January 31, 2013

Kevin Bauder’s Open Letter to Lance Ketchum: Expanding Our Reach

Site Publisher’s Update (2/1/13):
Dr. Lance Ketchum publishes a response to Kevin BauderOpen Letter.  See, Defining Points
The contradiction of all this is that men like Dr. Kevin Bauder, Dr. Doug McLachlan, Dr. Timothy Jordan, Dr. David Doran, and Dr. Matt Olson all profess to be independent, fundamental Baptists.  However, their new definition of the practice of separation is like that of the interdenominational Fundamentalism.  They want most other doctrines other than the Gospel to be eliminated from the practice of separation.  Independent, fundamental Baptists do not agree and do not like what they are trying to do.  They are convoluting what it means to be an independent, fundamental Baptist.
We have been conducting a critical review of Kevin Bauder’s Open Letter to Lance Ketchum.  Previously we published,



As we progress through this series on Kevin Bauder’s Open Letter we are going to expand our reach.  That is because Kevin has had a great deal more to say in the discussion thread under his Open Letter that appears at the pseudo-fundamentalist Sharper Iron (SI) site. Pastor Don Johnson posted a series questions to Kevin about elements of the Open Letter. Kevin has been answering Don’s questions in a series of thread comments. I will say this about the interchange between Don and Kevin. Don asked some pointed questions and is getting responses from Kevin that are exposing the real Kevin Bauder.

For those with eyes to see and ears to hear, Kevin is removing any doubts about his congeniality with evangelicals and personal disdain for objections that others may have over his lavish praise for, defense and embrace of them. We will excerpt from Kevin’s comments at SI and have some reaction to them here and in upcoming articles.

Dr. Bauder tries to act the gentleman in his Open Letter to Lance Ketchum. His words, however, seem as though his kindness toward Brother Ketchum is artificial. This is especially born out in his thread comments at SI. Sadly, Dr. Bauder’s public ministry in recent years has demonstrated his on-going unwillingness to deal specifically and directly with the errors of the so-called “conservative” evangelical crowd. He has frequently pointed out what he perceives to be the errors of fundamentalism in a very public way (Danny Sweatt, Lance Ketchum, Bob Jones, Jr., John R. Rice, the FBFI, etc.) and castigates them with impunity.

No one will forget Kevin’s 2009 three part series from his blog and SI in which without provocation he attacked the legacy and ministry of Bob Jones, Jr. and John R. Rice. Missionary John Himes (Rice’s grandson) responded with,
Again, I am very disappointed at the language Bauder uses against his fellow fundamentalists, evidently chiefly against Rice: ‘pugilistic and bellicose,’ ‘alpha males,’ ‘the big boys,’ ‘bullies,’ ‘chieftains,’ etc. Is this the kind of language a fundamentalist leader should use?”1
Bullies, alpha-males, Chieftans…?”  For his reaction to Bauder’s harsh rhetoric John Himes was gang-tackled and run off by the SI moderators. That is the historic pattern of SI moderators.  See, SI’s Deplorable Moderator Actions Run Off Another

From the platform of the 2009 FBFI Annual Fellowship Kevin, without provocation, and instead of answering a direct question put to him by the moderator Dr. John Vaughn on the evangelicals, chose to besmirch Bob Jones University. These are but two examples of Kevin discrediting fundamentalists from a previous generation and a fundamentalist institution. Even today, at SI, he attempts to demonize and dishonor men and/or their fellowships.
Where is Kevin’s indignation over the theological errors, ecumenical compromises and worldly methods of the evangelicals?
Where does he publicly “admonish” them?  Where does he call on to repent and obey the Scriptures?  Where does Kevin publicly warn the Fundamentalists he claims to speak on behalf of to “withdraw from, mark and avoid” the most theologically off-base and brazen non-separatists of the evangelical camp?

When it comes to the evangelical crowd Kevin Bauder portrays them as theological champions.  Only rarely has he dealt with disagreements, but in a very “professional way” – (i.e. - private dialogue and conference). The confusion that Kevin Bauder has spawned is widespread and frightening. Today, at the pseudo-fundamentalist Sharper Iron we read where Kevin acknowledges that “hazards do exist” and yet is willing to accept casualties among the next generation because of and for the sake of his dialogue and cooperative ministries with non-separatist, compromising evangelicals.2

Kevin seems to think that to “leave fundamentalism” is the hazard.  The real danger is not necessarily leaving fundamentalism.  The danger is where they are going to wind up, who will be their mentors and what they will become theologically and in practice.  If the trend that is already in place3 continues we will seen young men who were once balanced, militant separatist fundamentalists become practitioners and defenders of the modern charismatic movement, ecumenical compromise and a host of cultural compromises.  These young men have already been drawn to and are learning these things from so-called “conservative” evangelicals. Add to that Kevin Bauder heaping “lavish praise” on the evangelicals, refusing to articulate any meaningful Bible based reproof, admonition or warning about the aberrant theology and practices of the evangelicals and relentlessly redefining or castigating historic, balanced fundamentalism we will see mounting causalities in his Bauder’s wake.

As a man who has inherited the legacy of R.V. Clearwaters and Ernest Pickering, Kevin has not promoted their militancy. Nor has Kevin Bauder disseminated words of warning like his predecessors. Instead Kevin perceives, maybe self-appoints himself as the historian and spokesman for a brand of “biblical fundamentalism” that in reality is increasingly indistinguishable from non-separatist evangelicalism.
If Kevin Bauder desires to take Dr. Clearwaters’s venerable institution a different direction from the founder, he should do so without pretending to be guardian of the legacy. I knew Doc well enough to know that he would not be at all happy with the direction of Central Seminary under Bauder’s leading. It’s bad enough that his school is headed in a decidedly leftward direction. Please, Dr. Bauder, don’t make it any worse by pretending some affinity with one of the greatest separatist Christians of the last century.”4
Dialogue is Very Appealing to Academics
Our fundamentalist forefathers would have warned that dialogue of the sort Kevin Bauder and Dave Doran have participated in and encouraged others to emulate will always lead to disaster! These men may wind up becoming causalities to having thought that through dialogue they could influence the evangelicals.  It nearly always works the other way around.  In short or long term memory can we identify any high-profile evangelicals moving toward absolute fidelity to the Bible, especially in regard to obeying the God-given mandates for separation? We can, however, observe that 
Kevin Bauder, Dave Doran, Matt Olson and Tim Jordan have become apologists for and are shape-shifting into what the evangelicals are.
The dialogue, therefore, is achieving results, but not the results Kevin thinks or hope it will. His dialogue is causing confusion and casualties like that of Andy Naselli who has just joined ranks with John Piper at the Bethlehem College & Seminary. Given enough time this dialogue with non-separatists won’t have any better outcome than it did for Jerry Falwell and Liberty University.

The most obvious evidence of contemporary disaster is in what both Calvary Baptist Seminary (Lansdale) and Northland International University have become.  Northland’s disaster of dialogue began in April 2010 when Matt Olson, Sam Horn, Les Ollila and Doug Mac Lachlan traveled to California to call on John MacArthur, Phil Johnson and Rick Holland.
In April 2010 Matt Olson, Sam Horn, Les Ollila and Doug McLachlan traveled to the Grace Community Church (GCC) to meet with John MacArthur, Phil Johnson and Rick Holland. After a day of discussions the NIU men came away finding no reason not to have and increase fellowship with them. Inviting GCC’s executive pastor, Rick Holland, to speak in chapel confirms a new alliance for NIU with evangelicalism.”5
Calvary Seminary’s disaster of dialogue is through their conferences featuring Mark Dever and Haddon Robinson. Central Seminary’s disaster of dialogue has been fomenting for several years in large part due to Kevin Bauder’s inflammatory articles, apologetics for compromising evangelicals and, in the opinion of some, a revisionist history of fundamentalism. Bringing Central Seminary closer to disaster was its appearance as an official vendor at John Piper’s 2012 Desiring God conference.6 

There is much more to address from and about Kevin Bauder’s Open Letter to Lance Ketchum. This series will be continued.


LM

New Critical Review: Please see Kent Brandenburg's new article,  A Really Nice, Gentle, Loving OpenLetter, Because That's What I'm Calling It, to Kevin Bouder (sic)
“Do you [Kevin Bauder] have available a similar kind of criticism of any evangelicals like you have criticized Lance Ketchum? I could appreciate your wordsmith applied to John Piper, instead of what seems like only glowing praise… Piper doesn’t believe and practice like you.   Ketchum doesn't believe and practice like you.  It seems that perhaps the deciding difference between Piper and Ketchum is that Piper doesn't criticize you at all.  He's only praised you that I have read… And your guys would be upset about criticism of Piper, diminishing your legendary status with them.”
Related Reading:
“It is astounding to me that in many of your recent writings on a professedly fundamental, Baptist site, you seem to constantly extol the ‘virtues’ of evangelical Protestants while, at the same time, deriding the ‘vices’ of Fundamental Baptists. Reading your posts would lead some to wonder if you weren’t just writing a resume for some ‘conservative evangelical’ seminary to read and then hire you…. Dr. Bauder, all given appearances seem to indicate you are intentionally trying to lead those who follow your writings, the students of Central, and even Central itself away from the Testimony upon which it was founded and into the compromising orbit of protestant evangelicalism. As Samuel of old who, after his death, confronted Saul in his error, I plead with you to turn back ‘to the Law and to the Testimony’.”
But a man is more than his pulpit message. He brings to the pulpit a lifetime of associations, actions and perhaps writings. He comes as a total person. Is he in his total ministry the type of person you would want the young people at the separatist college to emulate?  If he is a compromiser, his example would be harmful, and the college president would be at fault for setting him up as such. The separatist cause is not advanced by featuring non-separatists.” (Biblical Separation: The Struggle for a Pure Church, Implementing Separatist Convictions, Whom to Invite to Your Platform, p. 229.)
Footnotes:
1) Today, at SI, Kevin chose an unflattering term in which to portray one unnamed FBFI leader. Kevin refers to him as a “muckety-muck FBFI official.” Such a pejorative to be used in describing a bishop, an official, sad!!! With his pejorative today and how he demeaned Jones and Rice Kevin is really helping produce a negative spirit, an angry spirit among the younger men seeking mentorship from Bauder, and it shows.


2) An Open Letter to Lance Ketchum, SI, January 30, 2013.

3) See, Andy Naselli’s Five Reason Were Excited to Serve at Bethlehem College & Seminary, Thoughts on Theology blog, Jan. 16, 2013.
Central Baptist Theological Seminary (CBTS) is bleeding cash. See What’s the Costof Change? $2.7 Million Dollars. In the business community one might refer to what they see at Central as “the death rattle.” John Piper started his Bethlehem College & Seminary in 2009.  Bethlehem Seminary is situated just 10 miles east of CBTS. One might reasonably conclude that it is only a matter of time before Central folds—and Kevin Bauder goes to work for Piper. One pastor wondered if Kevin’s Open Letter and his relentless defense of evangelicalism seem like he is making overtures to Piper for a position.


January 29, 2013

Kevin Bauder’s Open Letter to Lance Ketchum: Where Do I Find Agreement?

On Sunday we began with more than just an introduction to a review of Kevin Bauder’s Open Letter to Lance Ketchum. Let’s continue with where I find some agreement with the Open Letter.

1) Hegelian Dialect
I am not familiar enough with Hegelian Dialect to know with certainty whether Dr. Ketchum’s assessment is correct or not. I will, therefore, refrain from commenting on that issue.

2) Is John MacArthur a hyper-Calvinist?
My definition of a hyper-Calvinist appears in my book In Defense of the Gospel.
“I am uncomfortable with, and reject all five points of Calvinism. There are Calvinists who are uncomfortable with the extremes of the so-called hyper-Calvinism, but what is hyper-Calvinism? I have found that people vary in their definition of what constitutes a hyper-Calvinist. Some believe, for example, that if a man holds to the Limited Atonement position (Christ’s blood was shed only for the elect) he is a hyper-Calvinist. Although I believe that Calvinism’s limited atonement is out of balance with and contradicts the Scriptures, I do not agree that holding to that position necessarily makes one a hyper-Calvinist. So how do I specifically define hyper Calvinism? For me there is one historically definitive mark of hyper-Calvinism. This identifying mark of a hyper-Calvinist is when he refuses to preach the gospel to every sinner, when he has little concern for missions and evangelism, when he refuses to offer an open and universal invitation to every sinner.” (IDOTG: Biblical Answers to Lordship Salvation, pp. 275.)
So, is John MacArthur a hyper-Calvinist?  In my opinion, John MacArthur does not fit the widely accepted definition of a hyper-Calvinist.

3) Is John MacArthur a “New” Evangelical?
A significant number of fundamentalists believe Dr. John MacArthur is a potential bridge to New Evangelicalism. The reason being that among the so-called conservative evangelicals MacArthur had been thought to be the most like fundamentalists. He has, therefore, been the most widely accepted.  

Today, based on verifiable evidence that any objective reader can examine, I believe it has become clear that there is a more direct bridge for the next generation of fundamentalists to move toward New Evangelicalism than John MacArthur. The bridge is Kevin Bauder, as well as Dave Doran, but even more so at present are Matt Olson and Tim Jordan. What they’ve written, how they’ve abandoned authentic “militant” separation, with whom they are in cooperative ministry with and the influence they exert is paving a glide path for the current and next generation to New Evangelicalism. Having just announced (Jan. 16) his joining the faculty at John Piper’s Bethlehem College & Seminary Andy Naselli is IMO a loss to New Evangelicalism.  How long will it be before we read Andy heaping “lavish praise” not only on John Piper and Tim Keller, which he has from his blog, but for Rick Warren as well?1

Is John MacArthur a “New” Evangelical? In my opinion he does not fit the classic definition of a “New” Evangelical.

We’ll be back on Thursday with the more critical review of the Kevin Bauder’s Open Letter to Lance Ketchum.


LM

Please continue this series with, Kevin Bauders Open Letter: Expanding Our Reach

New Critical Review: Please see Kent Brandenburg's new article,  A Really Nice, Gentle, Loving OpenLetter, Because That's What I'm Calling It, to Kevin Bouder (sic)
“Do you [Kevin Bauder] have available a similar kind of criticism of any evangelicals like you have criticized Lance Ketchum? I could appreciate your wordsmith applied to John Piper, instead of what seems like only glowing praise… Piper doesn’t believe and practice like you.   Ketchum doesn't believe and practice like you.  It seems that perhaps the deciding difference between Piper and Ketchum is that Piper doesn't criticize you at all.  He's only praised you that I have read… And your guys would be upset about criticism of Piper, diminishing your legendary status with them.”

Site Publisher’s Update (2/1/13):
Dr. Lance Ketchum publishes a response to Kevin BauderOpen Letter.  See, Defining Points
The contradiction of all this is that men like Dr. Kevin Bauder, Dr. Doug McLachlan, Dr. Timothy Jordan, Dr. David Doran, and Dr. Matt Olson all profess to be independent, fundamental Baptists.  However, their new definition of the practice of separation is like that of the interdenominational Fundamentalism.  They want most other doctrines other than the Gospel to be eliminated from the practice of separation.  Independent, fundamental Baptists do not agree and do not like what they are trying to do.  They are convoluting what it means to be an independent, fundamental Baptist.
Footnotes:
1) Andy has frequently promoted and endorsed the teachings of Tim Keller, who among other concerns, Recommends Roman Catholic Mysticism. Will the pseudo-fundamentalist Sharper Iron retain Andy’s Thoughts on Theology blog on the SI Blogroll when he begins writing positive reviews of Rick Warren’s ministry and/or theology?

Related Reading:
What is Hyper-Calvinism?

January 27, 2013

An Open & Critical Review of Kevin Bauder’s Open Letter

On Jan. 25, 2013 from his In the Nick of Time blog Kevin Bauder published An Open Letter to Lance Ketchum. This Open Letter is Kevin Bauder’s reaction to a Nov. 2012 article by Dr. Ketchum titled, The Subtlety of Good Words and Fair Speeches.”1

“Kevin [Bauder] has been quite lavish in his praise of conservative evangelicals while castigating so-called fundamentalists. Yet he has spent very little time warning us about the pitfalls and problems of conservative evangelicalism…. Like Kevin, I would give credit to the conservative evangelicals where credit is due. I say ‘Amen’ to everything they have done well in defense of the gospel of Christ. But not at the expense of discrediting fundamentalism for the valiant battles it has fought against some of the very things many conservative evangelicals are espousing which compromise the gospel, yet which many of the current generation do not seem to take very seriously…. What I fear is that we may be allowing a Trojan horse into the fundamentalist camp. And after a while, if we keep going down this track, any significant difference between conservative evangelical and the fundamentalist institutions may disappear.” (Dr. Gerald Priest reacting to Dr. Kevin Bauder’s Let’s Get Clear on This, March 2010)
In the nearly three years since Dr. Priest’s evaluation above Kevin Bauder has gone far beyond simple “lavish praise” for so-called “conservative” evangelicals. He has doubled-down! Furthermore, it has come to pass that significant differences between conservative evangelical and certain former fundamentalist institutions has disappeared. None more stark than the former Northland Baptist Bible College2 and Calvary Baptist Seminary3 (Lansdale).

Kevin Bauder publicly praises evangelicals for the things he agrees with. However, neither from his blog or the pseudo-fundamentalist Sharper Iron does he offer serious public criticism of the evangelicals. He does not warn readers of the doctrinal aberrations, ecumenical compromises, “pitfalls and problems” of conservative evangelicalism.  He has not publicly “reproved” or “rebuked” them. (2 Tim. 4:2) He will not publicly “admonish” them. (2 Thess. 3:15) He does not “mark” them or caution believers to “avoid [any of] them,” (Rom. 16:17).  Instead Kevin Bauder has tolerated, allowed for, excused or ignored the major errors in theology and practice of the evangelicals.  He has, furthermore, embraced them in fellowship and cooperative ministry efforts.4

I invite you to read and consider each of the following articles.  Each has a direct correlation to Dr. Bauder’s defense of, silence or indifference toward the aberrant theology and non-separatist practices of the evangelicals. For example, since first we learned that John Piper would join Rick Warren in joint ministry Kevin Bauder has apparently said nothing from his blog to address this matter.

It was widely agreed that when Al Mohler signed the Manhattan Declaration, which he has never apologized for or repented of, he gave Christian recognition to the deadly “enemies of the cross of Christ” (Phil 3:18) and compromised the gospel. 
“The ‘Conservative Evangelicals’ have a great articulator in Dr. Bauder. Dr. Bauder gives a positive overview of the movement but says nothing as to their position on ecumenism and Biblical Separation. Read again Dr. Bauder’s definition of neo-evangelicalism. According to his definition, New Evangelicals of the past would qualify as ‘Conservative Evangelicals’ today…. Dr. Bauder’s “Conservative Evangelicals” repudiate the doctrine of separation, they are for greater social involvement, and they are determined to engage in theological dialogue with liberalism as is seen by their associations with what are considered liberal religious organizations.”
The Trojan horse of evangelicalism is being brought into the fundamentalist camp and it is Drs. Bauder, Doran, Jordan and Olson that are holding the gate open and leading it in. All doubt has been removed on the direction of Dave Doran and Kevin Bauder toward cooperative ministry with non-separatist, compromising evangelicals. Is this a fundamentalism worth saving?”
Should there be genuine surprise that CBTS would participate in the Desiring God conference? From what Central’s former president Dr. Kevin Bauder (2004-2011) has written and with whom he has been in fellowship and cooperative ministry with it is no mystery that Kevin’s feet are pointed toward the compromising evangelical orbit that is cloaked under the guise of a so-called ‘conservative’ evangelicalism. Unfortunately, it now appears as though Central Baptist Theological Seminary, as an institution, is headed in the same direction as Kevin Bauder.”
The Minnesota Baptist Association has announced that Phil Johnson, of John MacArthurs Grace to You, will be the featured speaker at its September 2013 Men’s Fellowship.
When professed fundamentalists such as Dr. Kevin Bauder, Dr. Douglas McLachlan, Dr. Timothy Jordan, and Dr. Dave Doran begin to defend men like Al Mohler, John Piper, Ligon Duncan, John MacArthur, Phil Johnson, Mark Dever, C.J. Mahaney, and Rick Holland (to name a few), it becomes very apparent that there has been a considerable change in direction regarding the practice of militant separation. This goes one step further when they invite these men to preach for them.”5
(Dr. Lance Ketchum’s The Subtlety of “Good Words and Fair Speeches”)
Beginning Tuesday we will examine and consider a number of excerpts from Kevin Bauder’s Open Letter to Lance Ketchum.  Does Kevin address the crux of Dr. Ketchum’s article? We will examine some of Kevins criticism, claims for himself and on behalf of conservative evangelicals. We will determine, which if any pass the smell test and a reality check.

Yours faithfully,


Lou Martuneac

Please continue to, Kevin Bauders Open Letter: Where Do I Find Agrement?

New Critical Review: Please see Kent Brandenburg's new article,  A Really Nice, Gentle, Loving OpenLetter, Because That's What I'm Calling It, to Kevin Bouder (sic)
“Do you [Kevin Bauder] have available a similar kind of criticism of any evangelicals like you have criticized Lance Ketchum? I could appreciate your wordsmith applied to John Piper, instead of what seems like only glowing praise… Piper doesn’t believe and practice like you.   Ketchum doesn't believe and practice like you.  It seems that perhaps the deciding difference between Piper and Ketchum is that Piper doesn't criticize you at all.  He's only praised you that I have read… And your guys would be upset about criticism of Piper, diminishing your legendary status with them.”

Site Publisher’s Update (2/1/13):
Dr. Lance Ketchum publishes a response to Kevin BauderOpen Letter.  See, Defining Points
The contradiction of all this is that men like Dr. Kevin Bauder, Dr. Doug McLachlan, Dr. Timothy Jordan, Dr. David Doran, and Dr. Matt Olson all profess to be independent, fundamental Baptists.  However, their new definition of the practice of separation is like that of the interdenominational Fundamentalism.  They want most other doctrines other than the Gospel to be eliminated from the practice of separation.  Independent, fundamental Baptists do not agree and do not like what they are trying to do.  They are convoluting what it means to be an independent, fundamental Baptist.
Footnotes:
1) The Subtlety of  “Good Words and Fair Speeches.”

2) Northland Students RAP to Jesus Loves Me, and It's Blasphemy!

Is Northland Opposed to the Modern Charismatic Movement?

3) Calvary Baptist Seminary Hosting New Evangelical Dr. Haddon Robinson

4) The same tolerance for and cooperative ministry with non-separatist evangelicals is true of Drs. Dave Doran, Matt Olson and Tim Jordan.

5) The Subtlety of Good Words and Fair Speeches by Dr. Lance Ketchum originally appeared at his Line Upon Line blog

January 22, 2013

Archival Series: Has Converging With Evangelicals Been a Dangerous and Failed Experiment?

This article originally appeared in March 2011.  I have revised and edited portions to reflect the current mood.

In April (2011) The Gospel Coalition (TGC) convenes in Chicago. If you were visit the TGC site, the schedule of speakers, you will find names such as:
•Al Mohler- who is known for ecumenical compromise with Roman Catholics, honoring liberals and his chairmanship of the 2001 Billy Graham crusade in Louisville.1

•Mark Driscoll- whom there is much to be alarmed with.2

•Tim Keller- a “New Calvinist” who recommends Roman Catholic Mysticism.3

•Michael Horton- who recently went to Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church and participated in a church growth forum where Horton did speak against pragmatism and posed for this photo.

•We Are Unashamed
Come join Lecrae and the rest of the Reach Records artists as they exalt Christ through the medium of hip hop and display how cultural renewal is taking place through urban music.
Any lingering doubt about evangelicalism’s embrace of the RAP/Hip Hop medium is now erased. The TGC/T4G leadership, including Mark Dever, has by this event officially endorsed the RAP, Hip Hop medium for ministry and worship. See, The RAP on Mark Dever, parts one and two.
The concerns above are highly disconcerting. In particular, however, I want to draw special attention to,
•John Piper- who on March 3, 2011 at his blog wrote, “This is my small tribute to another Christian killed for Christ’s sake. I read his story with great admiration. Extremists wanted to kill him because of his opposition to the blasphemy law and to Sharia legislation, and because of his work for ‘the oppressed and marginalised’, the Catholic politician said somberly into the camera.4
Furthermore, on June 12-13, 2011 the annual Southern Baptist pastors conference takes place in Phoenix. Sharing the stage with Rick Warren will be John Piper. Prior to that meeting John Piper is holding his West Coast Desiring God conference at Saddleback in April. In a promotional video Piper says, “We are so thankful that we have been invited to do our regional [DG] conference at Saddleback church…and I want you to come.5

In his Let’s Get Clear on This6 Kevin Bauder wrote, “Whatever our differences, I thank God for John Piper.”7 He also wrote,
Nevertheless, some Fundamentalists have managed to convince themselves that conservative evangelicals are the enemy. They insist that John Piper is a neo-evangelical. They actually hope to limit his influence—and the influence of other conservative evangelicals—in their churches and among their younger generation.”
Brother Bauder in light of these revelations, have you finally seen enough of Piper’s descent into “New” Evangelicalism to “withdraw from, admonish…have no company with,” and especially to “mark” him? In addition to his Charismatic theology is this finally enough for you to openly warn the “younger generation” under your influence to “avoid” John Piper (2 Thess. 3:6, 14-15; Romans 16:17)? Have you finally seen enough to personally “limit his influence?”

In 2008 Dave Doran wrote,
This was the reason for my disappointment with the first T4G conference. In many respects, it was one of the most spiritually beneficial conferences I’ve attended—the message by John Piper alone was worth the time and cost of the conference.8
Would Brother Doran publish a similar accolade for the message that John Piper is communicating today through his joint ministry with Rick Warren and recognizing Roman Catholics as born again Christians? Of course not.  Isn’t it then worth the time and cost to retract earlier accolades for the messages of John Piper and replace those with a warning to avoid Piper today?
Isn’t it high time for Dave Doran to “mark” John Piper and admonish brethren to withdraw from and “avoid” him?
Next month (April 2011) the evangelicals will converge in Chicago under the umbrella of The Gospel Coalition (TGC). This event is the alternating year sister conference of Together for the Gospel (T4G). Will men such as Kevin Bauder, Dave Doran Matt Olson, Les Ollila, Tim Jordan, et. al., attend and/or encourage others to attend TGC? Or have they finally seen enough to withdraw from the so-called “conservative” evangelicals and their fellowships?

Drs. Bauder, Doran, Olson, Ollila and Jordan claim to be committed to authentic biblical separation in principle and application. The pseudo- fundamentalist Sharper Iron and Kevin Mungons suggested on behalf of Bauder, Doran and Jordan that they are no different in their commitment to biblical separation than that of Dr. Ernest Pickering. If that is so, hasn’t enough of evangelicalism’s non-separatism been revealed to awaken these men to restore their fidelity to authentic biblical separation for the sake of a pure church? Unfortunately, (Jan. 2013) these men have edged closer to embracing compromising evangelicals in joint ministry, shunning fidelity to the God-given mandates.

Isn’t it high time to acknowledge that praising and converging with evangelicals has been a dangerous and failed experiment?

Isn’t it high time for self-described separatists to cease from reaching out to evangelicals for cooperative ministry efforts, putting these men into their pulpits and classrooms to influence impressionable college students?
Kevin [Bauder] has been quite lavish in his praise of conservative evangelicals while castigating so-called fundamentalists. Yet he has spent very little time warning us about the pitfalls and problems of conservative evangelicalism…. What I fear is that we may be allowing a Trojan horse into the fundamentalist camp. And after a while, if we keep going down this track, any significant difference between conservative evangelical and the fundamentalist institutions may disappear.” (Dr. Gerald Priest, March 3, 2010)
Men, wake up! Brothers, castigate Fundamentalism if you must, but stop this craze to embrace, heap lavish praise on the men and conferences of evangelicalism. Evangelicals have not changed! Evangelicals historically eschew authentic biblical separation. They have not changed or relented. Brothers Doran, Bauder, Olson, Jordan, Ollila you have changed and are personally moving in the direction of, as well as encouraging others to accept, tolerate and become what the evangelicals are.

We are witnessing a revival of the old “New” Evangelicalism. It is being lead by John Piper, Al Mohler, Ligon Duncan, Tim Keller, et. al.  Those of you who range in fundamental circles barely raise any warning of the evangelicals, John Piper in particular. Your silence is very near becoming complicity in the spread of his errors and, furthermore, culpable for the loss of our young people who go to him, his books and conferences, and consequently adopt his aberrant theology and egregious methodology.
I am calling on you to reconsider, repent and return to the moorings of biblical separation that has protected the church from the egregious doctrinal errors and compromises that are rife and in resurgence among the evangelicals.
Some of our younger generation John Piper/Evangelicalism tragedies I think of include Andy Naselli9, Bob Bixby and Ben Wright. They have embraced evangelicalism. They were in part shown the way to the new breed “New” Evangelicalism by Kevin Bauder, Dave Doran (and late comers Matt Olson, Les Ollila and Tim Jordan) who lighted the way there through praise for evangelicals and hesitancy to clearly articulate from the Bible the dangers of modern day New Evangelicalism. They would have done much better had they followed the example of a truly committed biblical separatist.
“David Beale warned against those who bear the label fundamentalist but whose personal philosophy is essentially New Evangelical. ‘Unlike present-day Fundamentalists, they refuse to regard the militant defense of the faith and the full doctrine and practice of holiness as intrinsically fundamental.’ In other words, there are fundamentalists who are either becoming or already are New Evangelicals. Some are actually adopting New Evangelical philosophies while still proclaiming that they are not New Evangelicals. The basic problem is this: Many fundamentalists, when speaking of the New Evangelicalism, are referring to the original positions and writings of the early founders of New Evangelicalism such as Carl Henry and Harold Ockenga. They repudiate heartily the thoughts of these earlier leaders, but either in ignorance or willingly they fail to recognize the updated version, the “new” New Evangelicalism. It is always safer to berate the teachings of those historically farther removed than of those who are currently afflicting the church.” (Dr. Ernest Pickering, The Tragedy of Compromise, p. 159)
If we see a continuation of the next generation joining the new “New” Evangelicalism of Piper, Mahaney, Duncan, Mohler, Keller, et. al. we will look to you Brothers Bauder, Doran, Olson, Ollila and Jordan for having encouraged them to find the way there. In your desire to embrace, praise and cooperate with evangelicals did you ever pause to consider that there might be casualties among the younger generation? Did you consider younger men lacking the discernment that comes with maturity, younger men who did not see/live the history of past waves of New Evangelicalism and its ecumenical compromises might fall prey to its allurements? You might look to yourselves for the answer as to why they would end up becoming what you surely must hope would never befall a young fundamentalist.

Is it possible you will continue to chart and follow a course of tolerance for the aberrant theology, worldliness in ministry and ecumenical compromises of the evangelicals to have your convergence with them? Is it possible you are willing to accept the losses already sustained and more that are sure to follow if you continue to pursue fellowship and cooperative efforts with increasingly non-separatist evangelicals? Will you instead become a modern day Paul and cry out with tears to those whom you minister to and have been influencing through the Internet?
Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears,” (Acts 20:30-31).
Brother Doran, in 1995 you wrote an article that concluded with the following powerful and prophetic admonition,
It seems to me that those who want to rid contemporary Fundamentalism of its alleged belligerence should watch the pathway carefully. The last group of people to take that path found it to be a winding road which ends up in a theological wasteland.” (In Defense of Militancy, Sentinel 11:2 Spring 1995)
Brother Doran for want of militancy and belligerence, in regard to the evangelicals, you have set foot on the winding road. In your wake there have been casualties among us, but must there be more?

Brothers Bauder, Doran, Olson, Ollila, Jordan- each of you have a wide influence. The current and next generation you minister to listen to you.
Today (2012-ff.) you men are the progenitors of the new wave New Evangelicalism winding its way through once Baptistic separatist circles.
There may still be time time to repent and recover from the ruinous pathway you trod and have encouraged others to follow you on. You can begin to restore some of the casualties and give those who are uncertain reason to pause and withdraw from the “winding road” of the new “New” Evangelicalism that, in part, your efforts in recent years have set them upon. We pray that you will.


LM

Footnotes:
1) Al Mohler: Sign the Manhattan Declaration: Is this a First Time Foray Toward Ecumenical Compromise?

2) The “Corrupt Communication” of Mark Driscoll

3) Tim Keller: Recommending Roman Catholic Mysticism

Redeemer Presbyterian Church: School of Gospel Foundations 2009 class schedule included The Way of the Monk, “taught by Susan Castillo sometimes know as the ‘Retreat Lady,’ she has been fleeing to monasteries to ‘honeymoon with Jesus’ for over ten years.”
“SEEKING GOD: The Way of the Monk, a fascinating examination of the strange life of the Benedictine monks at New Mexico’s Monastery of Christ in the Desert, presents the traditional chants, seasonal rituals, and heartfelt prayers, as well as penetrating interviews with the monks themselves about their choices and lifestyle.”
“The Way of the Monk” at Tim Keller’s Redeemer Presbyterian Church

4) the discernment deficit

5) ASPIRE: 2001 Pastor’s Conference

2011 Regional Conference - Lake Forest

6) Let’s Get “CRYSTAL” Clear on This A Response to Kevin Bauder’s “Cannonball” Cogitations

7) Andy Naselli: Conservative Evangelicals Are Not New Evangelicals

8) Dr. Dave Doran: Potential and Pitfalls of Together For The Gospel, March/April 2008, 9Marks

9) Andy Naselli just announced (Jan. 2013) his joining the faculty at John Piper’s Bethlehem College and Seminary. Andy has been featured at Northland International University (NIU) as a conference speaker and lecturer. Naselli and Bruce Ware’s appearances in NIU classrooms and/or conferences further confirms the new trajectory and radical change from NIU's separatist roots. They bring baggage with them to NIU and expose impressionable students to that baggage: Ware brings the SBC with him; Naselli the new “New” Evangelicalism of men like John Piper and Tim Keller whom he (Naselli) strongly supports and recommends from his blog. See, Is NIU “Unchanged?”

Related Reading:
T4G/TGC, “A Final Sad Spectacle”
“A final sad spectacle reported with enthusiasm...is T4G…. it conditions all who attend to relax on these controversial matters, and learn to accept every point of view. In other words, the ministry of warning is killed off, so that every error of the new scene may race ahead unchecked. These are tragic days for authentic spiritual faithfulness, worship and piety.” (Dr. Peter Masters, The Merger of Calvinism With Worldliness)
John Piper, “I’m Going to Need Help to Know Why I Should Feel Bad About This Decision”

January 16, 2013

Dr. Rob Congdon: New Calvinism’s Upside-Down Gospel

My friend Dr. Rob Congdon has just published a new book, New Calvinism’s Upside-Down Gospel. From the preface,
This booklet is the first in a series on New Calvinism that is intended to assist you in understanding the movement rapidly spreading throughout Christianity and dividing many churches and even families….
In light of New Calvinism’s impact and influence, especially on Christians between the ages of twenty and forty, it is hoped that a careful clarification and examination of the teachings and beliefs of New Calvinists will reveal why they are in error. After several years of studying this movement, the author desires to explain why New Calvinism appeals to the next generation of Christian leaders and how older men, such as John Piper and Al Mohler, are providing what appears to be deep biblical teaching, but what, in reality, is traditional Reformed/Covenant theology that has been repackaged in post-modern “wrappings.” Unfortunately, these new “wrappings” are cloaking the errors of traditional Calvinism as well as introducing some new doctrinal deviations.
You can read the preface in its entirety at the ordering page, link below.  Here are select excerpts from New Calvinism’s Upside-Down Gospel.
Instead of a gospel that leads individuals to salvation and spiritual growth, the gospel of New Calvinism is a distorted gospel that is setting a path to a mechanical, robotic, fatalistic, and corporate Christianity that offers only a false hope of salvation. Already, New Calvinism is creating a generation of twenty to forty year-olds that lacks a sense of direction, a sense of responsibility, a sense of holiness, a sense of God’s will, and a sense of God’s plan and purpose for creation. According to Time Magazine, New Calvinists are proclaiming a God who is a “micromanaging deity,” totally controlling a “sinful and puny humanity.” 
Because Calvinists do not fully comprehend or understand God’s plan to reveal characteristics of His nature through the redemption of human individuals who have the freedom to accept or reject His offer of salvation, they cling to and promote the doctrine of “Irresistible Grace” for the chosen or “elect” only. How can God be glorified for redeeming a pre-programmed “robot?” 
“Revelation History” as opposed to “Redemptive History” provides both the time and the “stage” necessary to reveal all of God’s attributes, not just His attributes relating to man’s redemption. To limit God’s purpose of history as New Calvinists do is to limit the revelation of God’s Person unnecessarily. 
The New Calvinist’s view of history is an outgrowth of a modified Reformed/Covenant theology called “Biblical Theology” or “redemptive historical hermeneutics,” first proposed in the 18th century.Men like Anglican clergyman Geoffrey Paxton, Geerhardus Vos, and former Seventh-day Adventist, Robert Brinsmead, have clarified and refined it. New Calvinists have repackaged this view of history to make it culturally relevant and have given it various labels such as: “The Centrality of the Objective Gospel” (COG); “The Gospel-Centered Theology;” (GCT) or simply, “Gospel-Driven.”* 
New Calvinism’s “gospel-driven life” may sound biblical, but upon closer examination, one finds that it is not one that is based upon the… “faith [that] cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:17). We are not talking merely about semantics, definitions, or a fad movement; we are talking about the eternal destinies of many for whom Christ died—Heaven or Hell! 
For those who are genuinely saved but have fallen under the teaching of New Calvinism, there is also concern. They, along with unsaved New Calvinists, are being led down a path that quite possibly is leading to a re-unification of Protestant churches with Roman Catholicism. Eventually, this union will spawn the worldwide religion described in Revelation. 
It is reasonable to wonder how earnest individuals can be deceived if leaders urge them to read their Bibles. This question leads to the second great danger of New Calvinism: it denies the power of the Word of God to change lives by relegating it to a minor mystic role…. What was going on is called Lecto Divina, which is a mystic Roman Catholic monastic practice of Scripture reading, meditation, prayer, and contemplation that supposedly promotes communion with God. The focus is “not a theological analysis of biblical passages but to view them [the Scriptures] with Christ as the key to their meaning.” In other words, this is Christo-centric meditation, now being practiced by both Emergent Church movement and New Calvinist leaders. 
To counter the “shifting sands” of today’s world and to provide authoritative leadership that young adults are seeking, New Calvinism offers a micromanaging God who controls every event, experience, or circumstance in a person’s life, down to the minutest detail, apart from any individual accountability for choices and acts. To a generation seeking stability, direction, security, and authority, a God who controls every aspect of life is welcome. 
John Piper, Al Mohler, Mark Dever, Mark Driscoll, and other New Calvinist leaders influence these young adults through their speaking, writing, and Internet blogs. They also encourage their followers to read the writings of past authority figures such as Augustine, Jonathan Edwards, and John Owens, as well as other influential Reformers or Puritans. While some of these writings provide useful spiritual insight, they also contain false biblical teaching. It is these and other writings that encourage mysticism, signs and wonders, and a continual looking back to the cross. Instead of complacent Christianity, New Calvinism seems to offer a sense of passion that is experienced through meditation on the majesty of God and the cross.
Dr. Congdon closes his book with a section of Suggestions for Countering New CalvinismI encourage each of you to purchase this powerful and compelling exposure of, and biblical response to the dangers of the New Calvinism. Click on New Calvinism’s Upside-Down Gospel to order your copy.


PO Box 1785, Greer, South Carolina 29652

*Note:Gospel Driven” is a preferred term of Dr. Dave Doran. In 2009 Dave wrote, “My goal through these posts on gospel-driven separation has been to lay out what I believe are the biblical obligations regarding separation that are explicitly stated in or implied by clear biblical texts.” (Starting at the Right Spot, Nov. 2009) Just days later it was learned that Dr. Al Mohler compromised the gospel by signing the Manhattan Declaration (Nov. 2009) with Roman Catholic priests. Mohler had given Christian recognition to the deadly “enemies of the cross of Christ,” which he (Mohler) has never apologized for or biblically repented of. Instead of making an application of his “gospel-driven biblical obligations” Dave elected to excuse Mohler’s ecumenism. Dave Doran dismissed the incident as merely, “a wrong decision based on bad judgment.”  Kevin Bauder suggested it was nothing more than a, “single episode...an occasional inconsistency.”