalms, the Bible, and then we also do tried and true, hundreds of years old hymns with good theology.
We don't really do new songs because most new songs stink.
I'm not convictionally against new songs because.
You can write a modern hymn that's good and use it.
But, anyways, all that being said, we live in a world that's mandating a poison to be injected in your kids to go to school.
That's right on the cusp of that.
Where we can't trust the integrity of our elections, where Arizona is counting ballots for a week, and the person who's running as a Democrat for governor is overseeing the election process, right?
Where we're going to have energy crises globally, globally, where we have people who are putting forth propaganda for Ukraine as though it's not the money bag of the West,
but this incredibly noble and virtuous country with virtuous leaders, and that are trying to basically get us into a third world war, a nuclear war with China.
And the threats that it poses, and all these different sanctions, and the way it affects trade, with communism, with Marxism, with critical race theory, with tyranny and locking down churches because of COVID.
And you think the biggest issue is Lauren Daigle.
I just think that's dumb.
I think you're dumb.
And I think you're making other Christians dumb.
I don't think you're helping.
I don't.
Now, hear me.
I've talked about those things, right?
So, Justin Peters, discernment minister, right?
That would kind of be the category of what he does in his ministry.
He is first and foremost, by his own admission, an expositional preacher of God's word and an evangelist.
He's not a local pastor, but an evangelist, and that's a legitimate biblical category.
He travels to churches and he expositionally preaches God's word.
But he spends a lot of time also as a discernment minister dealing with false teachers, primarily in the prosperity gospel group.
And I think that that's permissible.
I think that we do need guys like that.
And I've had Justin Peters on my show and I've done episodes like that.
And they're the most popular episodes, bar none.
If I want to get a ton of views, today's episode will not get a ton of views.
It won't.
It'll get 1.5 thousand views.
I can call it right now 1.5 thousand views.
Praise God for 1,500 people who are listening to the truth of God's word.
I'm not frowning on that, but I'm just saying if I wanted to get 100,000 views, then I can get Justin Peters on the show and we can talk about Benny Hinn.
That's just the way it goes.
You guys know that's the way it goes.
But my point is, I think talking about the questions that you guys are asking, which is why I appreciate these Mondays, because you ask good questions.
You do.
The question that we just did about the state and marriage and codifying Obergefell into law with the Disrespect Marriage Act, I think that's a more important question.
I do.
Now, don't get me wrong, the prosperity gospel is a false gospel and it leads millions of people to hell.
So it matters.
It absolutely matters.
So praise God for Justin Peters.
Seriously.
But I think when an entire denomination that won't call itself a denomination, but is, when an entire group that's one of the primary focuses of all of them.
See, the difference is with us within the Reformed world, yeah, we've got a couple Justin Peters, and we love our Justin Peters.
We thank God for them.
And they specialize in a particular area because it matters, because, like I said already, The prosperity gospel is a false gospel and it sends millions of people to hell.
But that's not what everybody, every reform pastor is doing.
Right, we've got our Justin Peters, but then we also have our Jeff Durbins and our John MacArthur's and our Doug Wilson's and our Joel Webbins, and you know what I mean?
And so it's not like everybody, um, in perfect sync with one another, are just doing episode after episode after episode on Stephen Furtick.
Yeah, I think Stephen Furtick's a heretic, Stephen Furtick is not helpful, he is harmful, actually, and people need to be aware.
Um, but people also really need to be aware of.
Of what's going on in other areas, not just in false churches.
People don't only need to be aware.
It can be less, but certainly more awareness.
They can't only be aware of the problems of mega churches that are not actually true churches.
People also need to be aware of the civil realm.
And I think the reform guys are doing a good job talking about theology applied to the civil realm, politics.
Now, not all the Reformed guys, because we also have a wing of the Reformed Church that they're brothers.
They're just wrong, but they're pietists.
They're radical two kingdom guys and basically don't think that Christians should be involved in the political sphere whatsoever.
So, you know, we've got our faults as well.
But, anyways, to answer your question, what's one thing I like about the independent fundamental Baptists?
They get the gospel right.
Now, you know, you might be saying, well, how did they get the gospel right if they're not Calvinists?
Well, okay, that's a doozy, but here's the short version.
Charles Spurgeon once said that Calvinism is the gospel.
Calvinism is the gospel.
And I don't often disagree with Spurgeon, but I will in this case.
I don't believe that Calvinism is the gospel.
I believe that Calvinism is the faithful, accurate, most helpful, most true biblical theological framework for presenting the gospel.
But I do believe that you can present a true gospel that is sufficient to save if the Spirit gives faith.
And regenerates the heart along with the preaching of that gospel, you can preach a sufficient gospel and a true gospel that saves without being a Calvinist.
You can do that as a provisionist, Leighton Flowers, right?
I disagree with Leighton on a lot of things, but Leighton Flowers, I do believe, preaches a true gospel.
Now, there are some moments in some of his videos and stuff, and I'm like, ah, that's getting really Pelagian, far more for my taste.
It sounds more Pelagian than it sounds Pelagian.
Provisionist, you know, and he would say, Joel, you're ignorant, and maybe he's right.
I'll say this, though, about Leighton, right?
And this might get me in trouble because I'm friends with, you know, James White and Jeff Durbin, guys who don't like Leighton.
But when my son was in the hospital for three days, struggling to breathe, Leighton Flowers texted me and said that his family, in their family worship time, prayed for my son's healing.
I don't know what to do with that except for say, thank you, Leighton.
So, anyways, I do believe that Leighton Flowers is a brother.
I think he's a wrong brother at times and more often than I would like.
I think he's an unhelpful brother, but I do think he's a brother in Christ.
So, my point is, I would disagree with Spurgeon.
I don't think Calvinism is the gospel.
I think Calvinism is vital.
I think it's vital.
But I think it's the correct framework for holding the gospel on the backdrop of the depravity of man.
And I would say total depravity means total inability.
That's where me and Leighton would disagree.
But the total depravity and inability of man, that not only will he not come, it's not that he just won't come to Christ, but he cannot.
He cannot.
A man can't even see the kingdom of heaven, much less enter it, unless he first be born again.
Regeneration precedes faith.
Regeneration precedes faith, right?
That's the crux of Reformed theology.
And so that's something that Leighton and I would disagree on.
So I think my point is Calvinism, Reformed theology, I think is paramount for presenting the gospel.
It's the correct theological framework for holding this precious diamond of the gospel.
But I'm not willing to go so far as to say Calvinism is the gospel itself.
Because essentially, the logical implication of that statement is that if anyone is not a Calvinist, they don't have the gospel.
And Calvinism is important.
It's incredibly important.
I would say, out of secondary issues, theological triage, in the secondary rung, because people aren't aware of it, they think primary, secondary, tertiary.
What you need to know is that in each of these categories, tertiary and primary, and secondary especially, there are multiple shelves within them.
So, I would say in the secondary category, Calvinism versus Arminianism is higher than Credo versus Pado Baptism.
But Credo versus Pado Baptism is not tertiary and it's not primary, it's secondary.
And Calvinism versus Arminianism is not primary, it also is secondary.
And yet, even within the second, both being in the second category, secondary category, there are different rungs.
Think of it as like a ladder.
There's the top of the ladder, the middle of the ladder, the bottom of the ladder, but multiple rungs in each of these three sections.
And so, I think there are some secondary matters that are more important than other, still secondary, but lesser secondary matters, if that makes sense.
Calvinism, I think, is the top rung, Reformed theology, the top rung, but of the secondary theological category, if that makes sense.
I won't put it in the primary.
I won't, because, you know, love me or hate me for saying that, I just understand the logical implications and biblical implications of doing that.
And I don't think that it's true to say Calvinism is the gospel and therefore primary, and therefore anybody who's not a Calvinist is going to hell.
So, all that being said, my point is simply that are we still talking about independent fundamental Baptists?
Supposed to be, Nathan?
My point is there's a lot to talk about.
And I think independent fundamental Baptists are pigeonholed and truncated and narrow.
Independent Baptists Like Dwarves00:01:16
And Sadly, I don't think they're going to help us fight.
You know what?
I'll get in trouble with that.
I think independent fundamental Baptists are like the dwarves in Tolkien's Middle Earth.
They, you know, they do some good work down in the mines, you know, but the dwarves are for the dwarves.
They, you know, it's just like out here, like we're fighting Sauron, you know, the battle for Middle Earth.
Everything, you know, is threatened to implode and fall apart and be utterly and completely destroyed.
And, you know, we still got our problems too, but, you know, men are teaming up with elves and, you know, and elves are teaming up with men and we've got, you know, this going on and that going on.
And we can't get the dwarves to come out of the mountain.
And they're not bad guys.
They're not bad guys.
They're just not always helpful guys.
They just, they've got their head in the dark, in the mountain, you know, mining for that, you know, false teacher, Stephen Furtick Gold.
Thanks so much for listening.
But, real quick, before you go, do us a small favor, take a moment and leave us a five star review if you enjoyed the show.
This is undoubtedly the best way that you can help us get this biblically faithful content to as many people as possible.