tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post5540769229755972179..comments2024-02-27T03:28:22.684-06:00Comments on In Defense of the Gospel: Do Fundamentalists & Evangelicals, “Believe, Preach and Defend the [Same] Gospel?”Lou Martuneachttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08683967904677815711noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-23463243978716623952010-08-26T18:36:27.296-05:002010-08-26T18:36:27.296-05:00Brian, on this particular issue, it doesn't ma...Brian, on this particular issue, it doesn't matter if one is dispensational or covenantal. On this issue, the DT/CT divide is meaningless. Since you have men on both sides who are both of those positions, it is a nonissue.Josh Lucashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11871902249009105861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-64316183174085141032010-08-26T17:11:53.968-05:002010-08-26T17:11:53.968-05:00Josh,
Please go back and read what I said. Calvini...Josh,<br />Please go back and read what I said. Calvinism is just the soteriological part of reformed/covenantal thought.One can be Calvinistic and not be Reformed/Covenantal, but one cannot be reformed and not be a Calvinistic.<br />I was not voicing anything against those who espouse Calvinism regardless of how many points they are. My thrust was to the difference between Dispensation's hermeneutics and Reformed/Covenant hermeneutics.<br />Some suggested reading in case you don't really understand the difference between dispensationalism and Reform/Covenantalism. Charles Ryrie's Dispensationalism; Renald Showers' There really is a Difference!; and an exceptional book IMO is Mal Couch's An Introduction to Classical Evangelical Hermeneutics: A Guide to the History and Practice of Biblical Interpretation.Brian Ernsbergernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-59206971255094608972010-08-26T16:01:01.198-05:002010-08-26T16:01:01.198-05:00Brian, dispensationalism is not a hermeneutic oppo...Brian, dispensationalism is not a hermeneutic opposed to reformed/covenant men. Charles Ryrie is a 4 point calvinist. There are many 5 point calvinists/dispensationalists.<br /><br />On this particular issue, hermeneutics is not the issue. The issue has more to do with word meanings and theology.Josh Lucashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11871902249009105861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-22496321816744792622010-08-25T20:38:11.644-05:002010-08-25T20:38:11.644-05:00Part of this equation that has remained somewhat s...Part of this equation that has remained somewhat silent is the hermeneutics of these men/groups. For the most part the CE men are of a reformed/covenant thought while Ryrie, et. al. and Fundamentalists are of a dispensational thought (even Bauder willingly acknowledges this). The hermeneutics of these two (reformed-dispensational) are really at odds with one another. How we interprete the Scripture bears directly on our understanding of what the Scriptures say. When you look back over the past 100 years, you really don't see a widespread, wholesale cooperation between these two hermeneutics. Really only a rather limited, local/personal cooperation.<br />Just some food for thought.Brian Ernsbergernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-60489897609581611082010-08-25T19:43:11.954-05:002010-08-25T19:43:11.954-05:00Kev:
I agree with your feelings above.
If Ryri...Kev:<br /><br />I agree with your feelings above. <br /><br />If Ryrie or Whitcomb were to cooperate in fellowship with the T4G men it would signal, at the minimum, tacit endorsement of their Lordship gospel, aberrant theology and hobnobbing with unbelievers.<br /><br />Thanks,<br /><br /><br />LouLou Martuneachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08683967904677815711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-56840364214967765422010-08-25T19:19:14.387-05:002010-08-25T19:19:14.387-05:00Hi Lou,
As one who has recently seen the fruit o...Hi Lou, <br /><br />As one who has recently seen the fruit of allowing members of a ministry to even visit T4G; that being the destruction of a highly fruitful ministry - I can say with confidence that if Charles Ryrie or John Whitcomb were to speak at such an event it would be a travesty. <br /><br />Unless they were to out and out rebuke the foolish men leading so many astray and Biblically destroy their imagined theology that raises it self above the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, for either man to even be present at such an event would be a travesty. <br /><br />KevKevlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18080346872086553798noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-18101230818591106522010-08-25T15:37:27.915-05:002010-08-25T15:37:27.915-05:00To All:
Bauder asked, “Is it really believable th...To All:<br /><br />Bauder asked, “<i>Is it really believable that they [T4G] cannot find a place for Christian statesmen like Charles Ryrie or John C. Whitcomb</i>?”<br /><br />I answered this in the article above, but I was wondering this afternoon-<br /><br />Has anyone consider that Charles Ryrie and/or John Whitcomb may not want and would decline an invitation to speak at T4G if it ever was offered?<br /><br /><br />LMLou Martuneachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08683967904677815711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-48329734572893382132010-08-25T08:29:34.321-05:002010-08-25T08:29:34.321-05:00Brian:
Continuing from above…
This tact from Bau...Brian:<br /><br />Continuing from above…<br /><br />This tact from Bauder has its roots in the paradigm shift to a <i>gospel-driven separatism</i>, which Dave Doran also articulates. The whole counsel of God is not brought to bear on the evangelicals in favor of let's agree on the Gospel and agree to disagree on virtually all the rest. Men like Bauder and Doran do not hold the evangelicals accountable for running rough-shod over the Scriptures that forbid their ecumenical compromises. It is ignored or excused. <br /><br /><b>2 Cor. 6:14-17</b>, <b>Eph. 5:11</b>; <b>2 John 6-11</b> are very clear, Bauder can teach from these very capably, <b>2 John</b> in particular. When it comes to the evangelicals, however, he will not make the application and refuses to them hold them accountable for their violating the principles of those passages. <br /><br />If men were to be consistent and live in fidelity to the whole counsel of God there is ample evidence from many of the evangelicals that irrefutably brings passages such as <b>2 Thess. 3:6, 14-15</b> and <b>Romans 16:17</b> to bear. That is why IMO Bauder does not hold them accountable for their ecumenical compromises and he never raises or discusses the passages on separatism from disobedient and erring brethren. If he does, he has a difficult personal decision to make- Either: <br /><br />1) Obey the Scriptural mandates and call for separatism from the evangelicals, or... <br /><br />2) Redefine and/or dismiss the Scriptures openly and openly call for others to follow his dismissal of those passages. <br /><br />On #1 I believe he will never go there because IMO he is well on the way to abandoning Fundamentalism and is building bridges for himself to one day join and become one of the evangelicals. To do this he must abandon fidelity to the principles of separatism just like the New Evangelicals 50 years ago and their children, the so-called “<i>conservative</i>” evangelicals, still do today. If he holds firm on separatism from unbelievers and disobedient/erring brethren the evangelicals will never accept him. <br /><br />FWIW, I sometimes wonder if Bauder’s intermediate step to evangelicalism is to create some kind of hybrid movement between the two and position himself as its figure-head.<br /><br />IMO this paradigm shift on separatism being propagated by Bauder and Doran is simply a mechanism to abandon the biblical mandates on separation for the sake of a pure church so that they (Bauder/Doran) can call for fellowship around the Calvinistic soteriology of their counter-parts in the so-called “<i>conservative</i>” evangelicalism. <br /><br />The price for that paradigm shift has shown itself in the form of their willingness to tolerate, allow for, excuse and/or ignore the evangelical’s aberrant theology, worldliness in their methods of ministry and ecumenical compromises.<br /><br /><br />LouLou Martuneachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08683967904677815711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-61514422733041124292010-08-25T08:17:03.649-05:002010-08-25T08:17:03.649-05:00Brian:
Thanks for the support and encouragement. ...Brian:<br /><br />Thanks for the support and encouragement. This article has had hundreds of reads since I posted it last night. <br /><br />The on line blogging evidence is irrefutable from Kevin Bauder and *Dave Doran. They have softened personally toward, are chipping away at and trying to influence their followings to abandon Fundamentalism’s militancy especially in regard to authentic <i>biblical separatism</i>.<br /><br />As I noted in this article Bauder is perpetuating a gross misrepresentation in his suggesting unity between Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism on the Gospel. Outside of men in Fundamentalism who are Calvinists and accept LS as the Gospel his all encompassing claims of unity around the Gospel with evangelicals are not true and he knows it. I mulled this over since I read his <i>Differences</i>, Part 12 on Friday. I finally decided that this obvious misrepresentation crossed the line, necessitated an exposure and an open call for honesty from him.<br /><br />More to follow.<br /><br /><br />LouLou Martuneachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08683967904677815711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-68539320584059540582010-08-24T20:29:51.082-05:002010-08-24T20:29:51.082-05:00Bro. Lou,
Thank you for this article. It is time ...Bro. Lou,<br /><br />Thank you for this article. It is time to call out and take a stand. Elijah called out the Israelites at Mt. Carmel but they remained silent initially. Sad commentary on their spiritual condition that they were unwilling to say anything until after the sacrifice was consumed by God.<br /><br />It is indeed time to wake up and see the damage that will be done if those within Fundamentalism whose agenda is to moderate and soften Fundamentalism's militancy are able to foist their distorted view/understanding of what is historic Fundamentalism. Kevin Bauder has been active in this arena with his postings at his blog site for quite some time.<br /><br />Thanks for the exposure of what is going on.Brian Ernsbergernoreply@blogger.com