February 23, 2025

Archival Series: "Our Children Learn Not Only What We Teach Them, But By What We Tolerate"

In its history Northland International University (NIU), the former Northland Baptist Bible College, has not been in a situation requiring a strong call to separate. In the early days Northland was a refreshing voice because of it’s good conservative stands, refreshing Northwood’s feel, friendly campus, servant’s heart, with a love for revival and the Lord Jesus Christ. Students were being discipled with a demerits system in place and properly emphasized for correction and growth. There are many fine pastors and Christian workers serving the Lord today because of Northland’s ministry to them.

Our children learn not only what we teach them, but by what we tolerate.”

According to NIU alumni Dr. Les Ollila (former NIU Chancellor) said that over and over to the student body. With decisions made in recent weeks at Northland a new kind of teaching and tolerance has come to the campus.

In 2005, because of Rick Holland’s inclusion as a speaker, Dr. Ollila pulled out of the God-Focused conference. It is believed that NIU president Matt Olson insisted Ollila withdraw. Just five years later Dr. Ollila along with Matt Olson, Sam Horn and Doug McLachlan reach out to and travel across the country to meet with John MacArthur, Rick Holland and Phil Johnson. Then Ollila/Olson/NIU have this same man (Rick Holland) speak in chapel to impressionable young people.

What changed between 2005 and 2010? It wasn’t Rick Holland. He is today what he was in 2005: a non-separatist evangelical, advocate for Lordship Salvation1 and the founder of the Resolved Conference, which merges preaching with the world’s CCM/rock culture and extreme Charismatic style worship.2 NIU embracing MacArthur, Johnson and putting Rick Holland in its chapel pulpit confirms they are willing to teach Lordship Salvation, teach/tolerate a neutered form of biblical separatism, tolerate and allow for the worldly culture of events such as the Resolved Conference.

Regrettably, in just five years, Les Ollila has changed. NIU is being transformed by its president, Matt Olson, and administration decisions. With and because of their change the historical trajectory of NIU has been radically altered. [On April 30, 2015 NIU Announced its Closure.]

With the changes at NIU many share concerns over ministry, direction and leanings of NIU. There is a declining interest in maintaining fellowship by many former alums, good Christian leaders and lay workers. Many who have some relationship with NIU are contacting the administration to express their concerns. Others will quietly pull away and encourage their young people to look elsewhere for a Christian college. Now unfortunately, because NIU’s administration wants it both ways their friendship base will have to change just to maintain status quo not to mention growth.

Many alumni view what Northland is doing today as completely contrary to what was taught not very long ago. Students were told that they will become in the future based on two things: the friends you have and the books you read. Is it any wonder they have done what they have? If you live long enough, you will have to change your friends or change your doctrine. NIU is changing its friends for new ones in the so-call  “conservative” evangelicalism. Certain doctrines, separatism in particular, is not far from being compromised for the sake of their new friends.

Why do men who claim a heritage and commitment to separatist Fundamentalism take the initiative to reach out to evangelicals who openly repudiate biblical separation in principle and in application? Is it possible that these alleged fundamental separatists want to retain the label they are comfortable with, but have lost the will to contend, to wage the battle for fidelity to the God-given mandates? Is it possible they will redefine the principles and application of separation to accommodate the need to tolerate, allow for and excuse aberrant doctrine and ecumenism for the sake of fellowship with evangelicals?

Have self-described fundamental separatists decided to move toward a safe, non-confrontational middle ground at the expense of fidelity to the Word of God on separation to be accepted and respected by evangelicals?

The “conservative” evangelicals have not and show no inclination of moving toward a Fundamentalist’s commitment to authentic biblical separation. Someone is moving, someone is changing, and it isn’t the evangelicals.

With recent revelations we are learning a great deal about Northland’s new trajectory. NIU will try to placate alumni and donors while it moves further away from its historic stand. Matt Olson’s recent open letter to Friends in Ministry was just such an attempt that, in the opinion of many, was an abject failure. If Northland maintains this new direction and discussions among concerned persons are any indication of a national response, I fear Northland’s best days are behind it and the worst is yet to come.

Northland’s new trajectory has a historic parallel. The devastating effects of introducing Evangelicalism’s philosophy and practices into a biblical Fundamentalist setting are no more stark than the demise of Pillsbury Baptist Bible College.3


LM
First Published Nov. 29, 2010 & again Jan. 2, 2018

For previous articles in this series see-

NIU’s Convergence With Evangelicalism: What Does It Mean for Impressionable Students?

NIU Presents Executive Pastor of Grace Community Church to It’s Student Body

1) An Example of Lordship Salvation’s Man-Centered Message

2) The Merger of Calvinism With Worldliness, by Dr. Peter Masters

3) Discussion Over the Closing of Pillsbury Baptist Bible College
Although Pillsbury struggled for a number of years to recover itself from the devastating effects of hob-nobbing with Evangelicalism, it never really dealt with (in any real tangible way) its ruined reputation. Although it was repeatedly brought before them by many friends of the college, they never really did what was necessary to regain the trust of the pastors and parents who send students.”

January 26, 2025

Chris Anderson's The Scandal of Schism: An Overview by Dr. David Beale

Introduction: Basic Facts to Know Before Reading this Book

      

Dr. David Beale
    Mainline Fundamentalism originated in the northern states. The editor of the Baptist periodical Watchman-Examiner coined the term Fundamentalist in 1920 to describe a group of concerned Baptists who had just met at the Delaware Avenue Baptist Church in Buffalo, New York, to discuss the problem of Modernism in the Northern Baptist Convention.

    New Evangelicalism is the religious mood or attitude that repudiates Fundamentalism’s doctrine of separation from false teachers and advocates theological dialogue with Modernism and greater social involvement. Harold J. Ockenga coined the term New Evangelical in 1948 when he described the movement as a “new breed.”


    By the late 1940s and early 1950s, Fundamentalists began to see the broad umbrella of Evangelicalism emerging distinctly into a New Evangelical movement. Evangelicalism committed to regaining respectability in the eyes of the religious world, even if that meant joining liberals in ecumenical campaigns. By the late 1950s Billy Graham had clearly emerged as the evangelist of New Evangelical. Fundamentalism was now growing and changing in emphasis. They were compelled to practice purity by separating not only from liberal churches and schools, but also from disobedient brethren who preferred to identify with false teachers under broad umbrellas. Many Fundamentalists came to the conviction that with the enemy in the camp, they must separate from evangelical ministries. To separate from the broad Evangelical movement was to renounce “Early Fundamentalism” and embrace “Separatist Fundamentalism.” Fundamentalism had fully changed! But separation is not “secondary.” Sin is sin! Practicing disobedience is sin, whatever or whoever commits it.


    At the 1938 General Association of Regular Baptist Churches meeting at Waterloo, Iowa, the GARBC abolished dual membership and set forth biblical separation. From that time on, separation from all Northern Baptist Convention churches would be the official practice in the GARBC. That was Separatist Fundamentalism.


    By 1967, The New Testament Association of Baptist Churches (NTA) and the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship (FBF) had become completely Separatist Fundamentalists. See: “Shift from Early Fundamentalism to Separatist Fundamentalism,” in David Beale, Baptist History in England and America: Personalities, Positions, and Practices (Maitland, FL: Xulon Press, 2018), 434-47.


    The explicit teaching of passages such as Matthew 18:15–18; 1 Corinthians 5:1–13; and 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 14–15 compelled separatist Fundamentalists to withdraw from New Evangelical ministries. Neo-Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy, with conservative sounding rhetoric, lured New Evangelicals directly into cooperation with unbelief. By the mid-1960s, the “Broad” Evangelical movement had almost completely gained control of the Bible colleges and seminaries.


Separatist Fundamentalism: The Standard of Charles H. Spurgeon


    On October 28, 1887, Charles H. Spurgeon registered the official withdrawal of the Metropolitan Tabernacle from the Baptist Union, which was filled with unbelief. Some Union churches, belief in doctrine, refused to separate from Union churches. They remained and identified themselves under the same umbrella as unbelief. Today, there are SBC churches who are belief in doctrine, but under the same umbrella with unbelief. Their identity is unbelief. Chris Anderson would urge any godly Christian to join anything in the Southern Baptist Convention. He says there is nothing to worry about it.


    On the Lord’s-Day morning of October 7, 1888, at Metropolitan Tabernacle pulpit, Charles H. Spurgeon preached his Sermon No. 2047, titled “No Compromise.” Spurgeon, clearly seeking to remain his calling and conscience, explained to his large congregation the biblical meaning of separation—in view of the Judgment Seat of Christ: “When I go back to my Master, if I have faithfully told out His message of free grace and dying love, I shall be clear. I have often prayed that I might be able to ... say: ‘I am clear, I am clear!’ that I might not stultify [invalidate] my testimony, I have cut myself clear of those who err from the faith, and even from those who associate with them. What more can I do to be honest with you?” Spurgeon pleads to his flock: “Clear me in that day of all complicity with the novel inventions [schemes] of deluded men. As for my Lord, I pray of Him grace to be faithful to the end, both to His truth, and to your souls. Amen.” Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit (1889; repr., London: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1970), 34:564 (34:553–64). “If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds” (2 John 1:10-11). Spurgeon was a biblical, Separatist Fundamentalist.


    Unlike Spurgeon in his day, Chris Anderson teaches to separate (breakaway) from biblical Fundamentalism and go into Broad Evangelicalism. Note Anderson’s title: The Scandal of Schism: A Journey from Sinful Division to Biblical Fidelity. His title would mean that Spurgeon’s separation (schism) was a journey on sinful division (scandal). Anderson has written a shallow book with serious mistakes to pull Christians away from biblical Fundamentalism and into Broad Evangelicalism.


    In March 1891, Spurgeon wrote these words to a friend regarding the Downgrade Controversy, “Good-by, you will never see me again; this fight is killing me.” During April 1891, the “fatal illness commenced,” (C. H. Spurgeon’s Autobiography 1856–1878, vol. 3 (London: Passmore and Alabaster, 1899, 152). Soon, at the Pastor’s College Conference, Spurgeon delivered his “final manifesto,” a powerful message titled “The Greatest Fight in the World.” His text was 1 Timothy 6:12, “Fight the good fight of faith,” published in The Sword and the Trowel 27 (August 1891). The sermon also appeared the following year as Charles H. Spurgeon, The Greatest Fight in the World (London: Passmore and Alabaster, 1892). Fundamentalists fight because they love their people and biblical truth.


The 1985 SBC Dallas Convention Center in Texas

  

On June 10, 1985, I [David Beale] went to Dallas with boxes of my book, S.B.C. House on the Sand (1985). W. A. Criswell, Pastor of the First Baptist Church in Dallas, had arranged for Judge Paul Pressler and me to a one-hour debate on the topic, “Believers staying or leaving liberal SBC churches, or believers cutting off fellowship from those believers remaining in SBC churches, etc.”


    The next few days, June 11-13, 1985, marked the largest annual SBC Convention in Baptist history, which occurred at the Dallas Convention Center in Texas. They drew over 45,000 messengers. Nearby, Brothers and Nobles placed boxes of S.B.C. House on the Sand on their sidewalk tables. Chris Anderson claims that those who remained in their SBC churches were “maligned” by S.B.C. House on the Sand, with Beale “an example.” Anderson adds, “Our SBC brothers fighting error from within should have been prayed for and encouraged.” My prayers and encouragement were for Bible believing Fundamentalist churches. Anderson said that the “call for conservatives to leave the SBC would have precluded the successful conservative resurgence which began in 1979 and purged SBC seminaries of liberalism.” (pages 72-73 and footnote 70). Anderson is totally wrong. The SBC has never seen a “successful conservative resurgence.” Even Judge Pressler in his book, A Hill on Which to Die, placed a chapter on “How the Liberals Fought the Battle.” Moreover, New Calvinism (Reformed Theology) has been as poisonous as the liberals.


The Fall of the Conservative Resurgence


    Dr. J. Gerald Harris, over more than forty years, has served as SBC pastors in North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Georgia. He has served as editor of The Christian Index, and he has served as president of the Georgia Baptist Convention. Dr. Harris has recently authored the book, The Rise and Fall of the Conservative Resurgence (2021). On page 64, Harris writes, “When Southern Baptists became secure in their glorious victory in the Conservative Resurgence, the god of this world began to explore ways to once again cripple the greatest evangelistic and missionary force in the world. Remember, the devil never contends for anything that is without value; and I am sure he has crafted a myriad of conspiracies for the dismemberment and destruction of the Southern Baptist Convention.”


    One of the conspiracies is that the Southern Baptist Convention in Indianapolis rejected a proposed ban on churches with female pastors. It was reported that there are about 1,800 women pastors working in the denomination. See Associated Press, 12:24 PM EDT, Wed. June 12, 2024. A perennial joke that SBC pastors tell at meetings is: “If the Convention splits, I'm going with the Annuity Board!”


John Piper: A Neo-Calvinist Spokesman


    Chris Anderson, in pages 29, 47, 68, 85, 101, 164, and 192, tells his readers that John Piper’s books are among the best for God’s people to read. Let us look at Piper’s book, The Legacy of Sovereign Joy: God's Triumphant Grace in the Lives of Augustine, Luther, and Calvin (Crossway, 2000), 40-74. Piper thinks he has found, “The Liberating Power of Holy Pleasure in the Life and Thought of St. Augustine.” Piper insists that “Signs and wonders” and all the spiritual gifts of 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 are valid for today and should be “earnestly desired.” He says, “Prophecy and tongues will continue until Jesus comes.” He declares, Christians must be “seeking this greater fullness of God’s power today,” even “extraordinary signs and wonders.” In Piper’s article, Signs and Wonders: Then and Now, he writes as the Third Wave. See:

https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/signs-and-wonders-then-and-now


    To millions of Christians, John Piper has insisted that they could find sovereign joy and God’s triumphant grace in the life of Augustine (354-430). Let us look at a few of Augustine’s doctrines and practices:


        *He wanted the apocrypha to be in the Bible. See: City of God, Book 18, Chapter 42 and On Christian Doctrine 2:8.12-13.

        *He confused justification with sanctification, “being made righteous.” Source: Alister McGrath, Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification (Cambridge University Press, 2005), 23-34.

        *He taught that an Old Testament circumcisional regeneration transferred its efficacy into a New Testament baptismal regeneration. See: City of God, 6.26–27; Enchiridion: On Faith, Hope, and Love 43; cf. 93; Sermon 294; and On Forgiveness of Sins, and Baptism 1.27.

        *He taught baptismal regeneration (John 3:5) and damnation of all unbaptized children. See: Epistle 98—To Boniface; Treatise against Two Letters of the Pelagians 3:3:5; Sermon 98 section 2; On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins and On the Baptism of Infants 1:24, 34, 39.

        *He taught that conversion is a lifetime process, with no possibility of assurance of salvation. See: On Rebuke and Grace 5. 10, 17, 18,22; and On the Gift of Perseverance 5.1.

        *He taught signs and wonders – dreams, miracles, relics, and prayers to martyrs. See: City of God, book 22, chapter 8.


Chris Anderson attempts, Timothy Keller's book, How to Attain Humility


    Donald Arthur (D. A.) Carson (b. 1946) and Timothy J. Keller (1950–2023) were founders of The Gospel Coalition. Carson is Emeritus Professor of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Chicago. Keller was senior pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Manhattan, New York, NY. At a Gospel Coalition Conference in 2017, Timothy Keller stated that he had now added two new positions to his ministry: The ordination of women and the ordination of the LGBT. Seven years later, Chris Anderson. on page 59, attempts, with Timothy Keller’s book, how to attain humility See The Christian Post, Wednesday, April 12, 2017, Michael Gryboski, church editor.


Free Masonry and the SBC: Overview of the Issue


    At the June 1992 Southern Baptist annual conference, an unsuccessful attempt was made by a minority of representatives to root Freemasonry out of the Convention. The Home Mission Board was assigned the task of preparing a report, but the chairman of the Board, Ron Phillips, displayed his prejudice when he stated that he did not agree with the conclusion that Masonry is incompatible with Christianity and that he knew many “dedicated Christian men” who are Masons (Christian News, March 15, 1993). 


    It quickly became obvious that the Southern Baptist Convention was more concerned about retaining members and with maintaining harmony than with dealing with false gospels. The editor of an official state paper, The Indiana Baptist for March 16, 1993, reported “fearing the loss of three million members.” The SBC Home Mission Board reported that it would be to each individual Southern Baptists whether to join the secret society. The report documented Freemasonry’s anti-Christian doctrine that many Grand Lodges do not declare Jesus as the unique Son of God; the offensive rituals and “bloody oaths”; “implications that salvation may be obtained by one’s good works”; the heresy of universalism; pagan religions are studied in higher degrees. Despite all this, the study recommended leaving the decision to the individual member.


    At the June 1993 convention in Houston, Texas, the Southern Baptist representatives decided to accept the Mission Board report’s recommendation and leave the matter of Masonic membership to the consciences of individuals.

    

    The Southern Baptist Convention has long been tied in closely with Freemasonry despite its clear pagan beliefs and false gospel. The Scottish Rite Journal in February 1993 stated that “Masons believe in the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of man...” In the 1990s, 14 percent of SBC pastors and 18 percent of deacons were Masons (Calvary Contender, June 1, 1993). We don’t know the statistics today, but Freemasonry remains well entrenched. In 1992, an attempt to root Freemasonry out of the Convention failed decidedly. The chairman of the Home Mission Board, Ron Phillips, stated that he did not agree with the conclusion that Masonry is incompatible with Christianity and that

he knew many “dedicated Christian men” who are Masons (Christian News, March 15, 1993). It quickly became obvious that the Southern Baptist Convention was more concerned with retaining members and maintaining harmony than in dealing with false gospels and spiritual compromise. Southern Baptist physician Dr. James Holly, who led the attempt to root out Freemasonry, said, “Southern Baptists have become the first Christian denomination that essentially blesses the Masonic Lodge” (Christian News, Dec. 20, 1993).


    The author of the Home Mission Board report, Gary Leazer, joined the Masons a couple of years later. See Gary H. Leazer, Fundamentalism & Freemasonry: The Southern Baptist Investigation of the Fraternal Order (New York: A & B Publishers Group, 2000).

James L. Holly, The Southern Baptist Convention and Freemasonry, 3 vols. Beaumont, TX: Mission and Ministry to Men, 1994. See- https://pulpitandpen.org/series/freemasonry/


Singing Popular LGBTQ Anthems


    Church by the Glades, in Coral Springs, Florida, is a Southern Baptist Convention church and in their directory. The Dissenter, April 15, 2024, “SBC Megachurch Starts New Sermon Series on ‘Family’ by Worshiping to Popular LGBTQ Anthem by Sister Sledge.”

David Hughes, the president and CEO of Church by the Glades in Coral Springs, Florida, has successfully turned the organization into a highly profitable carnival act. Rather than providing spiritual sustenance through the gospel, Hughes is preoccupied with putting on a spectacle. Week after week, we have reported that this church, which remains in fellowship with the Southern Baptist Convention and the powers that be, blasphemes God with its worldly performances and secular music. This past weekend, Church by the Glades opens a new sermon series on ‘Family’ by worshiping to a popular anthem that is used to open the vast majority of ‘pride’ festivals around the nation. According to one article in Rhino, the band Sister Sledge openly embraced the fact that their song had become such a popular LGBTQ anthem. ‘When Joni Sledge died in 2017, the website TheOutFront.com opened their obit of the singer by saying, ‘Every gay man who’s ever been on a dance floor or attended a Pride Parade knows the words to ‘We Are Family’. In fact, it’s practically required for getting one’s official Gay Card.

Conclusion:

Chris Anderson has written a shallow book with serious mistakes to pull Christians away from biblical Fundamentalism and into Broad Evangelicalism.


    Some preach the gospel and say that identification is non-essential. They say, “Associations are non-essential.” That is a path that God forbids. Indifference is dangerous! “Earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. For there are certain men crept in unawares” (Jude 3-4a). We are defined by those with whom we are affiliated. “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers.... After my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also, of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” (Acts 20:28-31).


    We must never entangle the message of the gospel with man-made organizations and institutions that harbor false gospels. This seriously applies to our personal condition when we stand before Christ. Identification within Broad Evangelicalism lends constant credibility to false teachers who preach another gospel. “For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds” (2 John 1:10-11). Our view of Christ or His gospel will determine our associations: “Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward” (2 John 8).


It is better to be divided in truth, than united in unbelief!


Related Reading by Dr. Beale:

FACTS: An Enlarged Discussion


Chris Anderson's Book Reviewed by George Zeller

January 2, 2025

Summarizing Lordship Salvation from a Single Page

 In each of the three editions of Dr. John MacArthur’s The Gospel According to Jesus there is a single page that summarizes the Lordship Salvation interpretation of the Gospel.

The page I refer to appears in the original and revised versions (pp. 218 and 252 respectively). In the 20th Anniversary edition, you will turn to page 250 and read,
One of the most comprehensive invitations to salvation in all the epistles comes in James 4:7-10... The invitation in 4:7-10 is directed at those who are not saved...
This is the passage Dr. MacArthur refers to as an “invitation to salvation.”
Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up,” (James 4:7-10).
At this point I want to remind my readers that the crux of the Lordship Salvation controversy is with the requirement for salvation, NOT what should be the natural results of a genuine conversion. In this section on the James passage MacArthur is making his application to, “those who are not saved.”

Is the epistle of James, “
directed at those who are not saved?” The epistle begins, “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting. My brethren, count it all joy…,” (James 1:1-2).  “Brethren” appears approximately 190 times in the New Testament, and when it does appear it is used almost exclusively in reference to born again Christians.

Dr. MacArthur views the carnality that James addresses as though it proves these “
brethren,” were never saved in the first place. He views them as “sinners…unregenerate…in desperate need of God’s (saving) grace.” MacArthur’s answer to the problem is that they need to be born again. He goes on to delineate what he believes are the ten “imperatives” for the reception of eternal life. The saving message to “sinners,” the “unregenerate,” according to MacArthur is,
...submit yourself to God (salvation); resist the devil (transferring allegiance); draw near to God (intimacy of relationship); cleanse your hands (repentance); purify your hearts (confession); be miserable, mourn, weep and let your laughter and joy be turned to gloom (sorrow). The final imperative summarizes the mentality of those who are converted: ‘Humble yourselves in the presence of the Lord’.”
If MacArthur’s statement was shared as instruction to Christians on how they should live wisely as born again disciples of Jesus Christ that would be a fair application of what he wrote. He is, however, stating what he believes are the necessary conditions of saving faith that results in a lost man becoming a Christian.

What we have in this single page (250) of 
The Gospel According to Jesus is the Lordship’s classic error of failing to distinguish between the doctrines of salvation and discipleship. Lordship Salvation frontloads faith with a commitment to do the “good works” (Eph. 2:10) one would expect of a mature born again Christian to become a born again Christian.

Do we find salvation by the grace of God through faith in Christ (
Eph. 2:8-9) anywhere in James 4:7-10? No, we do not, because James is addressing “brethren” some of whom behaved as “carnal” Christians.

The example from page 250 of 
The Gospel According to Jesus typifies and exemplifies the error of Lordship Salvation. The crux of the Lordship controversy is contained in the three paragraphs of that single page. That one page is all one needs to know about John MacArthur’s Lordship Salvation to realize he has changed the terms of the Gospel into a non-saving, man-centered message that corrupts the simplicity that is in Christ (2 Cor. 11:3) and frustrates the grace of God.
I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain,” (Gal. 2:21).

LM
 

September 3, 2024

Biblical Churches & Schools Cannot Unite With Apostasy

During the presidency of Steve Pettit his primary agenda became unmistakably clear. That was to erase the school’s historic fundamentalist, separatist legacy. The agenda he engineered took various forms. Among them was minimizing and/or removing a commitment to ecclesiastical separation.1

In articles going back to 2019 we provided numerous examples of this pattern. Steve Pettit and Sam Horn participated in cooperative ministry with Southern Baptists, Presbyterian Reformed, and compromising evangelical men and/or their conferences.  Non-separatist compromisers were given platforms at the university from which to speak to and influence students.2

In 2019 Pastor Travis Smith had written, “Under Dr. Steve Pettit’s leadership BJU continues to follow a path of ecclesiastical compromise, embracing the spirit of Neo-evangelicalism, and rejecting its historical legacy as a Bible fundamental, separatist institution.”3

BJU has installed a new president, Dr. Joshua Crockett. Have we any examples of his stance on ecclesiastical separation?


In May 2024 Pastor Crockett at Morningside Baptist Church hosted a prayer meeting with the whole SBC’s Greenville Baptist Association, led by Al Phillips, Director of Missions. All of BJU was called to come. In the bulletin (at right and below), note the people (and their affiliations) who were chosen to lead the praying.
➢ Praise – All Hail the Power of Jesus’ Name – Todd Jones (Morningside Baptist Church) 
➢ Welcome – Rev. Al Phillips (Greenville [SBC] Baptist Association) 
➢ Prayer of Praise and Thanksgiving – Al Phillips  
➢ Responsive Reading – Psalms 100 – Dr. Matt Wireman (Christ the Redeemer Church)
➢ Prayer of Confession – Rev. Will Broadus (Reconcile Church) 
➢ Prayer for Our Leaders – Dr. Josh Crockett (Morningside Baptist Church) 
➢ Prayer for Schools – Dr. Matt Rogers (Christ Fellowship Cherrydale, SBC) 
➢ Prayer for Peace and Healing – Rev. Joezel Allcea (Nuevo Comienzo.) 
➢ Prayer for Church Unity – Mr. Curtis Carr (One Prayer) 
➢ Prayer for Revival – Dr. Byron Battle (Tabernacle Baptist Church) 
➢ Prayer for Kingdom Advance – Rev. Michael Bayne (Greenville Community Church) 
➢ Prayer of Blessing and Benediction – Dr. Brian Habig (Downtown Presbyterian Church)

The National Day of Prayer is the first Thursday of every May. Many biblical churches wisely choose their own day of prayer. Morningside Baptist Church pastor Dr. Joshua Crockett did not. Biblical churches and schools cannot unite as one with compromisers and apostasy.

As I considered the One Prayer union hosted by Pastor Crockett, Promise Keepers came to mind. From the seven promises of a Promise Keeper, the sixth Promise states, A Promise Keeper is committed to reaching beyond any racial, denominational, generational, and cultural barriers to demonstrate the power of biblical unity.4 The problem with setting aside denominational barriers is you have to set aside, tolerate, allow for, excuse, and ignore doctrinal barriers.

Pastor Crockett joined a cooperative ministry, a mix of denominations, that feature men and women who take doctrinal positions that run them afoul of biblical truthHosting the National Day of Prayer at his church, Pastor Crockett exchanged ecclesiastical, biblical separation for ecumenical compromise. We find his decision to cooperate with “One Prayer” much like Steve Pettit's decision to entangle BJU students with Franklin Graham's ecumenical movement.5

Will BJU through the influence of its new president be returned to its historic stance on biblical (ecclesiastical) separation? Will BJU be returned to its founding principles and practices?6 If the above example provides any insight, we have to conclude, probably not.


LM

Footnotes

1) “Ecclesiastical separation is the flipside of fellowship. A refusal to fellowship (in the sense of theological agreement and ministry which flows out of that agreement) reflects the lifestyle, positions, and values of a church and its members.” A Theology of Separation by Dr. Larry R. Oats, Maranatha Baptist University.

See also, Dispensationalism: A Basis for Ecclesiastical Separation by Dr. Larry R. Oats, Maranatha Baptist University, 

2) Andy Naselli was the featured speaker for the 2019 Dr. Stuart Custer Lecture series. See, FACTS: An Enlarged Discussion by Dr. David Beale

3) Lunging Toward the Cliff of “No Return.” (Nov. 14, 2019)

4) I believe the original stated only denominational” barriers.

5) BJU Embraces Franklin Graham's Ecumenical Movement

6) BJU: A Return to Its Founding Principles & Practices?


August 19, 2024

Bob Jones University: Are the Founding Principles & Practices in Sight?

October 2019 was essentially the first time we raised serious concerns with and sounded the alarm over what was taking place at Bob Jones University under Steve Pettit’s Presidency. See, "This is Not Your Father's Oldsmobile," and Neither is Bob Jones University

To be sure, the first five years of Pettit’s presidency left many friends and alumni deeply concerned with the trajectory of the school. In the months that followed the October 2019 article Steve Pettit’s non-separatist agenda for BJU became increasingly pervasive and egregious. Some of this was documented in Dr. David Beale's FACTS: An Enlarged Discussion.

The advancement and proliferation of Reformed Theology became a cornerstone of Pettit’s remake of the university's doctrinal core. Ecumenical compromise and worldliness went on virtually unchecked. See,
Soon after Pettit’s departure we asked if the Board was ready to act on the future direction of the university. We didn't have long to wait. See, BJU: A Return to the Founding Principles & Practices?

Under its new president, Dr. Joshua Crockett, BJU begins its 2024-25 academic year August 26. Will we see new tangible evidence that President Crockett is leading the university toward some semblance of the very best of BJU's founding principles and practices?


LM

July 17, 2024

Archival Series: The Faith of the Gospel Dr. Bob Jones, III

Previously I posted a sermon excerpt from Dr. Bob Jones, III.  That was a continuation of a discussion I had at one of the Gospel Coalition blogs. There was some confusion there over whether or not Bob Jones, Sr., Jr., and the III preach the same gospel message as Dr. John MacArthur. In The Faith of the Gospel, Part Three1 we saw that there is a vast chasm between the gospel of grace and the works based, man-centered message of John MacArthur commonly known as “Lordship Salvation.”2 We saw that Dr. Kevin Bauder is wrong when he says that “fundamentalists and evangelicals believe preach and defend the [same] gospel.”3  Today, I am sharing opening portions from the fourth and final in the series, The Faith of the Gospel. Let’s hear from and read Dr. Bob Jones, III.

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).

I hope you students and all university family know that I am preaching this series of messages out of a grandfatherly concern, out of a pastoral concern, for you. Because what you do with your lives after you graduate and leave this place is of immense importance….

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 encourage all guests to listen to the balance of this message (24 minutes) in its entirety. Dr. Bob Jones, III, The Faith of the Gospel, BJU Chapel, April 21, 2011 can be heard in its entirety at Sermon Audio.

Footnotes:
1) The Faith of the Gospel, Part 3

“First Corinthians 15:1-3, the nutshell of the Gospel, the saving Gospel. There is a difference between the saving Gospel, which starts it all and without which there is no faith in the Gospel. We love the saving message of the Gospel. It’s to be on our lips at all times and in all places wherever we go. But Paul is dealing here [Phil. 1:27] with the governing gospel. That which governs us, as members of the household of faith, citizens of Heaven, AFTER we have received and believed into the Gospel of Jesus Christ.”

2) Summary of Lordship Salvation From a Single Page
3) Do Fundamentalists & Evangelicals, “Believe, Preach and Defend the [Same] Gospel?”

July 12, 2024

Archival Series: The Faith of the Gospel Dr. Bob Jones, III

Last week [May 2011] I participated in a discussion at one of the Gospel Coalition blogs. There was some confusion there over whether or not Bob Jones, Sr., Jr., and the III preach the same gospel message as John MacArthur's Lordship Salvation. Below is a transcribed sermon excerpt from Dr. Jones that I posted there to help settle the question. That was followed by my own personal commentary, which I have expanded for this article.

“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).
Our behavior as citizens of Heaven is what Paul is dealing with here. Our personal behavior, our worship behavior, everything pertaining to the redeemed Christian life is at stake here in what Paul is saying. Let your behavior as citizens of the kingdom of Heaven be as it becomes the Gospel of Christ, the saving message of Christ. Are you washed in the blood of Christ, His death, His resurrection? The Gospel of Jesus Christ. First Corinthians 15:1-3, the nutshell of the Gospel, the saving Gospel. There is a difference between the saving Gospel, which starts it all and without which there is no faith in the Gospel. We love the saving message of the Gospel. It’s to be on our lips at all times and in all places wherever we go. But Paul is dealing here [Phil. 1:27] with the governing gospel. That which governs us, as members of the household of faith, citizens of Heaven, AFTER we have received and believed into the Gospel of Jesus Christ.1
The crux of the LS controversy is not over the post-conversion issues such as sanctification, discipleship and following Christ. There is very little disagreement over what should be the results of a genuine conversion. The controversy is over the requirements for how to be born again, justification. Is a man born again by faith, believing in the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 15:1-3) what He did to provide salvation or by faith, plus commitment of life to perform the “good works” (Eph. 2:10) expected of a born again disciple of Christ to become a born again Christian, which is the demand of Lordship Salvation?

In his opening remarks you have all you need to know that the saving message that Dr. Bob Jones III preaches and the Lordship Salvation message of Dr. John MacArthur are not one and the same. Following are just a few of many examples in which MacArthur is teaching salvation, how he believes the lost man must come to Christ for salvation, i.e., to be born again.
Let me say again unequivocally that Jesus’ summons to deny self and follow him was an invitation to salvation, not . . . a second step of faith following salvation.”

And he [rich young ruler] needed to be willing to submit to the Lord Jesus, even if it meant he had to give up all his earthly possessions. He might not ask, but the requirement for eternal life is the willingness to give it all up if he does.”

Forsaking oneself for Christ’s sake is not an optional step of discipleship subsequent to conversion; it is the sine qua non of saving faith

Salvation is for those who are willing to forsake everything.”
Dr. Jones recognizes and articulates the separate and distinct biblical doctrines of salvation (the saving Gospel) and discipleship (the governing gospel). John MacArthur, however, insists salvation and discipleship are one and the same, which is why he frontloads faith with commitment to do the “good works” expected of a born again disciple of Christ to BECOME a born again disciple of Christ.

In an elongated series from 2010 Dr. Kevin Bauder included this statement,
Both fundamentalists and conservative evangelicals believe the gospel, preach the gospel, and defend the gospel.... This mutuality in the gospel leads to a question. Since conservative evangelicals and fundamentalists are united in their allegiance to the gospel, should they not be able to cooperate at the level of the gospel? To put it positively, should fundamentalists and conservative evangelicals get together for the gospel?”2
Many Fundamentalists do not believe, preach and defend the [same] gospel as the evangelicals. Most first year Bible College students would know there is no mutuality, unity or allegiance to a single interpretation of the gospel. The evidence strongly suggests that Dr. Jones and Dr. MacArthur do not believe, preach and defend the same gospel! There is, furthermore, a clear divide in fundamentalism over the interpretation of the Gospel commonly known as Lordship Salvation.


LM


1) Dr. Bob Jones, III, The Faith of the Gospel, Part 3, March 3, 2011 which can be heard in its entirety at Sermon Audio. I encourage all guests to listen to Dr. Jones’s message (27:30) in its entirety. At 13:30 he begins to address the new trend of an “inappropriate conveyance of the gospel.” For example he says,
“We’ve been taking in some of the last messages about the error that can result from those whose credo is, ‘Well, it’s all about the gospel, as long as a man is preaching the gospel I can go to that church…and I don’t have to worry about all the rest of it…. If we take the attitude that it’s only about the preaching of the gospel and that makes everything else acceptable we’re going to embrace a lot of error. How we convey the gospel is a very important part of how we preach the gospel…. Is there a conveyance that is appropriate and is there an inappropriate conveyance to this sacred, holy message sent from the holy God in heaven to save poor sinners like us…? You’re going to have to make your mind up about the kind of Christianity that you practice, the kind of churches you will join, the kind of expression of the gospel that you accept. You see, if it’s only all about the preaching of the gospel and if that is all that matters then you can accept almost any other kind of manifestations of the gospel…then we have formed our own opinions and practiced them more than going to the Bible to see what God says is acceptable.”
2) Now, About Those Differences. Please refer to, Do Fundamentalists & Evangelicals, “Believe, Preach and Defend the [Same] Gospel?”

Related Reading:
Summary of Lordship Salvation From a Single Page

The Fault Line for Fracture in Fundamentalism

John MacArthur’s Discipleship Gospel
Lordship’s “Turn From Sin” FOR Salvation