September 12, 2012

Dr. Doug McLachlan, Community is Being Elevated Above Theology…

On September 9 a TV station in Chattanooga reported that the “Highland Park Baptist Church [was] Relocating and Renaming.”1 The Highland Park Baptist Church (HPBC) will henceforth be known as the Church of the Highlands. The report noted that,

In 1946, Highland Park Baptist Church started Tennessee Temple University. While the church is relocating and renaming, Tennessee Temple University will remain in the Highland Park neighborhood.”
Is the name change simply because the church will be relocating out of the Hype Park neighborhood? That is a reasonable answer, but certainly not the only reason. It is widely known that HPBC has steadily been moving away from its historic Baptist, separatist roots.

This kind of news is becoming all too common among once independent Baptist, separatist churches. The same is increasingly true of some colleges. Northland International University (NIU) was originally founded 36 years ago as the Northland Baptist Bible College (NBBC). It may be impossible to know for certain which change came first, but we do know that along with the name change the former NBBC as NIU has drifted from its fundamentalist, separatist moorings.2

Following is an excerpt from Dr. Doug McLachlan’s President’s Page. The subject is Philosophy of Ministry and was published in 1998.
In recent years there has developed a “tendency toward generic Christianity.” (Millard Erikson and James Heflin on Old Wine in New Skins, pp 50-ff). The trend, these authors say, is toward a “doctrinally generic Christianity” where the “specifics” of doctrine are dismissed or unimportant. One of the most visible symbols of this trend is the decision of denominational tags from the church name. In my mind this is a dangerous trend. It seems to me that the engine driving such change is the belief that specific labels inhibit church growth i.e., the expansion of community
Community is being elevated above theology, growth becomes more important than truth.
In earlier times the theology of a church was reflected in its name. To me, that approach still has great merit. The reason is this: generality in name of leads to a loss of specificity in belief. Covering our beliefs, hiding our theology by masking our identity and camouflaging our name may indeed attract a larger crowd (most contemporary consumers think little of “brand loyalty”), but it has great potential to jeopardize and weaken our doctrine, our truth-claims. It produces an environment where beliefs tend to be minimized, changed and in some cases even abandoned as irrelevant to mission, unimportant to ministry (Erickson and Heflin). 
Whatever their liabilities (and there are some), names reflect our belief-system. They say something about us. They announce to others who we are and what we believe. Even today, in our postmodern world, names like Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian and Baptist alert us to a basic set of beliefs. The name becomes a summary statement of certain basic theological commitments. One of the reasons our name “Baptist” still has merit is because it identifies for honest seekers who we are and what we believe. And it represents our belief-system, the theological bedrock which is the enduring ground of our belonging. (Dr. Douglas McLachlan, President’s Page: Philosophy of Ministry, 1998)
Has anything changed from the time of this writing in 1998? Of course, Northland dropped “Baptist” from its name. Dr. McLachlan wrote,
“Even today, in our postmodern world, names like Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian and Baptist alert us to a basic set of beliefs. The name becomes a summary statement of certain basic theological commitments. One of the reasons our name “Baptist” still has merit is because it identifies for honest seekers who we are and what we believe.”
That statement begs the question from honest seekers: Since Northland dropped their name “Baptist Bible,” we ask- who are they, what are NIU’s basic theological commitments and what do they believe? Sincere questions such as these one might expect clear, precise, unambiguous answers from the University president, Matt Olson. Yet, those answers (to date) have not been forthcoming.

Dr. McLachlan wrote, “specifics’ of doctrine are dismissed or unimportant.” In Matt Olson’s Confidence in the Next Generation article on the Grace Bible Church, a member of CJ Mahaney’s Sovereign Grace Ministries, a major specific of doctrine is not even mentioned. A doctrine that the current official NIU doctrinal position states was “temporary,” must be “rejected, opposed” and “cannot accept.” That major doctrine is Charismatic theology, which teaches that the sign gifts of tongues, prophecy and healings are active and should be sought after today. Yet, Matt Olson praised this church and its pastor.3

Has Dr. McLachlan Contributed to the Changes at NIU?
Dr. McLachlan played a role in the initial wave of visible changes that Matt Olson has brought to the former NBBC. Dr. McLachlan contributed to the new trajectory of NIU with his being one of the three (Sam Horn, Les Ollila) who traveled with Matt Olson to call on John MacArthur, Phil Johnson and Rick Holland at Grace Community Church. From that meeting (April 2010) came the invitation to Rick Holland to speak to NIU’s impressionable young people in the college chapel.4

Dr. McLachlan wrote, “One of the reasons our name ‘Baptist’ still has merit is because it identifies for honest seekers who we are and what we believe.” Northland, your name was changed. You are no longer the “Baptist Bible College.” Who then are you and what do you believe?


LM

Site Publisher Addendum:
Beginning Friday we will begin a discussion of Dr. Matt Olson’s What Matters Most series.  Brother Olson’s series originates at his personal blog and is reproduced at the pseudo-fundamentalist site SharperIron. Our new series will be under the title, What REALLY Matters Most?

Footnotes:
1) WRCB-TV, accessed Sept. 10, 2012.

2) Is NIU “Unchanged?”

3) Is NIU “Opposed to and Reject[ing of] the Modern Charismatic Movement?

4) Resolved Founder, Rick Holland, Speaks to NIU Students

September 7, 2012

Attacks on Motives Do Not Belong...” at Sharper Iron?

In the previous article we discussed Sharper Iron and Censorship by Omission. Today, we are going to review elements of a thread comment by SI site publisher Aaron Blumer. The following excerpt appears in the SI discussion thread (comment #50) under Questions for Matt Olson and Northland International University.

I’m disappointed to see so many emoting so much in the thread…. I seem to be increasingly alone in believing this, but attacks on Don’s motives or Matt’s motives or anybody else’s motives do not belong here. You all agreed to the Comment Policy. Some of you need to review it. Some have reacted here without apparently even reading Don’s piece…. The situation calls for reining in tempers and making measured statements (if any at all). Chances are good the thread will close before much longer. Edit... OK, that sounded worse than I intended. There are some pretty good observations in the thread and I don’t want to too broadly criticize it. I do appreciate what many of you have contributed here. (It’s been a really hard week and I probably need a vacation)
Aaron Blumer IS increasingly alone in believing attacks do not belong at SI. SI moderators and certain vocal members have historically ridiculed, badgered, attacked motive and impugned character with impunity. In fact, there are occasions when Aaron has joined in these episodes taking sides against participants in the threads. In past and current SI discussion threads if Aaron admitted who was attacking motives, who was impugning character then he would have to admit his people have at times been in the wrong. It seems he can’t bring himself to admit certain things. It’s as if he could not afford to lose face with his people even if it meant being a hypocrite, which is sad.

Aaron wrote, “I seem to be increasingly alone in believing this, but attacks on…motives do not belong here.” So, how did Aaron exemplify this admonition to forum participants? On Friday, August 31 Aaron published an article on SI’s Front Page, a ten point article, How to Blast…a Christian Brother.... Taking into consideration his thread admonition on attacking motives and comparing it to his How to Blast... article we have IMO the crown jewel of hypocrisy! In the article Aaron assumes much motive, which really shoots himself and his leadership in the foot. Personally, I don’t think Aaron will acknowledge this or walk-back the article.

Is That a “Pretty Good Observation?”
It also appears Aaron cannot accept or cannot grasp that others are right when it comes to criticism of the blatant problems with the SI commenting world. Let’s consider another excerpt from Aaron’s statement above, “There are some pretty good observations in the thread….” The following statement can be found under comment #3 in the Questions for MO & NIU Filings thread, the same thread where Aaron posted his admonition. Does the following from SI member Matthew Richards qualify as a “pretty good observation?”
What about Chuck Phelps? Any good articles discussing his hatchet job on the Tina Anderson situation?”
SI’s team has the ability to delete such an irresponsible comment, if they were inclined to do so, which they obviously weren’t inclined to do. Apparently, Aaron believes that is a “pretty good observation” because it is still there.1 Apparently, that kind of off topic rhetoric passes SI Comment Policy.

Aaron Blumer, his team and many of the vocal members there often follow typical leftist strategy: When you cannot refute or answer the question, then you attack the messenger and/or discuss something else, even if tangential. Redirect to anything to move off the pertinent issue at hand.  The SI deletion of comments in violation of comment policy only seems to be implemented in order to cast objectors in as poor a light as possible.2

SI Drives Off Another:
Long time SI member JG formally and permanently ended his participation at SI. Following are excerpts from JG’s explanation to Aaron Blumer/SI for requesting that his membership be cancelled.
You know, friends, I’m a busy tent-maker. Anyone wonder why I’d take so much time on this when most people here apparently don’t want to hear what I say? There has been little of the Lord’s compassion in some statements…. Sharper Iron is far from the forum I joined years ago. Much has disappointed me. I’ve cited Scripture repeatedly in this discussion. No one bothered to interact with it…. This used to be a place where the Scripture WAS the discussion. Not on this topic, not even close. The double-standard I mentioned in a prior comment would never have been tolerated in the past. It used to be charity was extended to those who were different…. SI was a place where actions and beliefs of all could be scrutinized, but harshness in tone would cause those from across the spectrum to rise up as one in opposition. That’s gone. But this, to me, goes beyond all that and is a line I have to draw. 
I will not stand silent while our Lord’s grace is dishonored in a forum where I am a member. 
Thank you to all who have been friends to me, been gracious to me when I’ve not been all I should have been. There have been many I’ve appreciated here, many who I still appreciate greatly. But I’ll have to bow out now. Please cancel my membership of this forum.3
And the SI crowd can’t seem to understand why JG left the forum.

A Somewhat Positive Note:
While the behavior of Aaron’s own team and certain members has risen again, we do acknowledge a first time new and different reaction. In the recent Matt Olson/NIU threads SI administrator Jim Peet reacted to SI moderator Joel Tetreau’s violations of SI’s official commenting policy. In a pair of the Matt Olson/NIU Filing threads, Joel Tetreau was twice publicly warned by Jim Peet for “ascribing…attacks on the motive of other participants.” Of course, Joel’s personal attacks were not deleted.

While I am pleased to see a first time effort to rein in the behavior of SI’s moderators, my question is: Why this week, after six years of ignoring its own moderator abuses, does SI now deal with their own team’s abusive behavior in the forums? In any event, while this action is appreciated I seriously doubt it makes good (in anyone’s mind) the six previous years of participating in and/or ignoring moderators’ abuses.

Close:
The last week of August was a “really hard week” indeed for Aaron Blumer. SI moderators drove off one of the last participants that did try to speak for and on behalf of a good and balanced Fundamentalism. This is what SI moderators, admins and certain members have done to virtually every member who once did or might have participated from a Fundamentalist perspective. The week ended with a long overdue admonition against attacking motive from Aaron, which inexplicably he ignored in his Ten Things article.


LM

Footnotes:
1) Last accessed, Friday, Sept. 7 @11:55am.  Please continue to: Does SI Allow for the Name of Christ to be Sullied?
“Aaron Blumer has been derelict as a Christian publisher and sinful in his approach to addressing the entire tragic situation. There has been no ‘attitude of forbearance’ whatsoever. Aaron has shown no inclination of forebearance. Aaron (and Jim Peet) have repeatedly allowed for the publication of ‘reckless accusations of crime or cover up,’ which as SI site publisher and owner makes him complicit in the doing of it.  Aaron Blumer and Jim Peet have been enablers of sinful gossip, hurtful innuendo and rumor mongering.”

September 4, 2012

Sharper Iron: Censorship by Omission (Revised & Expanded)

This week we are taking a break from the series on the changes at Northland International University. We will return with new articles on developments there later this month. Today, I want to begin with the first of two articles on Sharper Iron.
Sharper Iron (SI) is infamous for a history of castigating and besmirching Fundamentalism at virtually any opportunity. SI has never posted and, therefore, cannot produce even one article from its Front Page that is thoroughly positive on Fundamentalism and uplifting for the fundamentalist. SI has never allowed for a blog, that is unapologetically positive toward Fundamentalism, to appear in its Blogroll. SI never passes on an opportunity to heap lavish praise and run interference on behalf of the so-called “conservative” evangelicalism, its star personalities and conferences.

SI’s leadership beginning with Aaron Blumer to Jim Peet, Joel Tetreau, Joe Roof, Larry Rogier, Susan R, JayC and a small, but aggressive pack of vocal SI members historically gang-tackle any participant who tries to present an apologetic for Fundamentalist concerns or take on the doctrinal aberrations, ecumenical compromises, cultural relativism and worldliness of the “conservative” evangelicals. SI is a willing participant in and a conduit for the influences of the new wave of non-separatist evangelicals in and around fundamental circles. SI’s double standards, bias and favoritism is obvious to any objective observer.

And SI can’t figure out why they have alienated and driven off almost every person who might participate on behalf of a truly good and balanced Fundamentalism? 

For over two months it has been widely known that Dr. Matt Olson and Northland International University (NIU) lauded a Charismatic Church. On July 2, 2012 Matt Olson from his personal blog posted “Confidence in the Next Generation.” In the article Olson stated, “I have great confidence in this next generation. They get what matters most. This was evidenced in my visit Sunday to Grace Bible Church in Philadelphia…”

What is the Crux of the Controversy?
The Grace Bible Church (Philadelphia, PA) is a member of CJ Mahaney’s family of Sovereign Grace Churches. It is a Charismatic Church. NIU’s current Articles of Faith and doctrinal statements in its Undergraduate and Graduate Handbooks explicitly state the university’s rejection of, and opposition to the “modern Charismatic movement.”1 From his blog Matt Olson announced that an NIU graduate/staff member, Greg Dietrich, will be in the membership of this Charismatic church and would be on NIU’s payroll. All of this has been fact checked and documented here at IDOTG, by Don Johnson at his blog (an oxgoad, eh) and the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship International (FBFI) Proclaim & Defend blog.

SI once alleged that it “is a fundamentalist place....  that SI is about how fundamentalists see the world.”2  The story of NIU president Matt Olson praising and initiating a fellowship with a Charismatic church is highly relevant to a wide cross–section of believers in fundamentalism. So, why didn’t SI carry its own report of this widely known development?

The liberal mainstream media heaps lavish praise on liberalism, but besmirches and demonizes conservatism. The mainstream media protects their liberal friends by refusing to report on and/or will censor negative stories about them. SI is no different than the liberal mainstream media when it comes to praise, bias, censorship to protect and favoritism on behalf of non-separatists in “conservative” evangelical circles and/or the new wave New Evangelicals circulating in fundamental circles.
SI’s media style is the first cousin of liberal mainstream media bias!
For the nearly two months after publication of Matt Olson’s public praise for the SGM Charismatic church nothing appeared at SI. The external pressure on SI, however, was begun through the initial blog articles of the NIU/Charismatic connection by Pastor Don Johnson in Getting What Matters Most at his blog an Oxgoad, eh?.  I followed Don’s article with the current on-going series of articles on Matt Olson and NIU at this blog. The presence of Don Johnson’s blog article and my series alone did not move SI to bring this major doctrinal discussion to their site.

On the morning of Friday, August 31st the FBFI entered the Olson/NIU Charismatic discussion. Once the FBFI’s Proclaim & Defend blog published Don Johnson’s Questions for Matt Olson and NIU3 SI no longer had any excuse for the stories non-appearance at its site and could not claim ignorance of the issue. Within minutes a link to the FBFI’s Proclaim & Defend appeared in SI’s Filings, and a comment thread was opened. Predictably certain members of SI’s leadership and its membership immediately gang tackled Don with impunity.  SI is not about to allow for, tolerate or let go unchallenged critical commentary of a person or ministry that is pursuing the same non-separatist evangelicalism they are.

Until the Proclaim & Defend article Questions for Matt Olson and NIU appeared it was purely another example of Censorship by Omission at SI. It’s just that simple.

On the other hand, as fast as Matt Olson can issue statements (on the current controversy and questions) SI has those articles posted on their site post-haste. Case in point was Dr. Olson’s Sept 3 article from his personal blog.4  That article was in SI’s Filings before daybreak the same day. What do you suppose the chances are that SI would add to their Filings a critical review of Matt Olson’s recent statements from this or Don Johnson’s blog?

SI’s censorship of the NIU/Charismatic issue and critical reactions to the issues was predictable. SI’s subsequent media support of Matt Olson’s attempts to dismiss, ignore or legitimize a serious contravention of NIU’s doctrinal statements is consistent with their objective to advance non-separatist evangelicalism, advance the agenda of and protect compromising men who circulate in and around fundamental circles. SI’s moderators (“referees”) do not provide for or guarantee an even playing field in the forum. A perusal of the Olson/NIU Filing’s thread of August 31st demonstrates the absurdity of any claims of unbiased moderation and fair treatment at SI.
SI has NEVER been fair to or a friend of authentic Fundamentalism! 
Sharper Iron IS a pseudo-fundamentalist site!
If you do not appreciate the slant of media bias at Sharper Iron you would do well to refrain from propping up the site through your participation.


LM

Please continue to “Attacks on Motive Do Not Belong...” at Sharper Iron?

Footnotes:
1) Is NIU “Opposed to and Reject[ing of] the Modern Charismatic Movement?” and Questions for Matt Olson and NIU

2) That statement has since been revised to a nearly unrecognizable form.

3) Questions for Matt Olson and NIU, FBFI’s Proclaim & Defend blog.

4) What Matters Most: How We Draw the Lines, Part 3. Matthew R. Olson blog. (accessed Sept. 3)

Site Publisher’s Addendum:
Some are asking why nothing is coming from SI contributors Kevin Bauder and Dave Doran on the NIU/Charismatic church connection. Earlier this week I read a noteworthy premise for their silence. At an oxgoad, eh Pastor Brian Ernsberger wrote,
Based upon the track record of the above-mentioned men (Bauder, Doran, Jordan, et. al.,) they have no reason to denounce what Matt Olson has said and done. These men have, to one degree or another, opened up avenues to evangelicals without much in the way of warnings. So why would they denounce a fellow who is pursuing those same avenues?”
Related Reading:
SI,“You LIE!”

SI May Fit the Description of Being PSEUDO- FUNDAMEMTALIST 

Censorship by Omission: Haddon Robinson

Revised and republished from the Sharper Iron: In the Iron Skillet blog.

August 30, 2012

Dr. Olson: Would You Kindly Tell Us...?

Special Alert, 8/31: The FBFI’s Proclaim & Defend blog published an article on the NIU controversy. See, Questions for Matt Olson and NIU. I am grateful the FBFI has finally joined the discussion over and is questioning NIU’s involvement with a Charismatic church. 
In these discussions of the changes at Northland International University, not I or anyone I am familiar with would suggest that Matt Olson does not love the Lord. We believe that Matt is a sincere man and is trying to please the Lord. We believe that we’ll meet Matt before the throne of God and for eternity worship the Lord together. Until that time, however, we are seriously concerned with the new direction that Matt is going, which has begun to resemble New Evangelical compromise. The concern is compounded because Matt sits in a position from which he can influence impressionable young people to follow him in what we believe to be a direction that draws believers away from fidelity to God’s mandates for separation and ultimately harms the cause of Christ on the earth.

Until Matt Olson begins answering questions about his actions and statements in precise terms he is causing confusion and uncertainty about where Northland is headed and/or going to stand. Clearly, Northland International University is drifting far from what was the Northland Baptist Bible College. Under Matt Olson Northland has changed, “radically” some would say.

Many men in Fundamental circles recall Les Ollila constantly warning that “it’s not what a person says, it’s where his feet are pointed,” that brings corruption. He illustrated the concept with Solomon who wrote wonderful truths (Proverbs), but pointed his feet toward pagan women and was corrupted. Matt Olson has been saying, “Northland is unchanged!” His feet, however, are pointed toward Reformed, non-dispensational, amillennial, non-separatist, CCM /Rock-music-oriented, non-Baptist, Continuationists!!

Following is a series of questions that any pastor or parent can comfortably ask Dr. Olson. They are brief, simple, but penetrating questions. These questions get right to heart of widely held concerns with Northland.

Dr. Olson would you kindly tell us...
1) Will NI teach that the church is Israel? 
2) Will NI move away from a Dispensational hermeneutic and embrace a Covenant hermeneutic? 
3) Will NI open its chapel music to the kind of music featured at the Resolved conference?* 
4) Will NI continue to establish Bible, Chapel and Community Churches or will they begin to plant Baptist Churches?** 
5) Will NI accept the apostleship of the Sovereign Grace Ministry leaders? 
6) Will NI students continue to be encouraged to attend T4G events? 
7) Will NI change its Handbook doctrinal statements and Articles of Faith to allow for open acceptance of the Charismatic churches and pastors? 
8) Will NI students who leave their dispensational, Baptist heritage to become leaders in Charismatic “Continuationist” churches continue to be lauded?
Approach Dr. Olson or any NIU administrator and board member in a spirit of Christian love with a seeker’s heart. If you are sincere, then I can think of no reason why a brother in Christ, the president of a Christian college, would be reluctant to answer these questions in precise terms.

Yours faithfully,


LM

*Rick Holland is the founder of the Resolved conference. Matt Olson had Rick Holland, the former executive pastor of John MacArthur’s Grace Community Church, as a chapel speaker on October 5, 2010 at NIU. See, Rick Holland Speaks to Students in Chapel at NIU
Resolved is the brainchild of a member of Dr. John MacArthur’s pastoral staff [Rick Holland], gathering thousands of young people annually, and featuring the usual mix of Calvinism and extreme charismatic-style worship. Young people are encouraged to feel the very same sensational nervous impact of loud rhythmic music on the body that they would experience in a large, worldly pop concert, complete with replicated lighting and atmosphere. At the same time they reflect on predestination and election. Worldly culture provides the bodily, emotional feelings, into which Christian thoughts are infused and floated. Biblical sentiments are harnessed to carnal entertainment. (Pictures of this conference on their website betray the totally worldly, showbusiness atmosphere created by the organisers.)” (Dr. Peter Masters: The Merger of Calvinism With Worldliness, italics his, bold mine)
**Brother Dick Fellers recently left NIU, but before he did he was the Church Ministries Chair, was involved in and taught church planting. The Church he planted while at Northland is the Timberland “Bible” Chapel of Crivitz, WI.  Brother Fellers was pastor of the Immanuel “Bible” Church in Scottsdale, AZ. He was pastor for 27 years until leaving in 2007 to take a position at NIU.  Dick Fellars is a plurality of elders man.  How does a “Community” church man come on staff at what was then the Northland Baptist Bible College.  While discussing this with a pastor in the Midwest, he asked: How is it that no one at NBBC/NIU ever brought this to light?  Are other Bible Church/Community/Chapel people on the faculty of NIU?

Related Reading:

Is NIU “UnChanged?”

Exactly How Does Northland's Music Remain, "Unchanged?"

Is NIU Opposed to and Reject[ing of] theModern Charismatic Movement?”