You are here: Home / Archives for Issues / Separation
by on 11.2.09

lost in the woods

There’s something right and something wrong about the "compass and map" analogy. The purpose of the analogy is to teach us that it is more important to have the right philosophy and direction (spiritual discernment) internally rather than depend upon uncertain and changeable labels that might be attached to various individuals in the ecclesiastical world.

I think we can agree with the point being made to this extent: it is vital that men in the ministry develop their spiritual discernment so that they can wisely guard the flocks the Lord gives them. This includes making decisions about who you might enter into ministry partnership with and who you might recommend as a resource to your people, or why you might give various levels of cautions concerning some resources.

Likewise, men in the ministry need to be able to develop the same kind of discernment in those whom they train for future ministry.

And it is more important to understand the Biblical principles of separation than it is to know exactly where every prominent figure in the current ecclesiastical landscape stands. We need to understand the principles ourselves to make good judgements and evaluations.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Evangelicalism, Fundamentalism, Issues, New Evangelicalism, Separation
by on 10.26.09

separation over essentials – an analogy

The doctrine of separation insists that Christians must separate from professing Christians who deny essential doctrines. This is the fundamentalist position. Some have a problem with the notion of ‘essential doctrines’ because it suggests that other doctrines are ‘non-essential’. That really isn’t the case, as Dave helpfully explains here:

The problem is that the word essential is sometimes used as simply meaning important, and, thus, non-essential would mean unimportant. But that’s not what the word essential means in the statement above (or normally when people use it in contexts like this). If something is essential it relates to or constitutes the essence of something. As the dictionary states, “essential implies belonging to the very nature of a thing and therefore being incapable of removal without destroying the thing itself or its character.” So, to speak of the “essential doctrines of the faith” is to talk about those doctrines which cannot be removed without destroying the faith itself or its character.

This understanding of ‘essential’ is … essential!

It isn’t that any doctrines or teaching of God from the Bible is unimportant. But the thing that makes a doctrine essential is that if someone doesn’t believe it, he is not a Christian.

I thought I might offer an analogy as a further explanation.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Issues, Separation, Theology
by on 9.11.09

fundamental issues, 21st century version

Mark Snoeberger is working on a series of articles called “A Fundamentalist raison d’etre” (except he knows how to put the fancy accent mark over the first ‘e’ in etre). In part 4 of his series, he highlights two issues that he believes are significant areas of concern in the conservative evangelical camp:

I am convinced that at least two doctrines deemed non-essential by the conservative evangelical majority are more essential than at first meets the eye, viz., cessationism and young earth creationism, which will be the topics of my next two posts. Ambivalence to these blind spots, in my mind, does not serve Christian unity, but rather functions to erode biblical authority. And that is something fundamentalism most definitely stands for.

I agree with him on these points.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Complementarianism, Evangelicalism, Fundamentalism, Issues, Separation
by on 7.7.09

fundamentalism applied to conduct

In the comments on “fundamentalism defined”, a certain ambiguity in the FBFI definition was noted at this point:

3. Endeavors to practice Biblical conduct in all areas of his life.

A question could be raised here: “So exactly how does this aspect of the definition differentiate you fundamentalists from conservative evangelicals? Don’t they believe in practicing Biblical conduct in all areas of life also?”

In my reply, I noted that other phrases of the definition might more clearly differentiate a fundamentalist from a conservative evangelical. I am willing to concede that in many ways, conservative evangelicals agree with fundamentalism in terms of “Biblical conduct in all areas of life.”

I will also concede that the statement as it stands is pretty open-ended. Everyone thinks that the way they apply the Bible to their life is the ‘Biblical’ way.

However, let’s be really clear… Fundamentalists are not vague and uncertain about what they believe to be biblical conduct.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues, Music, Separation
by on 6.27.09

exhibit A

Interesting.

See this follow up and this one as well. See a response to the original article at 9Marks and one at another blog. Finally, see here Dave’s excellent response (and he says, hopefully, his last word) on the subject. Hear, Hear! Exactly right, Dave.

A little kerfuffle between Fundamentalists and Conservative Evangelicals erupting over Dave’s quite reasonable questions illustrates perfectly why we have two groups of men, Fundamentalists on the one hand and Conservative Evangelicals on the other. Fundamentalists don’t get why CEs are willing to be collegial and congratulatory of those who betray the faith. CEs don’t get why Fundies question their respect for their ‘moderates’.

Hence the divide.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Evangelicalism, Fundamentalism, Issues, New Evangelicalism, Separation
by on 6.16.09

what does it mean to be a fundamentalist?

A lot of the discussion swirling about our fundie blogosphere lately contains talk of “staying in”, “going out”, or other prepositional relationships to “Fundamentalism.”

It is unclear to me exactly how we are “in, out, under, behind” and so on with respect to a ‘movement’. We can be in an organization like the FBFI by paying our annual fee. You may or may not think it is worth it to be in the FBFI, but that is how it is done. You can be in the GARB by being a member or pastor of a GARB church. You can be in the OBF the same way.

But how are you “in” Fundamentalism?

It seems to me that this is the wrong way of looking at the question. The question really is, “Are you a Fundamentalist?”

In other words, it is a state of being question. To be a fundamentalist is to adopt a fundamentalist philosophy. I might argue later what I think that philosophy is. I think we have argued it before in many places, but for this post, I’d like to argue instead something of what it means to be a fundamentalist as a pastor of a local, independent Baptist church.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues, Separation
by on 5.29.09

doctrinally sound? NOT

Exactly! What I have been saying with respect to the blasphemer is that he is not doctrinally sound. The repeated disclaimer for not completely rejecting the blasphemer and refusing to refrain from all recommendation of him is that he is ‘doctrinally sound’. Sound doctrine doesn’t produce blasphemous behaviour. And close scrutiny, says Dave, will show that the ‘sound doctrine’ isn’t really all that sound.

So what is behind the seemingly compulsive qualification of so many who write disclaimers ((P.S. I can’t wait for Dave’s entry for me in his new “Disclaimerpedia”. I am sure it will be a doozy.)) for the blasphemer to include, “Well, he’s doctrinally sound”?

Could it be…

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Driscoll, Issues, Personalities, Separation
by on 5.22.09

an important question

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. [Read more…]

Filed Under: Doran, Fundamentalism, Issues, Personalities, Piper, Separation
by on 5.6.09

I have a question

or two…

Lighthouse Trails reports and a news report and the Mars Hill church calendar confirms that Mark Driscoll (yes, him again) will be speaking at Robert Shuler’s Crystal Cathedral on June 14.

There is no word from the CE camp as yet whether this means there is an expansion in the Gospel Coalition.

In the meantime, certain leaders seem to be sorta, kinda, almost, but not really calling for a new kind of Christianity that is not evangelical or fundamentalist but is conservative.

Conservative Christians believe that their task is to reclaim a full-orbed, historic, biblical Christianity. Their task is made difficult by the unfavorable environments of fundamentalism and evangelicalism. It is complicated further by the fact that conservatives are trying to reconstruct a heritage that was not handed to them intact.

Presumably, the crowd that tends to be in the Gospel Coalition, who are also a lot of the same people in Together for the Gospel, and who also tend to show up at the Shepherd’s Conference would be the conservatives from the evangelical side of the equation. Those conservatives from the fundamentalist side of the equation are getting … what? bolder?

I said I had a question… [Read more…]

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues, Separation
by on 3.12.09

applied fundamentalism

It’s been a long (but blessed) day. See previous post. I am still up late after an early morning. I am attempting to make a DVD of the funeral for family members to take home to loved ones who were too ill to attend.

While I wait for the process to conclude, I thought I’d make an attempt to answer questions that came from this post regarding this event held at our church.

The event we held was a Creation Seminar led by Dr. Emil Silvestru, a geologist with Creation Ministries International (formerly Answers in Genesis). The question, as I understand it, is essentially this: How does your sponsorship of this event square with your previously stated views on separation?

I think the question is a fair question, as I stated in my initial brief reply:

In deciding on this particular event, I had some misgivings and am still not certain we made the right decision.

Now for a more detailed answer.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues, Separation
« Previous Page
Next Page »