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

Please now refer to- Bob Jones III Appeal to the Alumni

Newly posted (Nov. 14)- While We Wait: Let's Talk About It

Related Reading:

FACTS, An Enlarged Discussion by Dr. David Beale

Why These Schools Collapsed & What Does it Mean for BJU?

Compromised Spiritual Sanctification for Secular Pragmatism

BJU Embraces Franklin Graham's Ecumenical Movement

BJU Moving Closer to Pseudo-Fundamentalism

BJU's Rejection of Ecclesiastical Separation: Is This Northland All Over Again?

An Analysis of BJU's Position Paper on Calvinism, Arminianism and Reformed Theology

John MacArthur Requested to, and Resigns from the IFCA

February 23, 2017
Statement Re: John MacArthur’s IFCA International Membership

In John MacArthur’s recently published book Biblical Doctrine, his position regarding the nature and extent of the Atonement is clearly presented in the section entitled “The Extent of the Atonement” (pages 543-565). This section confirms that he changed from the position he held at the time of his admission into IFCA membership in 1980.

Dr. Les Lofquist, Executive Director IFCA

The specific change is regarding how to understand the following language in the IFCA Doctrinal Statement: “We believe that the Lord Jesus Christ died on the cross for all mankind as a representative, vicarious, substitutionary sacrifice” (IFCA Constitution, Article IV, Section 1.3.b). During several previous meetings and correspondence over the last ten years, I clarified with Dr. MacArthur how the words “for all mankind” have been historically understood within the Fellowship of IFCA International. The IFCA Board of Directors also provided clarification to Dr. MacArthur in 2009 by correspondence and in a subsequent meeting IFCA Board President Jerry Smith and I had with Dr. MacArthur in his office in California.

Understanding the historical context of the words in the IFCA International Doctrinal Statement, and in comparison to the book Biblical Doctrine, yesterday 

I respectfully requested that Dr. MacArthur withdraw as an individual member of IFCA International, which today he has done.

This action is necessary to comply with the IFCA International Constitution which reads: “Each and every person, church, or organization, in order to become or remain a member of IFCA International, shall be required to subscribe to the following articles of faith…” (Article IV. Section 1. Articles of Biblical Faith); and “In subscribing to these articles of faith, we by no means set aside, or undervalue, any of the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments; but we deem the knowledge, belief and acceptance of the truth as set forth in our doctrinal statement, to be essential to sound faith and fruitful practice, and therefore requisite for Christian fellowship in IFCA International” (Article IV. Section 3. Covenant of Faith); and the IFCA International By-Laws: “The following are specific causes for rejection of applicants for membership…doctrinal and constitutional disagreement.” (Article II. Section 6.b).

With mutual respect, we both simply acknowledge our doctrinal difference regarding the nature and extent of the Atonement and that this difference causes John MacArthur to be in doctrinal and constitutional disagreement with IFCA International in this matter. 

We want it to be known that this action is taken in a spirit of humility and with gratitude for Dr. MacArthur’s global ministry of expositional Bible teaching. While we graciously differ on this point of doctrine, we remain friends and rejoice in our common passion to serve God in the fulfillment of the Great Commission.

Les Lofquist                                                               

IFCA International Executive Director                                  

Grandville, Michigan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~    

“I’m happy to withdraw from the IFCA with nothing but gratitude for the fellowship I have enjoyed through the decades. I am grateful for the exemplary faithfulness of the men who stand for the truth without compromise and have been willing to include me.  My confidence in those strong men who love the truth, written and incarnate, will continue to make them my friends.”
Dr. John MacArthur 

Related Reading:

Summary of Lordship Salvation From a Single Page

Insights From the IFCA Interview with John MacArthur

IFCA Statement on the Nature of Saving Faith

John MacArthur’s Position on the Extent of the Atonement

Insights from the IFCA Interview with John MacArthur

I have been reading the transcripts (see links below) of the interview, conducted by the Executive Committee of the IFCA, with Dr. MacArthur in June 1989 shortly after the release of The Gospel According to Jesus.

The result of that interview with Dr. MacArthur, in regard to his Lordship Salvation interpretation of the gospel, lead to the IFCA’s Executive Committee writing and issuing the doctrinal statement titled, The Nature of Saving Faith.

The first transcript (Part 1) of the Q&A with Dr. MacArthur dealt with three areas of doctrine. Each area was or is an ongoing concern some have with John MacArthur. The three issues he was being questioned about are:
1) The blood of Christ
2) The eternal sonship of Christ
3) Dispensationalism

The blood of Christ issue is one that people have been passionate over. Most I have heard from or about have moved on from this.

The eternal sonship caused a huge flap. Some IFCA members resigned over it. Later MacArthur issued a statement that I once read at the GTY site where he acknowledged he had made a mistake on that issue.

As for the dispensational question- the concern was raised because of the heavy, nearly exclusive use of reformed theologians in the footnotes of The Gospel According to Jesus.

Part 2 of the interview was devoted totally to some of the doctrinal issues stemming from The Gospel According to Jesus.

In the early portions of Part 2 transcripts you can read from Dr. MacArthur’s own remarks, about several people he knew when he was a young man who sorely disappointed him in regard to an alleged relationship with Jesus Christ they had. They either backslid horribly, or their appearance of being a Christian was a façade; I don’t know which.

What I do know is this: Those events started him on a journey that lead him to adopt and later advocate the Lordship Salvation interpretation of the gospel.

In the transcript Dr. MacArthur said,

“And as a pastor I have seen them come and go and come and go and come and go, and trying in my own heart to assess the nature of true conversion was very much a personal struggle with me, not a theological one. And then I began to study the Gospel of Matthew, and I preached in Matthew for eight years at our church. And in that process of going through Matthew, I began to come to grips with the whole gospel record, because I was doing a study of the synoptics and John at the same time. And I began to fix on how Jesus evangelized and what He called for and so forth.”

This point in his life and study of Scripture is pivotal. He had experienced the disappointment that any pastor would if those he believed to be saved went bad or had lived out a facade. With those disappointments in mind his study of Matthew resulted in coming to believe The Sermon on the Mount contains pure gospel. In my article, Is The Sermon on the Mount Pure Gospel, I explain why that sermon is not an evangelistic appeal.

In his review of The Gospel According to Jesus, Dr. Ernest Pickering wrote the following, which I cite in my book:

“John MacArthur is a sincere servant of the Lord, of that we have no doubt.... We believe in his advocacy of the so-called lordship salvation he is wrong. He desperately desires to see holiness, lasting fruit, and continuing faithfulness in the lives of Christian people. This reviewer and we believe all sincere church leaders desire the same.... But the remedy for this condition is not found in changing the terms of the gospel.”

Dr. Pickering speaks of the “desperate desire” which lead to Dr. MacArthur’s “changing the terms of the gospel.” From reading Dr. MacArthur’s opening remarks in the LS section of the IFCA interview with him- one can read when, how and why his “desperate desire” originated.


LM

IFCA Interview with John MacArthur (Part 1)

IFCA Interview with John MacArthur (Part 2)
The Lordship Q&A is in Part 2

IFCA Statement on: The Nature of Saving Faith

To All:

In 1990 the IFCA International, of which John MacArthur’s Grace Community Church is a member, had several scholars do a study to interpret their statement of faith on salvation. It is my understanding that this statement was drafted in response to Dr. MacArthur's original edition of The Gospel According to Jesus, published in 1988.

The title of the IFCA statement is: The Nature of Saving Faith.

The IFCA statement appears to be very balanced and to speak against MacArthur’s Lordship interpretation of the gospel. The study committee is listed at the end of the paper. It is very impressive.

Dr. Robert Thomas of The Master’s Seminary was on the committee. Dr. Thomas is considered a world class New Testament scholar, he taught at Talbot for years (1959-1986) where John MacArthur was one of his students. Dr. Thomas has been at The Master’s Seminary since 1987.

This is just a sample from the statement:

Some suitable expressions equivalent to the reliance on Christ that brings salvation include “believe in,” “trust in,” and “depend on.” Other terminology that may be misleading in representing this relationship include “submit to,” “yield to,” “dedicate [oneself] to,” and “make Jesus Lord of one's life.” These are better reserved for a stage of sanctification that usually comes subsequent to saving faith. Two additional phrases, “make a commitment to" and “become a disciple of,” are ambiguous because they could or could not refer to reliance on Christ, depending on how they are defined. “Repent” is not a suitable way to describe saving faith, because it only partially represents what it is to rely on Christ alone.

That paragraph addresses several of the controversial terms/phrases that are inherent in the Lordship gospel. They appear in The Gospel According to Jesus and in the later works by MacArthur on Lordship Salvation.

The sentence in bold is the key to the Lordship error. As I demonstrate in my book and in various articles here and at other sites John MacArthur, and the Lordship advocates he represents, conditions the reception of salvation on the upfront promise from a lost man to "submit, yield, dedicate" his life in "exchange" for eternal life. Lordship Salvation places demands on a sinner (requirements for salvation) that belong to the born again child of God in regard to growth as a disciple of Christ.

This IFCA statement was adopted by the Executive Committee (Board of Directors) in November 1990 and was affirmed by 93% of the individual members participating in a straw poll.

Incidentally, another Master’s Seminary faculty member, Dr. James Rosscup (retired June 2005), also wrote about his reservations with MacArthur’s expressions of his Lordship theology. See post #10 on page 2 by Bob Topartzer at Sharper Iron in my response to Pastor Todd Wood’s review of my book.


LM