Entries Tagged 'Doran' ↓

Dave points out some of the difficulties we have in dealing with the doctrine of separation. I agree with him about the complexities we face. Separation decisions aren’t easy.

His ‘case study’ is the recent conference in Powell, TN, the International Baptist Friends Conference. His view is that it is unacceptable to enter into ministry partnership with a church and pastor from Hammond, IN. In the main, I agree with this point.

In discussing the topic, Dave says this:

My guess is that plenty of people in the FBF are prepared to overlook it. It is clear that speaking for the Pastors School in Hammond doesn’t get one excluded from Bible Conferences or have churches refuse to host your music seminars. And that reality raises the point that needs to be discussed and illustrates something that I’ve been saying for at least a couple of years now—what ripple ramifications should this have for my fellowship?

Well, that is a good question. What should our relationship be with those who don’t see Hammond as such a problem as I do (or as Dave does)?

Continue reading →

Dave said (here and here):

Restore the local assembly to the center where God intended it to be. When your local assembly engages in Great Commission work outside its walls, find some folks you agree with and get busy doing it. Unity is built on agreement about the truth, not by politics. Few things are as political as trying to preserve movements once they have fragmented theologically.

Would that it were so simple. But it is not that simple. In the words of John Donne,

No man is an island entire of itself…

And certainly the pastor and church in question is no island, entire unto themselves. If we were talking about a small church in a small community it might be that simple, but … probably not.

Everyone influences someone else. That’s why our private decisions are important. They have influence on someone.

Continue reading →

Within fundamentalism, ongoing discussion of our views and practices inevitably leads to a discussion of worldliness. Traditionally fundamentalism has called for a separation not only from false teachers and modernism but also for a separation from the world. Fundamentalism has spoken out against an attitude of worldliness developing in the church.

In Dave Doran’s recent presentations concerning separation, he touched on the area of worldliness, some of which I objected to earlier. He continues this discussion by putting into writing a good deal of the material he covered in the presentations. This article deals with worldliness.

Dave starts off with a reasonable definition of worldliness:

Worldliness is having a heart and mind shaped by the world’s beliefs and values so that we engage in its sinful pleasures and pursue earthly treasures.

So far, so good. You can read any number of articles on worldliness and come up with similar definitions.

But it is the expansion of this definition that I find … what? Curious? Unusual? Discordant? Troubling? Perhaps all of the above…

Continue reading →

In response to the recent MACP presentation on separation, I posted some questions. Today, I’d like to post a few objections. That is not to say I object to the basic concepts concerning separation as presented, I thought that was quite helpful. But I do have some objections to particulars and I think they should be noted.

Continue reading →

Since Dave Doran’s blog has no comments and he sometimes comments here, I thought I’d ask some questions.

I have listened to the audio of his first two presentations at the recent Mid-America Conference on Preaching. I have to say that in general I am in agreement with what he is teaching about ecclesiastical separation. We may differ on some points of application, but as to philosophy, biblical grounds and motivation, I think Dave has it basically right. (I am sure he is relieved to know I think so!) I would encourage anyone to listen to the audio for their own instruction.

But I do have some questions:

Continue reading →

Dave Doran gives us more concerning the fragmentation and death of the fundamentalist movement as such. There is a good deal of truth to his observations concerning the lack of unifying goals and the center of biblical focus for Christian unity and ministry.

He concludes:

The center of God’s will for this dispensation is in the local church (1 Tim 3:15). That’s where the unity of the Spirit is to be preserved in the bond of peace (Eph 4:3). The local church has been charged with the task of carrying out the Great Commission (since baptizing is an ordinance of the church). The movement that ought to matter most to us is one that aims to plant churches that will reproduce in every place where the name of Christ has not been named, and that movement must spring from local churches in order to be biblical. Sign me up for that movement.

I once met a preacher who told me that he wasn’t much for going to conferences and getting known. He just preferred to stay home and “hoe corn” (he pastored in the Midwest).

So in light of this non-movement movement sentiment, I wonders:

Continue reading →

Our friend Dave references “a blogger” who answered his question regarding appreciating Piper without having one’s fundamentalist convictions questioned. That blogger, according to Dave, answered the question:

Here’s his answer: “So I would answer the question, No.”

He carries on discussing this as if that is all there is to the answer. He never links to the unnamed blogger so that you can read the context and judge for yourself if DMD is representing him fairly (bad netiquette, Dave).

As you know, it is possible that Dave could be referring to my answer given on this site. We don’t know for sure, because the quoted portion above isn’t exactly like my answer.

However,  Dave does offer a quote from the comments section that is word for word from my comments:

And I really think it may be unbelievable because in the comment section that follows, the same man writes, “Well, I am not saying don’t appreciate the good that such men do, although we may debate what is good and what isn’t.”

So … let’s make these points:

1. It really isn’t legitimate to attack another blog without providing links so that readers can evaluate context.
2. It has never been my position that it is wrong to use or appreciate the work of men with whom I would not join in ministry partnership with.
3. My complaint on this point is that so-called fundamentalist educators, pastors, leaders have been guilty in recent years of unreserved enthusiasm for men with serious ministry flaws. My answer to Dave’s question wasn’t a bare “No” as he suggests. I gave reasons for it which he conveniently ignores.

I’d be interested if Dave would have the courtesy to deal with the entire argument, not misrepresent what was said for his own purposes.

I’m not going to make my blogging simply a point-counterpoint with Dave Doran, but he asks an important question today that does get to part of the current controversies roiling Fundamentalism.

Is it possible to appreciate this man’s [Piper's] heart for the Word, expository preaching, people’s souls, and God’s glory without being questioned about one’s fundamentalist convictions?

I think the answer is no, given Piper’s notable errors on matters that are fundamentalist convictions. Continue reading →

A friend of mine recently gave me a set of CDs containing the messages from the 2007 Mid-America Conference on Preaching, a conference hosted every year at Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary.

Unfortunately, none of the sessions from the 2007 conference appear to be available on-line, but I would encourage you to seek out a copy for yourself. In particular, I would like to draw your attention to a workshop by Dave Doran on this subject:

Conservative Evangelicals and Fundamentalists:

Recognizing the Differences

I have been critical of Dave for his message this summer at the FBF. If he had presented the material in this workshop at the FBF meeting, there would have been nothing to criticize.

I am going to include a few clips below. Dave’s presentation on this occasion was extremely clear and helpful. What mystifies me is how he can be so clear on some occasions and so confusing on others.

Be that as it may, I want to give you a summary of Dave’s presentation, taken directly from the accompanying pdf notes file that must have been included at the workshop itself.

Continue reading →

In the comments to my ‘still no middle ground’ post, I made this comment to Dave Doran:

When Dever posted his response on 9marks to the Minnick interview, your answer (very early in the thread) was excellent. But on the other hand, you have said other things at other venues that seem disconnected with fundamentalist philosophy. Here I am thinking specifically of your recent message at the FBF conference and your speaking at a church in the “MacArthur orbit” not too long ago.

In response, Dave said this:

I’d be interested to hear what your concerns about the FBF message are. … I suppose I should say, I am interested in your concerns, but not likely to engage in much discussion over them simply because I am trying to cut back on blog discussions currently. So, please do offer your assessment and I will attempt to listen carefully, just probably won’t respond lest I find myself in a long discussion.

Well folks, I am not sure of the wisdom of publishing this commentary. This could too easily be construed as a personal attack. My focus is on what Dave said and what it seems to convey about the directions fundamentalist leaders are taking (i.e., mostly inaction while the younger set speculate about the future of fundamentalism).

So at the outset, let me offer my appreciation to Dave for requesting a more detailed assessment. I am not planning an extended discussion of this beyond this post. As Dave mentioned, understanding our busy schedules and the need to minimize some of the blog activity, I will let his response stand as is though I may add a point or two if absolute clarity is needed.

Continue reading →