First, a summary of his points:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
In the introduction, he mentions his days after graduating from college and his acquaintance with \u2018big names\u2019 in fundamentalism. (More on this later, it is the first of two areas where he is most criticized, but here, I think, most unjustly.)<\/p>\n
In the intro, he also mentions that he believes a great \u2018reshuffling\u2019 is under way in American Christianity, a reshuffling that will impact the schools, institutions, and camp ministries many fundamentalists have built and trusted over the last many years.<\/p>\n
He asks, \u201cHow can we inspire the next generation\u201d to be faithful to what they have been taught and to not depart from their grounding.<\/p>\n
After some time, he arrives at his text, 2 Cor 4.1-3. From this point on, he generally follows the text to make his points (although one has to listen carefully to follow it). There are some points where his points really go beyond the text, we\u2019ll cover that later also.<\/p>\n
\n2 Corinthians 4:1 Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not; 2 But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. 3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
His points here:<\/p>\n
\n
- We have been given a ministry, it isn\u2019t of us, it is of God.<\/li>\n
- Since we have been given this ministry, we don\u2019t give up.<\/li>\n
- We renounce hidden things of dishonesty in this ministry (this is where the notorious anti-Calvinist point comes in)<\/li>\n
- We must refuse to handle the word of God deceitfully \u2013 young men are looking for careful preaching of the Word (true, and it would have been better if pastor Sweatt had been more careful)<\/li>\n
- We must manifest the truth by a faithful testimony of living for God \u2013 an authenticity of a consistent life that will influence by godliness (something all the younger set clamour for, and which, by all reports, pastor Sweatt personally exemplifies)<\/li>\n
- We must not hide our gospel by carnal methods or we will have no spiritual success.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
I suspect if the many critics would listen to those last points (and just shut their ears to the Calvinism comments), they would find themselves in agreement with what pastor Sweatt was saying. Even in those last points, pastor Sweatt misuses words \u2013 he is an unfortunate victim of malapropisms\u2026 I\u2019ve heard him before, it\u2019s just the way it is folks. We all do it from time to time, but\u2026 well, pastor Sweatt is pretty well a regular at it. Before folks make this a matter of criticism, they should really examine their hearts to see if Christian charity resides there.<\/p>\n
Now I\u2019d like to deal with the two main criticisms:<\/p>\n
1. The \u2018lauding\u2019 of the \u2018giants of the past\u2019<\/h5>\n
I recommend that the critics carefully listen to the introduction again. I think pastor Sweatt\u2019s comments have been totally distorted here.<\/p>\n
\n
- He cited the big names as men he knew in the late 1960s. He remembers them at that time<\/em> as having built significant fundamentalist works that were leading the fundamentalist world. Please note the dates. I, along with others, would wish he hadn\u2019t mentioned two of the names. But at that time<\/em> (late 60s, early 70s) none of them had fallen into scandal.<\/li>\n
- He mentions \u2018big names\u2019 as examples of the fundamentalist world he knew that was led by big personalities (and it is true, large segments of fundamentalism at the time was hugely influenced by big personalities). He recalls wondering who would replace these men when they passed from the scene.<\/li>\n
- He says that some tried to rise up as replacements, but no one succeeded, fundamentalism largely became led by men who were \u2018lesser personalities\u2019 [my term]. He came to see this as a good thing, and hoped that the new leadership (his generation) would develop a more biblical leadership that the next generation would follow.<\/li>\n
- He regrets to say that his generation failed to be the influence they needed to be. Some of them went off and followed Hybels and Warren. [I would add the word \u2018even\u2019 to \u2018went off\u2019. This is also true \u2013 many men, Sweatt\u2019s contemporaries and later mine (I\u2019m a decade younger) did indeed wander off in many strange directions.]<\/li>\n
- Now he sees a new generation making the same mistake \u2026 following big personalities. They are reacting [to some extent] to things they have heard and things they have imagined about former fundamentalists. They are reacting to a \u2018cartoon\u2019 of fundamentalism. But at the same time they are becoming just as much personality driven.<\/li>\n
- His point with this seems to be that fundamentalist leaders need to develop into strong personalities that are also biblical and solid fundamentalists.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Now this is the result of my careful listening. I could be wrong, but I invite the critics to listen again, and listen as Christians<\/em>. That is, love \u201cbears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.\u201d Listen with the attitude that you are listening to a godly, sincere man, given to malapropism and clumsy expression.<\/p>\n
As for the remark where he says, "it is difficult to judge a generation unless you lived through it" the context seems to indicate that he means "difficult to fully<\/strong><\/em> judge or comprehend" rather than to somehow be dismissing the ability of the young to understand at all. Again, listen with charity.<\/p>\n
2. The notorious Calvinist rant<\/h5>\n
Here I have less that can be said in apology. But first, let me say, I have heard Calvinists explain away John 3.16 exactly as he characterized it.<\/p>\n
The most egregious part of this point was the word \u2018inerrancy\u2019. The normally mild-mannered Greg L. keeps bringing this up at SI, so if he is rankled, I suspect this is the most significant error. However\u2026<\/p>\n
This is the biggest malaprop of the message. He clearly means \u2018perspicuity\u2019 here, not inerrancy. He is saying that the Scriptures are clear, you don\u2019t need to be an expert to be able to understand them. He thinks that Calvinists, with their approach, twist the Scripture and make them obscure. Now, you can argue with his point of view, but wouldn\u2019t Christian charity really try to understand what is being said and not froth at the mouth in criticism?<\/p>\n
And of course, he doesn\u2019t leave it there. He goes on about the failure of the succeeding generations of Calvinists after the \u2018charismatic leader\u2019 passes on. He obviously doesn\u2019t like Calvinism. He shouldn\u2019t have let that dislike take over and sidetrack him in the message.<\/p>\n
~~~<\/p>\n
But to say that pastor Sweatt is an example of the bad old days, a dominant personality who is trying to bully young fundamentalists into accepting his teaching as gospel is really a stretch. It is a distortion of pastor Sweatt\u2019s personal testimony and of this particular message. Some have accused him of \u2018breaking the 9th commandment.\u2019 Such critics should look in the mirror.<\/p>\n
~~~<\/p>\n
But there is more to say.<\/p>\n
I said in the subject line that pastor Sweatt has a point. There is a point that I think he was trying to make but did not succeed.<\/p>\n
![\"don_sig2\"](\"http:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/06\/don-sig22.png\" "\\"don_sig2\\"")
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"