The Necessity of Personal Separation in Biblical Fundamentalism
Editor’s Note: This article accompanies FBFI Resolution 09-05 and is reprinted with permission from the May/June issue of FrontLine magazine.
Paul declares that all Scripture is “profitable” or “useful” (2 Tim. 3:16) in the sense of yielding a practical benefit (1 Tim. 4:8; Titus 3:8). The Scriptures construct our faith by establishing correct belief (“doctrine”), convict by exposing incorrect belief (“reproof”), correct by exposing incorrect behavior (“correction”), and counsel in order to establish right behavior (“instruction in righteousness”). Sound doctrine includes the moral implications which necessarily result from genuine faith in the truth: “For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine” (1 Tim. 1:10).
In regard to personal separation from the world, God’s Word corrects. “Correction” (2 Tim. 3:16) is used in the sense of “setting something right,” most likely with reference to conduct.1 God’s Word has the authority to regulate personal and public conduct. Attitudes and behavior among “Christian” young people toward things once considered wrong and sinful are gradually changing. There has been a noticeable shift in attitudes toward smoking, drinking alcoholic beverages, objectionable movies, questionable entertainment, rock music, modern dancing, gambling, sexual involvement outside of marriage, androgyny,2 and public immodesty. James Hunter, in Evangelicalism: The Coming Generation, considers certain aspects of this shift as “moral reposturing.”3 Generally speaking, there has been a decline in personal separation from the world in Evangelical colleges and universities, among Evangelical preachers and leaders, and among everyday Christians. Richard Quebedeaux, a self-professed New Evangelical, admits in The Worldly Evangelicals that “Evangelicals are making more and more compromises with the larger culture.” He adds that “Evangelicals have become harder and harder to distinguish from other people,” pointing out that Christian “business people, professionals, and celebrities have found it necessary (and pleasant) to travel the cocktail-party circuit in Beverly Hills.” Lastly, he mentions with approval that “Evangelicals have often discovered the pleasure of alcohol and tobacco while studying and traveling in Europe.4 The status of these traditional taboos has undergone alteration in Christian circles. They are regarded less as sins that displease God and are described only in terms related to their dysfunctional or unwise character. In some respects Fundamentalism lags about ten to fifteen years behind such Evangelical trends.
A Lack of Commitment
What has contributed to this decline? I suggest that a lack of commitment to the doctrinal and ethical message in the Scriptures carries much of the responsibility. Words such as “sin,” “guilt,” and “wickedness” are being replaced with euphemisms such as “mistake,” “estrangement,” “maladjustment,” “indiscretion,” or “imprudence.” “Sin,” in today’s religious world, is no longer against God but against oneself. Selfishness, rather than being the essence of all sin, has become the goal of redemption. Ministers appeal to self-interest in their preaching because they know that self is what really motivates people. Human need now beckons the unfulfilled to receive “wholeness” at the foot of the cross. The regression is from the Biblical position that says, “I’m not OK, you’re not OK,” to the popular notion of the seventies—“I’m OK, you’re OK”—culminating in the current self-esteem craze,—“I’m OK, I’m OK”—a kind of schizophrenic Pelagianism.5 Consequently, sin has not been a popular subject for Christian authors or pastors. A virtual paucity of writing and preaching on the subject exists today. The Scriptures correct these popular misconceptions regarding sin by exposing the extent that human nature has been spoiled and impeded by the effects of sin. Sin is any lack of conformity to the moral law and character of God, either in act, disposition, or state (Rom. 5:12–14; 7:22, 23; James 4:11, 12). If people are invited to accept Jesus Christ just to have their needs met, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to expect something more of them later.
Secondly, God’s Word “trains” or “disciplines in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16). The training is designed to produce conduct whereby “righteousness” becomes a reality in the life of the believer. Holiness literally means “to cut,” “to separate,” or to be “set apart” as sacred by God’s presence.6 It refers to the majestic transcendence of God by emphasizing the distinction between the Creator and the creature. It also means that God is separate in His being from all that is evil, impure, and defiled. Righteousness entails moral integrity of action and disposition according to God’s perfect standard of holiness. The term is used here in the simple sense of “right conduct” (1 Tim. 6:11; 2 Tim. 2:22; Rom. 6:13; 9:20). Such training or discipline is designed to bring one’s behavior into conformity to God’s holiness.
God’s Love and His Holiness
Generally, God’s love is emphasized today in Evangelical circles much more than His holiness and righteousness. God is love (1 John 4:7–16). Nevertheless, God’s love is governed by His holiness; otherwise, His love would be reduced to capricious sentimentality. God’s holiness necessitates His judicial wrath against that which is opposed to His character and commands. Psalm 97:10 says, “Ye that love the Lord, hate evil.” God hates “every false way” (Ps. 119:104), “vain thoughts” contrary to His Law (Ps. 119:113), “lying” (Ps. 119:163), “a proud look,” “wicked imaginations,” and factious men who are heretical schismatics (Prov. 6:17–19; 1 Cor. 3:17). God “[hates] all workers of iniquity” (Ps. 5:5). The psalmist himself says that he “hated the congregation of evil doers” (Ps. 26:5). The dictates of Biblical separation and conformity to Christ are summarized in several passages: “Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good” (Rom. 12:9); “Hate the evil, and love the good” (Amos 5:15); “And let none of you imagine evil in your hearts … for all these are things that I hate, saith the Lord” (Zech. 8:17).
Scripture gives much counsel regarding the righteousness so desperately lacking in Christ’s church today. The apostle John addresses this issue in his first epistle. The term “world” (kosmos) is mentioned six times in 1 John 2:15–17. The “world” in this context refers to a system or network of ideas, activities, and purposes. In this sense the world is an organized system of evil ordered against God at every point. Paul says, “The world by wisdom knew not God” (1 Cor. 1:21). He speaks of the “princes of this world” who crucified the Lord of Glory (1 Cor. 2:8). James declares that “friendship” with the world is the height of infidelity with God (James 4:4). God tells His people plainly, “Love not the world” (1 John 2:15), “have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness” (Eph. 5:11), and “be not conformed to this world” (Rom. 12:2). The world is at total cross-purposes with God, because it is “not of the Father.”
According to Dr. Rolland McCune, the term kosmos emphasizes the present, meaning the present arrangement of things. The world is the current secular mindset with its ever-changing values, symbols, goals, and priorities. It always emphasizes the “now.” Thus, the world is transient, always on the move, and “passing away.” It believes in “change” for its own sake and the “becomingness” of all things. As such, the world is humanistic, being structured by autonomous man and his “I’m worth it” philosophy. It consists of the desires of modern man’s sinful, fleshly, and prideful nature, his self-esteem and self-fulfillment syndrome. Worldliness includes both those outward activities and inward affections for and attachment to some aspect of the present arrangement of things. This includes the world’s thought patterns, amusements, fads, habits, philosophies, goals, friendships, practices, and lifestyles.7 First John 2:15–17 enumerates three aspects of the world which is conditioned by fallen humanity. First, John characterizes the world and its current age as the “lust of the flesh.” Grammarians describe this expression as a subjective genitive. John is speaking of the flesh’s passionate desires. The “flesh” is a complex of sinful attributes that comprise the sinful nature.
How does the believer combat worldliness in regard to the intellectual, volitional, and emotional aspects of this complex of sinful attributes called the flesh? First, Paul says, “make [no] provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof” (Rom. 13:14). The word “provision” carries the idea of “forethought,” which literally means “to have a mind before.” The apostle commands believers not use their intellect sinfully in order to discover various ways to fulfill the desires of the flesh. A man must yield to the Spirit of God and refuse to exercise a fleshly intellect by making forethought to sin. In addition, believers are admonished to “cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God” (2 Cor. 7:1). Contextually, Paul is concerned with the influence of other people who are succumbing to fleshly activity (2 Cor. 6:14–7:2). In this case, believers are not to enter into a spiritual yoke or union with those whose lives are characterized by the fleshly nature where it would be impossible to avoid being negatively influenced and having one’s “temple” defiled.
The Misuse of Liberty
Finally, the people of God are not to abuse or misuse their liberty in Christ as an occasion to fulfill the works of the flesh (Gal. 5:13). In this present age believers are not under the Mosaic Law as a governing constitution for the New Testament local church. However, every command and principle rooted in the unchanging character of God, the created order, and repeated or adjusted in the NT carries over into each new, succeeding dispensation. In this sense, the Law of Moses remains a corroborative witness to the will of God for believers in the NT church age. Paul’s concern here is that believers not abuse their new standing in Christ by using the grace of God as a cloak for sinful, fleshly behavior. Paul revolted against such perverted thinking. Freedom from the Mosaic Law does not imply freedom from NT commands, principles, precepts, directives, prohibitions, or standards.
Second, John mentions “the lust of the eyes” as an integral part of “all that is in the world.” This entails the sinful cravings and desires stimulated by what is seen. The grammatical construction could be considered a genitive of means, namely that the eyes are the means by which sinful desires are stimulated. Fleshly lusts are aroused by that which enters the mind by means of the senses. In a day of billboard advertising, movie and television screens, computer monitors, and eye-catching magazine spreads, this aspect of the world is predominant. The world is filled with men who are exercising their fallen nature willfully, mentally, and emotionally. Others are looking upon the experiences, accomplishments, and creations of men exercising their fallen nature, and through their senses they are being enticed (James 1:14, 15).
Third, and perhaps the most insidious of all, John describes the world as characterized by the “pride of life.” There is a devilish progression from what one wants to what one has and boastfully displays. Pride parades the spirit of the braggart who extols his own virtues and possessions. The genitive “of life” portrays an attitude of boastfulness and hollow self-exaltation. The goal of these fleshly desires is the celebration of earthly life in its possessions, achievements, indulgences, and self-promotion. Ultimately, John refers to men whose lives are filled with the self-congratulation of an independent life resting in self-sufficiency. It is the making and maintaining of an image of which the world approves. Wherever there is this arrogance of lifestyle, this image that “all is well and prosperous with my life without God,” there is “the pride of life.”
Now the world will hear any minister who speaks of the world: “They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them” (1 John 4:5); therefore, it is imperative that we instruct ourselves and others from the Word of God on how to remain personally separated from the world while serving Christ in the world. How does one obey God’s command not to love the world? By the “renewing of the mind” in the Word of God. This renewing of the mind is evidenced by the choices that people of the faith make every day. By faith believers seek God’s will through the Word of God in every decision (James 4:15). By faith believers reject worldly wisdom (1 Cor. 3:18).
Directives for Personal Separation
Specific directives for personal separation from worldly attitudes and actions include the moral commands, precepts, and directives of God’s Word (Exod. 20:1–17; 1 Cor. 5:9–13; 6:9, 10; Gal. 5:16–21; Eph. 5:1–7; 2 Tim. 3:1–5). In addition, God lays down numerous principles by which believers are to make wise decisions regarding their behavior in the world:
1. The principle of enslavement (self-control).
1 Corinthians 6:12: “All things are lawful unto me [Corinthian slogan of antinomianism8], but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.”
1 Corinthians 9:27: “But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection.”
2. The principle of offense.
Romans 14:13–16: “Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way… . Let not then your good be evil spoken of.”
1 Corinthians 10:32: “Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the
church of God.”3. The principle of God’s glory.
1 Corinthians 6:20: “For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.”
4. The principle of a Biblically educated conscience.
Romans 14:23: “And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.”
5. The principle of Christ’s name (authority).
Colossians 3:17: “And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.”
6. The principle of corruption by association.
1 Corinthians 15:33: “Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.”
7. The principle of peace in the Body of Christ.
Colossians 3:15: “And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body; and be ye thankful.”
8. The principle of edification.
Romans 15:1, 2: “We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification.”
In summary, then, separation from the world grows out of the very character of God and His exclusive right to first place in all things; it is an expression of God’s eternal holiness (Isa. 6:1–3). God could demand no other behavior in this regard and be consistent with Himself. Therefore, He demands that all people who name the name of Christ be like Him in character and conduct (Matt. 5:48; 1 John 2:1–4). It remains the responsibility of every believer and Christian organization to refuse to compromise His character by any association or endeavor, attitude or attempt that breaks down the absolute distinction between righteousness and sin, God’s people and Satan’s people, “day people” and “night people” (1 Thess. 5:1–11), obedient Christians and disobedient Christians, light and darkness, truth and error, right and wrong, or good and evil.9
[1] This Greek term is used only once in the NT (BAGD, p. 282).
[2] Androgyny means the removal of male and female characteristics, roles, or dress.
[3] James Davison Hunter, Evangelicalism: The Coming Generation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), pp. 59–62.
[4] Richard Quebedeaux, The Worldly Evangelicals (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1978), pp. 12, 14, 118.
[5] Pelagianism, a heresy that began early in church history, denies the depravity and moral inability of the human will (Millard Erickson, Where Is Theology Going?,pp. 147–55).
[6] Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, reprint ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972), p. 871.
[7] Rolland McCune, “Handout on Biblical Separation,” Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary.
[8] Antinomianism (literally, “against law”) is the title given to the view which espouses that because believers are under grace they are not bound by the ethical/moral principles and commands of God’s Word, including their sound and skillful application; therefore, Christians may sin with virtual impunity because God’s grace abounds. This view is refuted in Romans 6:1, 2.
[9] McCune, “Handout on Biblical Separation,” DBTS.
|
- 19 views
First, I love the 8 point “Directives for Personal Separation.” With your permission, I might just make copies of this and pass them out to the congregation I serve.
Second, This is a great article. Thanks for the work. There might be a point or two I would present differently. I would want to build some fences around your principle #6 -corruption by association - The Pharisees and the disciples of John said the same kind of thing to Levi and Jesus. But, as long as we can agree that there ought to be places where we do sit with publicans and sinners, then I’m in agreement with your list.
Third, I’m hesitant to say anything “counter” even if I would want too because…. the church and all branches of it are soooooo polluted with the world’s philosophy and “feel” that this kind of preaching, writing, teaching, etc…..is very much needed. Amen and Amen Mike! Thanks for your work. Thanks to the FBF for keeping this issue before our minds and hearts. May God give us the type of purity you speak of.
Fourth, This remains the strength of the Type A fundamentalism. You are not afraid to call Sin what it is ……. wickedness pure and simple, plus the ability to discuss what responsible righteousness looks like.
Last, Mike this was refreshing! You should write more often. Selah!
Straight Ahead!
jt
ps - Mike…..excellent statement - “Freedom from the Mosaic Law does not imply freedom from NT commands, etc….”
ppss - Mike, I like the two paragraphs (under the section you call , “God’s love and holiness”) where you talk about the concept of the “World.” I may turn those paragraphs into a sermon. Shalom!
Dr. Joel Tetreau serves as Senior Pastor, Southeast Valley Bible Church (sevbc.org); Regional Coordinator for IBL West (iblministry.com), Board Member & friend for several different ministries;
I might add also that our current culture frowns upon “naming names” or pointing out that somebody is wicked, or even some institution. Note NY Representative King who has spoken out against the press coverage of Michael Jackson!
What this boils down to is that many “fundamental” churches no longer preach against certain things, or expose things for what they are. I know of several “fundamental” Baptist churches who no longer denounce Roman Catholicism as a system, or the Pope, because they don’t want to appear “negative” or “unloving.” This is only one example of where not demonstrating the truth of a matter leads to acceptance of that thing - eventually.
So, we must expose sin for what it is, even if it means being labeled “negative.” We must expose institutions of false teaching for what they are, even if it means being labeled “unloving,” or whatever else. The truth is more important than how people view us. Certainly, we should be careful in how we present the truth, yet present it we must. We don’t need to be obnoxious or purposefully offensive, but we still have an obligation to warn our churches of false doctrine, and those who propound it.
In Christ,
Pastor Steve Schwenke Liberty Baptist Church Amarillo, TX
Thank you for your kind words. As a pastor, I am all too familiar with the pressure one feels from society not to be Pauline (Phillippians 4:19) in our preaching. Paul was often direct, specific, controversial. Quoting Stott we are all between two worlds—Scripture and the World we live in everyday. Discernment and courage are both necessary to bridge those worlds in our preaching. There are times where I have shamefully fallen short of that goal either by being cowardly or overly enthusiastic. I pray for wisdom to get it just right. Joel, I really like your new haircut in your family picture. I read your autobiographical essay and enjoyed it very much.
Pastor Mike Harding
I hate hair…..period. I think we should preach against it…..all forms (just kidding). I try hair for about 6 months and then cut if all off for 3 or 4 months. Have no idea what I do the other two months. This keeps everyone guessing - including myself. Thanks for the response. I’m serious about printing out your 8 point presentation. Great stuff.
Steve, I noted your response to Mike. I’m sure you’re right about some who claim to be fundamentalists who refuse to denounce the Roman Church publically. To me, that would not be a fundamentalist church in any of my previous-mentioned categories: Type A, B or C varieties. How in the world can you claim to be a fundamentalist and ignore the assult on forensic, imputed justification? Wow.
Blessings on you both!
Straight Ahead!
jt
Dr. Joel Tetreau serves as Senior Pastor, Southeast Valley Bible Church (sevbc.org); Regional Coordinator for IBL West (iblministry.com), Board Member & friend for several different ministries;
I don’t agree with sweeping assumptions regarding “Evangelicals.” That descriptor is too large a word at which to throw rock solid definitions and practices. this of course is the challenge of biblical fundamentalism, culture and therefore many churches are fragmented and variant in their practices.
I don’t agree that using alcohol and tobacco are grouped into the area of unrighteousness as lying, gossip, disobedience to parents, etc. which are clear biblical directives. When we talk of “attitudes once considered wrong and sinful are changing”, we are allowing old cultural norms to define right and wrong, instead of biblical norms. In other words, define worldliness according to Scripture, not early 20th century American behavior.
Overall, i echo JT’s comments that walking the straight and narrow is ever difficult, but we can be encouraged that we are not the first generation to deal with a reckless and pagan society. we have God’s Word, the Spirit and a long line of leaders to follow.
Discussion