IFCA Meddling in the Affairs of BJU
Last week I published a brief article about BJU president Steve Pettit and the current state of affairs regarding whether or not the board will renew his contract. Return to, Steve Pettit's Tenure at BJU in Question for details.
Yesterday I received a carbon of an email that passed through two other hands before it came to me. The author allowed for and encouraged it being forwarded to others.
The author of the email and its recipients' ministries are publicly trying to whip up a mob to pressure BJU's board. The sender and two recipients of the email are as follows:
Dave Deets
-Dave Deets, in Fairview, NC, is the vice president of ministries in The Institute of Biblical Leadership (IBL). See: https://www.iblministry.org/about/team
-Bud Haskell is secretary and on the board of Independent Fundamental Churches of America (IFCA) International, California Church Extension.
-Richard Bargas is executive director of IFCA, International California IFCA International.
Deets, Haskell, Bargas the IFCA & IBL are meddling regarding the internal affairs of BJU. I post their email that these men might be reproved (2 Tim. 3:16-17) and biblically repent of their deed.
LM
From: Dave Deets <daved@iblministry.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2022 11:41 AM
To: Bud Haskell <bhaskell425@gmail.com>
Cc: Richard Bargas <bargas@ifca.org>
Subject: Help for Dr. Steve Pettit and Bob Jones University
Men of the IFCA:
I am writing to you with the full support and approval of Dr. Bargas:
As many of you are aware, Bob Jones University has hosted our CORPs retreat for the past 5 years. For that, we are deeply grateful. Many of you joined a zoom meeting last year after the CORPs retreat and heard about the challenges that were happening between those in the Foundations Baptist Fellowship movement and their influence over the board. Many of you responded with emails and letters of support to Dr. Pettit, Dr. Benson, and Dr. Wood. I wanted to give you an update on things.
Two weeks ago, the faculty and staff gave Dr. Pettit a standing ovation for his work at BJU and the systematic and intentional changes that have been made. Immediately following the standing ovation, the Chairman of the Board stood up and addressed the Faculty and Staff and let them know that the board was seriously considering not renewing his contract and would in essence be terminating him as President. The reasons for this have been written about in a number of Fundamental Baptist blogs. Among the concerns that have been written about are:
• Steve is no longer a separationist because he allowed the students to participate in packing Operation Christmas Child Shoeboxes last year as part of their campus outreach
• Steve is an ecumenical because he has preached at a couple of area Presbyterian churches, so far the IFCA has not been named in the demise of the ecumenicism, but I do know that some have issues with Steve’s participation with us
• Steve has allowed the women to wear pants to class
• Steve has allowed the parents to determine what church their children will attend. For a few of you, you will remember we had this conversation with Steve and Sam and other administrators when the University flew 4 or 5 of us down there several years ago
To that end, there has been a petition created to show support for and encouragement for Steve Pettit and the administration of Bob Jones. I am fully aware of the history of BJU and I am also super appreciative as an alumnus of what is happening. My son Caleb is a Junior there this year and I can testify first hand of his growth in his spiritual life and maturity and development as a Christ-honoring young man thanks to the influence of the faculty, staff, and administration.
Please sign this petition
[Link Deleted by Site Publisher]
If you would be so kind as to sign this petition and if you would like to share this on your social media feeds or in other venues. I know that some of you have had Steve come and preach for you and bring the musical groups to your church. If there are those in your church that you would like to make aware of this petition, please feel free to send this to them.
Thank you so much men and please let me know if you have questions.
Dave Deets D.Min.
Vice President of Ministries
Lou, yet another example of Dr. Pettit's move toward evangelicalism. To have had the IBL on campus hosting their retreat is another "notch," so to speak, to add to the growing laundry list of encroachment toward evangelicalism.
ReplyDeleteThis man's attempt to "influence" the internal workings of another institution is right out of the political liberal playbook, not exactly a playbook that should be embraced by believers.
Brian
Thanks for sharing those thoughts. It is beyond question Steve Pettit has swung the university decidedly into non-separatist evangelicalism and ecumenical compromise. The IFCA and IBL inserted itself into a ministry's controversy that is not their own. Not to mention Dave Deets disparaged another ministry, the FBFI.
DeleteAs a 2020 graduate of BJU, I see many of my former classmates enraged about Dr. Pettit’s potential removal, and current students threaten to leave in mass if he is removed. However, when BJU did the right thing and separated from the Billy Graham movement many years ago, there was a mass exodus but God provided for and blessed the school for its commitment to biblical separation and holiness. I pray that the board will renew its commitment to that biblical separation because there is a noticeable change in the spiritual climate on campus - and not in a good way. There is not a concern for holy living. Yes there are good kids still who are trying to serve the Lord, but there are more who are trying to be as close to the world as possible while still “loving Jesus.”
ReplyDeleteAs a 2020 BJU grad, I see my former classmates enraged about Dr Pettit’s potential removal, and I hear current students threatening to leave. However, perhaps that would be a good thing. When BJU Separated from the Billy Graham movement, there was a mass exodus. However, God provided and blessed the school for its commitment to biblical separation and holiness. I pray that this is a turning point for a return to that separation. I have first-hand seen how the spiritual climate of BJU has changed recently and not in a good way. Yes, there are still good kids who are trying to serve the Lord, but there is not a concern for holy living in general. Instead, I see students who want to be as close to the world as possible while still “loving Jesus.” Contemporary music and emotionalism are common. The dress code is almost nonexistent, and if you abide by the rules then you are a “boj.” Even worse, if you enforce the rules, you’re badmouthed and considered legalistic.
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing your impressions from first hand experience on campus. Soon after the beginning of his presidency Steve Pettit set out to erase the university's fundamentalist, separatist legacy. I have documented many of the "changes" he engineered and/or supported. You have clearly defined some of the tragic results of those changes.
DeleteImo, the university's survivability is in doubt. If Pettit is retained the school will continue moving deeper into non-separatist evangelicalism and ecumenical compromise, which will make BJU the new Liberty University and Cedarville. Many would rather see the school close and dissolved before that happens.
I also think If Pettit is removed there will be a voluntary and necessary involuntary purge of the administration, faculty and staff who supported and enabled Pettit's program. Hard to predict what percentage of students would withdraw. 30, 40, 50%? Much of BJU's long time support base have been driven away, how many might come back alongside is questionable.
You wrote, "I pray that this is a turning point for a return to that separation."
Many would like to see the school returned to its founding principles, but it would likely to be a slow and painful process.
LM
Is there any indication how the board’s dealings with Dr Pettit became public knowledge? The fact that this is being hashed out publicly is tragic and will only lead to further damage in my opinion. I am a 2000 grad.
ReplyDelete
DeleteGood question. The three year renewal process was a given, common knowledge among the board and administration. Being this is the first time removal of a sitting president is on the table a leak was, imo, inevitable. If the Deets email is to be taken as factual I suppose the leak and resulting public outcry began when the board Chairman notified the staff that Pettit's contract renewal was in doubt.
LM
Lou, this was leaked intentionally to shore up support for Dr. Pettit. I will be very surprised if his contract is not-renewed. The outcry from current students and supportive staff will keep Pettit in place. The elephant in the room is the enormous amount of money at stake. A loss of 50 percent of the students would devastate the University. Principle and Biblical separation were put out to pasture years ago with the acceptance of Government funding. I could be wrong, but I think this is a last gasp effort on the part of Dr. Bob, III, who no doubt is quietly behind some of the more conservative board members, to bring the University back from decay and ruin. It is my opinion that it will not be successful. The Matthew 6:24 principle- "No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon" is in play here. Sadly, there have been two masters who the leadership of BJU have been trying to serve under the Pettit tenure. It cannot be done without serious consequences . Something huge is about to happen in this upcoming Board vote. Please note: we are watching, either way, the death throes of a once vibrant and effective training institution for separatist, Christ-loving, sin-hating, world-rejecting, character infused, truth preaching, Scripture-oriented servants.
ReplyDeleteBrother Brainard:
DeleteThanks for the timely thoughts. The public spectacle is sad and might have been avoidable had the board responded decisively to the changes ushered in by Pettit much much earlier in his tenure. The signs of where he was taking the university were quite evident early on. What becomes of BJU is ultimately in God's hands and it will be accomplished according to His good pleasure.
Respectfully, I can’t help but see the division over this issue as an attempt by Satan to tear apart one of the remaining doctrinally sound colleges in this day and age. We should strive for unity as part of the body of Christ (Eph 4) and seek to avoid division (I Cor 1). I understand there are differences of opinion, but the unity of the gospel should be greater than any difference we have over personal conviction or the management of a school. I personally support the changes Dr. Pettit has made while he has been President over BJU. I’m impressed that the university has remained faithful to the gospel for nearly a hundred years. I believe unity in the gospel as believers (not focusing on changes in dress code) is what will sustain the university in the future as well.
ReplyDeleteAnd a genuine question: When doctrinally sound Biblical schools are so few and far between, would it not be better to continue to run a college that might be shifting toward non-separatism than to close the school and have nothing at all?
I am going to briefly react to some of your comments. This isn't going to be a homiletical gem, just speaking from the heart in plain language in the few moments I have.
DeleteYou wrote, "one of the remaining doctrinally sound colleges in this day and age."
Calvinism, Lordship Salvation and Reformed Theology are not doctrinally sound theologies. And only in recent years have these been allowed for and promoted on campus. See- An Analysis of B JU's Position Paper
http://indefenseofthegospel.blogspot.com/2019/11/an-analysis-of-bob-jones-universitys_20.html
Ignoring or redefining biblical separation is not doctrinally sound. Entangling BJU with Franklin Graham's ecumenical movement that embraces apostasy and rank heresy is not sound. Steve Pettit has transformed and reimagined the once doctrinally sound BJU.
You wrote, "the unity of the gospel...." Or some say, "gospel centric fellowship." These are a favorite catch phrase of men who want to redefine authentic biblical separation so they can legitimize their fellowship with non-separatist evangelicals. Kevin Bauder and Dave Doran have been the primary drivers among us of this novel reinterpretation of the Scripture. See- Separation in Academic Context
http://indefenseofthegospel.blogspot.com/2010/05/redux-is-there-second-definition-for_17.html
Gospel Centric Fellowship
https://indefenseofthegospel.blogspot.com/2012/11/incompatible-gospels-misfit-of-lordship.html
"Its adherents generally believe that since the Gospel is the main thing and everything else is secondary to it in importance that they can fellowship with [virtually] anyone who is a believer in the Gospel."
You wrote, "would it not be better to continue to run a college that might be shifting toward non-separatism..."
No, it would not! What men seek to do in moderation their followers will take to extremes. Steve Pettit has essentially erased the school's biblically separatist legacy. You seem to think this has been reasonable and in moderation. He has done it incrementally and if left unchecked far worse is not far off. Schools like Wheaton, Cedarville and Liberty didn't become ecumenical over night. Princeton and Yale didn't go into rank heresy and become haters of God and His Word overnight. Northland, Pillsbury, Clearwater, TTU, Calvary Seminary all closed because the leadership there tried much the same thing Steve Pettit is doing at BJU. He like they is shifting the school away from its fundamentalist, separatist moorings. You can’t take a hard left and expect your base to stay with you. It's a hard unlearned lesson that repeats itself over and over. Every time it's tried that administration thinks it can get it right. See- Closure of Calvary: Predictable & Repeatable.
https://indefenseofthegospel.blogspot.com/2013/08/closure-of-calvary-baptist-seminary.html
So, I tell you frankly and with a heavy heart it better serves the cause of Christ that BJU close down rather than continue the course Steve Pettit and his administration has set it on.
Kind regards,
LM
This evangelical/ecumenical idea of “unity for the gospel sake” is an attempt to use the lowest common denominator for togetherness and relegating all other doctrine as being inconsequential. We know the danger of such thought and action and history is replete with example after example.
DeleteAnother thought for those who call for "unity" and cite such passages that call for unity. Please note the context for unity, the local church body (as noted above, Eph. 4 and I Cor. 1). The greater "body of Christ" will not see unity till we're all in God's presence. Doctrine divides and this is a good thing. The Apostle Paul, John, Jude all exhorted their readers concerning those who attempted or brought in wrong doctrine into the churches and called us to separate from such and to name them as a warning to others. In the epistle of Galatians, Paul calls out wrong doctrine but does not bring up unity, why? Because he was addressing the "churches" of Galatia, not a single church like in Ephesus and Corinth. We see that men started moving away from the Apostle's teachings very early on in the first century and it has only continued since.
Beside reading such books as Dr. Pickering's book on Separation, I would encourage everyone to read Dr. McCune's, Promise Unfulfilled, as he examines the new evangelical movement and notes its failure. May we learn from the errors of the past and not repeat them expecting a different outcome, because that just won't happen.
My alma mater left the path we were both on 40 years ago (and no, I'm not referring to the personal dress standards). There is a long and growing list of speakers coming to and Dr. Pettit speaking for, that 40 years ago was unthinkable by the Dr. Bob's (Jr. and III), as well as activities on campus that are worldly and would not have happened 40 years ago.
Well put Lou and second anonymous. The Gospel is never to be isolated from the other doctrines of Scripture.
DeleteTitus 2:10-15,
10Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.
11For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
12Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
13Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
14Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
15These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.
"Unity of the gospel should be greater than any difference we have..." Here's a poignant observation from a series of chapel messages by Dr. Bob Jones III (2011). The Faith of the Gospel, Part 4. See-
Deletehttp://indefenseofthegospel.blogspot.com/2011/05/dr-bob-jones-iii-faith-of-gospel-part-4.html
His text, “Only let your conversation be as it becometh the gospel of Christ: that whether I come and see you, or else be absent, I may hear of your affairs, that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel,” (Phil. 1:27).
Dr. Jones said,
The faith of the gospel…is the outflow of the saving gospel of Jesus Christ. The faith of the gospel, which as we have been trying to say in these previous messages encompasses everything about the Christian life. And this is a verse about behavior, it says so right there in the first phrase…Let it be about the gospel stemming from the gospel. We have tried to make it clear in these messages that those who say, “Well, it’s all about the gospel.” If it’s all just about the gospel then we’ve missed the whole point of the gospel.
There is the saving gospel, which introduces us to the faith of the gospel. And if we embrace the philosophy that it’s just about the gospel we can put our arms around about every wrong, unbecoming Christian behavior in all the world. We can put our stamp of approval on counterfeit Christianity. If they’re preaching the gospel… no matter what else is going on in those ministries, no matter what endorsements and involvements they have with liberal unbelieving religion, no matter what ecumenical reach they may have, no matter what distortions they may have, no matter what tolerance for the intolerable…we can embrace all of that and say that’s fine, that’s good they’re preaching the gospel. This verse makes it very clear that there is a lot more than that….
I beg you to think about how the gospel is changed when it is conveyed in an unholy conveyance [that] God did not intend…
I feel like I am missing something in this article. I admittedly am new to the concerns, but I am trying to get up to speed quickly. I see 4 concerns pointed out in the original article.
ReplyDeleteAllowing students to participate in the Shoebox Christmas packages - I admit, not a fan or supporter of the Graham movement. However, it seems like this participation could be stopped and it doesn't seem like an offense worthy of firing.
Preaching at Presbyterian Churches - I have always felt, observed, and believed BJU was more closely tied with the Presbyterian church than Baptist anyway. The title is irrelevant, it is the doctrine that matters. Neither title is founded in scripture, they are simply used to indicate doctrine and church polity. So, again, doesn't seem to be an issue.
Allowing women to wear pants to class - from the article it appears the writer is opposed to that. Scripture discusses modesty. It does not say women should/shouldn't wear pants. To say it is unscriptural for a woman to wear pants is not scripturally founded (legalism).
Allowing parents to determine what church their child attends - fully agree. As the parent, I definitely should be involved. A campus church does not allow students to involve themselves in the local church. They miss many ministry opportunities because of that. I should help train my child in finding a good church, not the University.
I am a graduate from the 1990's. I have had two children graduate, one is attending now and another has been accepted to attend next year. Unless there are issues not discussed in the article, I am scratching my head over why all the uproar. If there are more concerns, I would appreciate knowing what they are so I can make an informed decision to support/not support the board's decision. One comment referenced Calvinism, Lordship Salvation, and the Reformed Movement - are these beliefs being taught on campus? Are there doctrinal issues not discussed? Thank you for any insight anyone can offer.
I need to add one more article as a must read so that you might see just how far Steve Pettit has taken the university away from its founding purposes and principles. See "BJU Fashion Design Runway Show"-
Deletehttp://indefenseofthegospel.blogspot.com/2022/01/bju-fashion-design-runway-show.html
Your questions are fair. The answers are all found in any number of the related articles I have published about the goings-on at BJU over the past several years. All are thoroughly documented.
ReplyDeleteMy recommendation is to begin with "FACTS..." by Dr. Beale. Being a graduate you certainly know the man and his character.
Then read "An Analysis of BJU's Position Paper..." by Dr. Rob Congdon.
From there read "BJU Embraces Franklin Graham’s Ecumenical Movement."
The links to these and more articles appear with this and the previous article. In each of the articles you will find links to additional related articles.
If you truly want to understand why a wide swath of BJU alumni and long time supporters have abandoned the university and would welcome Steve’s Pettit's dismissal you will find those answers there.
Kind regards,
LM
PS: The pants on women issue I have never discussed. All I will say here is in some settings pants are not necessarily a problem. In that setting, young people gathered together, I would have erred on the side of caution giving God the benefit of the doubt.