Al Mohler: “So Much for Sola Scriptura”

Last week Pastor Brian Ernsberger published a new article on yet another ecumenical compromise by Dr. Albert Mohler.

“There is a serious problem when men who supposedly stand firmly on the self-sufficiency of the Scriptures go off into human reasoning to justify their positions/actions. So much for Sola Scriptura being the call words of evangelicals…. [Al] Mohler has betrayed the very basic, the primary distinctive that Baptists have clung to for centuries, that the Bible is the sole authority for faith and practice.”

I invite you to read Mohler’s Homo Ratio at Parsings of a Preacher.

LM

Site Publisher’s Commentary:

Dr. Al Mohler has crossed a line that irrefutably shows he is and has been a New Evangelical, masquerading as a so-called “conservative” evangelical. Pastor Ernsberger’s article documents Al Mohler’s latest and most egregious betrayal of the Word of God to date.

The Mormon Church, its leadership and membership are deadly enemies of the cross of Jesus Christ, (Phil 3:18). The doctrine of the “God Makers” is responsible for countless millions of souls in or on the way to the Hell’s eternal fire. Mohler’s betrayal of the Lord Jesus Christ, His Word and the Church is only the latest in a long line of egregious errors and compromises on his resume. 

2001 Billy Graham Crusade

• ·      Sat as chairman for the 2001 Billy Graham Crusade in Louisville.
• ·      Signed the Manhattan Declaration, and has never biblically repented of it.
• ·      Embraced the ministry of Rick Warren.
• ·      Joined Hands with the Mormon Church.
• ·      Endorsed RAP Music for the church.*

Al Mohler has, furthermore, praised the Vatican and the Pope.

“I also appreciate the spiritual concern reflected in this document. The artificial and deadly dangerous game of ecumenical confusion has obscured issues of grave concern for our souls. I truly believe that Pope Benedict and the Congregation for the Defense of the Faith are concerned for our evangelical souls and our evangelical congregations...I actually appreciate the Pope’s concern.” (R. Albert Mohler, (from Albert Mohler.com) Courage and Controversy: The Vatican Takes on Feminism, August 4, 2004. [accesed Feb. 5, 2013.]

For years Dr. Kevin Bauder (to a similar extent Dr. Dave Doran) has been heaping “lavish praise” on Al Mohler and other alleged “conservative” evangelicals. For example for having signed the Manhattan Declaration Kevin declared that to be merely, “a single episode…one time inconsistency,” which was in fact another in an already well established line of ecumenical compromises. When Dr. Bauder does not give cover for or excuse these things, he ignores them, and he has happily worked in cooperative effort with Mohler. So, here we are, yet again with another serious compromise by Al Mohler.

In October/Nov 2013 Kevin Bauder gave his thumbs up to and excused Al Mohler for having, in an official capacity, spoken at The Mormon Church’s Brigham Young University (BYU).  He wrote,

“In short, nothing in Mohler’s appearance at BYU violates any of the Bible’s teachings about ecclesiastical separation. Mohler did not transgress any biblical precept or violate any biblical principle by speaking to Mormons, nor did he somehow betray his calling when, in an academic role, he chose to address cultural and intellectual issues instead of preaching a sermon. No legitimate, biblical criticism can be directed at Mohler in this instance.” (In the Nick of Time: Mohler, Mormonism & Militancy, 10/25/13)

That reaction is reminiscent of, and in keeping with how Dr. Dave Doran redefined biblical separation for  “academic contexts.” See, Is There a Second Definition for “Separation” in Academic Contexts? This novel redefinition of authentic biblical separation is how men, who claim to be “militant” separatists, neuter and side step biblical commands to have their fellowship with compromisers and/or the unbelieving.  This is a mantra of the new wave of New Evangelicalism being circulated in Baptist circles.

Pastor Ernsberger wrote,

“The Mormon Church stands diametrically opposed to everything a Christian holds as Truth. They are indeed an enemy of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Any kind of accommodation of Mormonism will only enrich Mormonism’s positions to the detriment of the Truth….”

Following Mohler’s signing the Manhattan Declaration, embracing Rick Warren and speaking at BYU this was simply the next logical step for him.  IMO, what biblical restraints Al Mohler might have had at one time he no longer does. There will be more of this from him, much more.

Isn’t it high time for Kevin Bauder, who alleges absolute fidelity to the entire Word of God, to speak out as decisively against Mohler’s betrayal of the Scriptures as he has these past years in “lavish praise” of Al Mohler?  No honest Bible-believing Christian can honestly, and in good conscience tolerate, allow for, ignore or excuse Al Mohler for this latest betrayal of God’s Word. Because he has shown no previous proclivity to do otherwise I suspect Kevin Bauder will once again choose to ignore or excuse Al Mohler’s embrace of the Mormon Church.

Al Mohler has crossed biblical lines that demand obedience to the Lord’s commands:

Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us…. And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother, (2 Thess. 3:6, 14-15).

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.  For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple, (Romans 16:17-18).

There is no subjective decision left to be made with Al Mohler. There is no more room for benefit of the doubt to be given. No chalking this up to a novice in the ministry.  Since as early as 2001 we have a consistent pattern of Al Mohler committing numerous ecumenical compromises and/or betrayals of God’s Word.

LM

*Over a month ago Dr. Kevin Bauder promised to comment on Mohler’s RAP issue. We’re still watching and waiting.

Taking Responsibility

This country in which I live continues to plunge toward moral, economic, and spiritual disaster.  In the world of the unregenerate, this would be no surprise; professing Christianity, however, is complicit to this looming tragedy, and no one wants to take responsibility.  The liberal mind bent on change has no measuring device.  It continues to create problems and generate difficulty for society, but is not willing to grasp or admit its error.  For some strange reason, liberals seem to think that more moral degeneracy will make things better.  The answers they offer are limited to the physical and the temporary, using such things as money to make things right.  In the end, this human- based system refuses to take responsibility for the suffering it creates.

On the other side of the coin is professing Christianity.  The problem here is that this crowd tends to be filled with unregenerate souls who have only a pretense of any true Christianity.  In the end, their charade provides no room to bear responsibility for the misuse of scripture and the practice of polishing liberal ideas.

The real focus of this article, however, would be those of us who are true believers, who understand that Christianity is not a thing - it is a life.  It is impossible to possess the gift of eternal life without its manifesting itself in the way we live.  Our words and actions should betray the life within us.  No one should have to search for evidence in our lives of the presence of the Holy Spirit; it is impossible to hide such power and reality.  We are not talking about perfection - that is God’s work; rather, this is about our spiritual life, the existence of which is undeniable.  The true believer must be careful.  This fleshly house in which we live can fail, and that failure is what this discussion is all about.

THE ROOT OF RESPONSIBILITY

We love to shift blame.  It all began in the Garden: it was her fault; no, it was the serpent’s fault.  We all know better, so let’s face facts.  The growing disaster in our nation lies at the feet of believers.  Those of us who have tried to follow the clear teaching of scripture should have known better.  It is time to stop the denial and get on with our responsibility.  That means we will have to openly deal with those who claim the name of Christ, but who rewrite the Bible to cover their shame and disobedience.

The only way to begin work on this responsibility is to admit we have failed.  It means that we need to go back to the Eternal Word of God and let the text speak for itself.  This is something you will not get in the plethora of so-called evangelical publications now available.  We talk to each other, but seldom to the flawed society.  It appears that very soon speaking the truth of scripture is going to bring persecution.  For the believer, it is time for the whole counsel of God to be broadcast to the whole of society.  Stop hiding that truth under a bushel - take your responsibility.

SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES

In our busy world, we tend to become lazy.  We let everyone else develop our doctrine and then take little time to search the scriptures to see if what they opine is actually true. Almost daily now, those who should know better quote “false teachers” without any disclaimer.  The end result is that our listeners go to the writings of these same people and become buried in false teaching.  This is only one reason why we are responsible for the decline of a nation that is fueled by error; you can't share truths with a corrupt society when you don't even know the truth yourself!

One of the major reasons we have failed to communicate truth to our culture is the compromise of evangelical leaders.

We are told repeatedly that we are to stay silent in the open market.  The idea is that we need to have "hands off" when it comes to political subjects.  Now, that might be true if you are talking about political parties and candidates, but it is a serious error if you mean the discussing of biblical truths.  For the true believer to be quiet about abortion, sodomy, and other moral issues is patent disobedience to a Holy God.  God is the only one who has the answers to these questions, and we need to be willing to say what God says.  People in our culture are deceived because they go about sharing their ignorance while we are told to be deaf and dumb when it comes to truth.

SO LET’S TAKE RESPONSIBILITY

We need to ignore ridicule from those whose father is the devil; we belong smack-dab at the center of any discussion on a subject to which God has spoken.  Followers of Satan need to be chided for their human theories and destructive opinions, and we must ignore leaders who scold us for saying what God has said.  If they choose to be cowards who are fearful of truth, we must not be caught up in their deadly silence.  Even if some true believers are fearful to enter into public discussion, we need to do our best to serve the Lord with courage and wisdom.

Liberalism is smart, but it definitely is not wise.  Liberals’ ability to debate is often disguised as right, when in fact it is merely foolish.  Moderate evangelicals talk a good game, giving themselves to love, the gospel, and going about doing “good”.

They don’t have time to stand firm or to dirty their white gloves with discussions, which are included in the whole counsel of God.

That arrogance doesn’t fool the wise true believer, though. Sure, those things may be good, but it amounts to disobedience if that is all one does with the great task God has given.  May we repent of our responsibility in the matter of national failure and move forward with true responsibility.

Shepherd’s Staff is prepared by Clay Nuttall, D. Min

SHEPHERD’S STAFF – January, 2014

A communication service of Shepherd's Basic Care, for those committed to the authority and sufficiency of the Bible.  Shepherd's Basic Care is a ministry of information and encouragement to pastors, missionaries, and churches.

Al Mohler’s RAPPIN’ T4G

On December 1^st R. Albert Mohler posted an article under the title, “Thinking about Thinking about Rap — Unexpected Thoughts over Thanksgiving.”1 He wrote,

“I do admire its [RAP’s] virtuosity…. I want that language taken for the cause of the Gospel…”

For those who have been objectively watching Al Mohler’s ecumenical compromises, and they are many,2 this article by him should have come with no surprise whatsoever. In fact, it should have been anticipated. Mark Dever, as I documented in 2011, was way out ahead of Al Mohler on RAP in the ministry of the church.3

The line is long since cemented on Al Mohler and the T4G/Gospel Coalition men. We have the, “I don’t care what Mohler (Dever, Mahaney, MacArthur, Piper, et. al.) does, he writes good books,” crowd. Those folks are essentially lost to the new wave of New Evangelicalism sweeping the Church of Jesus Christ. The greater concern many have in IFB circles is with the influence Al Mohler, Dever, Piper are having among some fundamental Baptist churches. Increasing the concern is that certain men who circulate in fundamental circles, most notably Dr. Kevin Bauder primarily and Dr. Dave Doran, are acting as apologists for these so-called “conservative” evangelicals, who are in fact the new wave of New Evangelicals among us.

Will this latest manifestation of Al Mohler’s misguided and worldly methodology give Drs. Bauder or Doran cause to rebuke him and/or warn believers to avoid him? Men who claim be “militant” separatists, loyal to the principles of authentic biblical separation certainly would have said something long before this.  There has been ample opportunity to rebuke Mohler and/or warn others about him. To date, however, there has been no level of aberrant doctrine, ecumenical compromises and cultural relativism coming from Al Mohler that has given either Bauder or Doran cause to publicly “rebuke” (2 Tim. 4:2), or warn the body of believers to “mark, avoid” (Rom. 16:17-18), to “withdraw from” (2 Thess. 3:6, 14-15) Mohler and his expanding foray into New Evangelicalism.

With history as our guide the reaction we can reasonably expect to Al Mohler’s RAPPIN’ for the Gospel will be either heaps of “lavish praise” for it, and/or be tolerated, allowed for, ignored or excused.

Finally, in light of Al Mohler’s vision of rappin’ “for the cause of the Gospel,” I would propose a revision of the T4G acronym to R4G, which is to say, “Rappin’ foda Gospel.” The kids will love it.

LM

Addendum (12/6/13)
See thread comment #3 for analysis and reaction to Kevin Bauder’s predictable Nick of Time article posited today.

For additional reading on Al Mohler and RAP please see Kent Brandenburg’s What is Truth blog.

Footnotes:

1) Thinking about Thinking about Rap — Unexpected Thoughts over Thanksgiving

2) Following are but a few examples of Al Mohler’s egregious ecumenical compromise. There will be more.
What Does John Piper and Al Mohler Have in Common? Rick Warren!

Al Mohler Signs the Manhattan Declaration, which he has never repented of.
Al Mohler Joins Hands with the Mormon Church

3) Mark Dever’s affinity for RAP was ignored by Kevin Bauder and Dave Doran. The RAP on Mark Dever They participated in a cooperative ministry with Dever in the 2011 Advancing the Church conference at (the soon to be defunct) Calvary Baptist Seminary, Lansdale, PA. The Closure of CBS: Predictable and Repeatable

Secondary Separation: When to Stand Apart, and Those Who Won’t

Dr. Peter Masters, pastor MetropolitanTabernacle (1970- present), recently published, Secondary Separation: When to Stand Apart.1 This was a well-defined explanation of a biblical principle, namely secondary separation and necessary application of it.

Dr. Masters gives understanding to and several practical applications of the principle.  The section, Dr Lloyd-Jones and Billy Graham, has a direct bearing on how one current day so-called “conservative” evangelical ignored applicable scriptural mandates under the very same circumstance.

Dr Lloyd-Jones and Billy Graham  

The question arises – how should evangelicals who obey God’s call to stand apart treat fellow-evangelicals who refuse to do so? Should they maintain full fellowship, or stand apart from those who disobey? The latter is called secondary separation.” 

To prove the point we remember the way in which Dr Lloyd-Jones refused to work with Billy Graham, and this is a significant example of secondary separation. In 1963 the evangelist asked Dr Lloyd-Jones to chair the first World Congress on Evangelism (eventually held in Berlin in 1966; predecessor to Lausanne). Dr Lloyd-Jones told Billy Graham that if he would stop having liberals and Roman Catholics on his platform and drop the invitation system he would support and chair the Congress. 

Billy Graham would not change his views, and Dr Lloyd-Jones declined to endorse or commend or work with him. No doubt the meeting between them was courteously conducted (it lasted three hours) but the outcome was a firm application of secondary separation. 

Dr Lloyd-Jones adopted the same attitude to Billy Graham’s London crusades. He took the view, and stated it publicly, that to have visible unity with those who are opposed to essential matters of salvation was sinful. (He also believed the invitation system was a source of mass-delusion and harm to churches.) 

Despite Billy Graham’s high standing with most British evangelicals, the enthusiastic support he received from the secular media, the fact that his name was a household word, and despite the significant place in world evangelicalism that he was offering to Dr Lloyd-Jones, the latter stood by his biblical principle, and declined all the overtures. He would not commend or work with Dr Billy Graham. This is true loyalty to God’s Word, and protectiveness of one’s congregation. 

For what it’s worth, as far as the present writer is aware he goes no further in his view of secondary separation than Dr Lloyd-Jones (although he does not share the great man’s latter day enthusiasm for a new evangelical denomination). [Bold added]

In 2001 Dr. R. Albert Mohler shared no such principled conviction, such as Lloyd Jones in 1963, when he (Mohler) agreed to chair the Billy Graham crusade in Louisville, Ky. Where Lloyd-Jones determined to obey the scriptural mandates for “secondary separation,” Mohler simply brushed them aside. From the Graham crusade, through numerous ecumenical compromises since,2 Al Mohler has routinely and irrefutably ignored the Lord’s Word on biblical secondary separation.

Dr. Masters begins to wind down his article with this challenge,

“May I say to pastors, elders and deacons – we have a choice. We either show unreserved kindness, protection and solidarity toward the offender, or we show it to the Gospel and our congregations. We either commend one or the other. Which will we embrace? No pastor or church officer can be truly loyal to the Word and protective to the flock of God without the practice of biblical secondary separation, applied with all the sensitive discretion of charity.”

In spite of Al Mohler’s long time, consistent pattern of egregious ecumenical compromises Dr. Kevin Bauder has been relentless in “lavish praise” for, tolerating, ignoring or excusing Dr. Mohler.  By this I think we can know the measure of Kevin’s loyalty to the “Word” in “the practice of biblical secondary separation.”

LM

See thread comment #1 for Dr. Masters on the Texts for Biblical Separation & References to Separation from Worldliness and Harmful Practices.

Footnote:

1) Secondary Separation: When to Stand Apart, Sword & Trowel 2013: Issue 2, pp. 23-32.

2) Examples include: 

Al Mohler Signs the Manhattan Declaration

What Does John Piper and Al Mohler Have in Common? Rick Warren!

Al Mohler Joins Hands with the Mormon Church

We also learned, “Richard Mouw was a featured speaker at the celebration of the life of Carl F.H. Henry [one of the architects and high priests of New Evangelicalism] held at SBTS in September, in conjunction with Fuller Theological Seminary.”

Related Reading:

Kevin Bauder and Dave Doran Join Mark Dever at Lansdale: Is This a Fundamentalism Worth Saving?

Dr. Peter Masters, New Calvinism: The Merger of Calvinism with Worldliness, Sword & Trowel, Dec. 2009

“The new Calvinism with the new Calvinists constantly extol the Puritans, but they do not want to worship or live as they did. One of the vaunted new conferences is called Resolved, after Jonathan Edwards’ famous youthful Resolutions (seventy searching undertakings). But the culture of this conference would unquestionably have met with the outright condemnation of that great theologian.”