Comments on: So… who is DMD referring to? https://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/ fundamentalism by blunt instrument Thu, 24 Nov 2011 01:39:21 +0000 hourly 1 By: ox https://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/comment-page-1/#comment-16536 Thu, 24 Nov 2011 01:39:21 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/#comment-16536 Note: several comments in this thread have been deleted at the commenter’s request. He has a good reason for the request, totally unrelated to the thread in question. I am happy to oblige him.

]]>
By: ox https://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/comment-page-1/#comment-3464 Wed, 27 May 2009 23:47:57 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/#comment-3464 Hi Gathan…

Relax, friend!

I know what you mean, but just pointing out that the things Dever advocates are not news to fundamentalism. The way some speak of his work it is as if we got a new tablet from the mount. I am not saying that is what you were advocating, but pointing out that the fundamentalism I know has taught these things for years.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

]]>
By: ox https://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/comment-page-1/#comment-3454 Wed, 27 May 2009 15:29:02 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/#comment-3454 We don’t just let their names drop off a list. There is a process, but we don’t submit it to a congregational vote either. The leadership issues letters of notice of change of status and appeals for repentance. We don’t believe a clear cut objective rule requires a congregational vote when it is violated.

The point is, however, that fundamentalists practice discipline on this matter and have done so for a long time. Is there Scripture that says we must practice it exactly the way Dever does? Has 9 Marks become inspired somehow? Don’t think so. But to say that fundamentalists don’t practice discipline on this point is just not correct.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

]]>
By: Kent https://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/comment-page-1/#comment-3452 Wed, 27 May 2009 14:30:55 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/#comment-3452 Nathan,

LOL on the smack down reference. I’ve never been a WWF, but it really is just a figure of speech in this case (as you took it, signified by the emoticon).

I’d be glad to give Mark Dever credit where credit is due. However, my first sermon in Oct 1987, when our church started was expositional and that began my first ever series, through John. Sunday evening I was doing Ecclesiastes. I’m in the process of finishing the NT right now with a series through Luke. I’m in chapter 6. I did not know Dever or Piper. I had heard of MacArthur and he was a contributor to my understanding of expositional preaching—did you notice I gave him some props in my above comment.

On church discipline, we practice it consistently and been criticized for it roundly by other churches (fundamentalist and evangelical ones). We also discipline for lack of church attendance (1 John 2:19). You can’t be a card carrying member, that’s not one of the privileges of membership. I’m happy for whatever Dever does right and I’m glad to mention it. I’ve said I agree with all his nine marks. We were already doing those before I ever heard of Dever. He did get them from scripture. I wrote a post saying Dever doesn’t do enough—separation. He does great damage in a number of ways. He point blank told Minnick that he stayed in the SBC to preserve money and buildings. He should exposit Matthew 6:19-34 sometime. These are all the things that the Gentiles seek. You can tell he’s sensitive about the separation criticism. I think because he is converted.

I believe that what was done to Sweatt was a smack-down. I would expect the same of conservative evangelicals. I really was wanting something with names in it that goes after Piper’s wrong beliefs and practices, Mohler’s wrong beliefs and practices, MacArthur’s wrong beliefs and practices. I want a scholarly work against Christian hedonism. I’m planning on writing against it soon. I think he misrepresents Jonathan Edwards too. We’re not in fellowship with these guys for a reason. It isn’t because we don’t love them, Nathan. I love them. They are dangerous though, among other things because the doctrine of separation is so tied into pleasing our God.

Where do you get your strong vibes about me?

]]>
By: ox https://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/comment-page-1/#comment-3451 Wed, 27 May 2009 04:48:15 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/#comment-3451 Hey, Nathan, you should listen to my sermon from last Sunday afternoon, where I reference the WWF as an illustration.

Anyway, re Dever… of the lot of the CEs, I would say that Dever and MacA have the most to offer. And you note some of the key problems. Add Acts 29 to that. But when I read 9 Marks, I thought… this is exactly what I learned in preacher boys at BJU. It was nothing new. When I see young fellows praise him as if its something new, its one of the things that makes me wonder about what is going on in the colleges.

And we have had automatic removal for non-attendance for 20+ years. I didn’t come up with the idea, I borrowed it from somewhere else. Of course, since it was so long ago, I have no idea where I got it from.

Anyway… We can see if Kent wants to add anything. He usually isn’t shy about expressing his point of view!

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

]]>
By: ox https://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/comment-page-1/#comment-3449 Tue, 26 May 2009 19:42:44 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/#comment-3449 In reply to Kent.

Kent, remember, it is always ‘nuanced’.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

]]>
By: ox https://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/comment-page-1/#comment-3448 Tue, 26 May 2009 19:40:09 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/#comment-3448 In reply to Dave.

Thanks for the reply, Dave. I appreciate the clarification.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

]]>
By: Kent https://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/comment-page-1/#comment-3447 Tue, 26 May 2009 18:24:10 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/#comment-3447 My perception is that fundamentalism isn’t coming out very strong against conservative evangelicals and is not showing the difference between them and us. They are more concerned with the Dan Sweatt branch of their own group. I think they want the perception that they’re fair ‘cuz look, we’re pounding on these guys, see the balance.’ I’m not saying, however, that I don’t think some pounding shouldn’t occur. I, like many within fundamentalism, think that the Hyles, SOTL and many of the hybrid spin-offs are worse than John MacArthur. I think this might be why new groups form with new names—for the purpose of differentiating. But I do believe that the conservative evangelicals are MORE DANGEROUS to fundamentalism than the Hyles etc. group. Don understands that. I don’t know if Dave sees it that way. My perception is that he doesn’t. I think that is noteworthy. It looks like it is Don’s perception too.

I think this is what set Danny Sweatt off as well. He just wasn’t able to express it in a persuasive manner, that is, some exposition with good application. I noticed on his site that he preaches expositionally—doing a series through Revelation—but he didn’t get that done at an FBF meeting. What he did do was akin to what would often be done at FBF meetings in the past. Of course, he didn’t know he’d be linked to all over the world and I noticed something like 1500 downloads at sermon audio.

I’m waiting for some strong smacking down of John Piper and John MacArthur and Mark Dever from the fundamentalists. I’ll hold my breath. I don’t think it will happen. Nathan, could you direct me to some conference download where there was a strong put-down of the conservative evangelicals? I would like to listen to that.

]]>
By: Dave https://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/comment-page-1/#comment-3444 Tue, 26 May 2009 16:48:20 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/#comment-3444 Yes, I think the term pseudo-fundamentalism was a legitimate description. For the record, I am pretty sure it was Rod Bell who coined the term and others picked it up. It became popular at that time, yet never reached a level of clarity that the self-identifying moniker “new evangelicalism” did. Others preferred the term neo fundamentalism, but that actually got tossed back and forth (i.e., used by both sides toward the other).

I didn’t link because I don’t believe there is an argument to be checked out. You did not qualify your answer; you gave the reasons for it. So, unless you’re suggesting that your reasons actually serve as qualifications (that is, turning your “no” into a “yes and no” answer), then there is no point in going back and forth. You’re arguing against something I didn’t say (by your own admission) and something that I don’t do (and Nathan has provided eyewitness testimony to that).

]]>
By: ox https://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/comment-page-1/#comment-3442 Tue, 26 May 2009 16:36:40 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2009/05/25/so-who-is-dmd-referring-to/#comment-3442 Hi Nathan

Well, I guess we will have to just stand in disagreement then. No problem. I am glad for the interaction and your willingness to stick at it with me. I am glad Dave chimed in. I think our positions are different, but I don’t know what else we can say to make the distinctions clearer.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

]]>