An Open Letter from Dr. Matt Olson of Northland International University

[JohnMatzko]

we are changing our music on a missional level

No matter how these sorts of changes get described, the result always seems to be a trap set on stage. ;)

You say that like it’s a bad thing. :) Remember 100 years ago people were saying the same things about the piano, a bar instrument shot through and through with evil connotations. Surprising how quickly the change happened; all it took was the changing of the guard when the new converts saved in the camp meeting revivals (with the sound of pianos in the background) found themselves in positions of leadership 20 years later.

[mounty] Remember 100 years ago people were saying the same things about the piano, a bar instrument shot through and through with evil connotations. Surprising how quickly the change happened; all it took was the changing of the guard when the new converts saved in the camp meeting revivals (with the sound of pianos in the background) found themselves in positions of leadership 20 years later.

I thought it was because it dawned on someone that the piano was a stringed instrument :D

The dissertation on Russian music is fascinating, but can we pretend just a bit harder that we are staying on topic? ;)

[Susan R] SNIPThe dissertation on Russian music is fascinating, but can we pretend just a bit harder that we are staying on topic? ;)

Sorry for not expanding on my quote :(. My point is it looks like Northland is going to shift their music to deemphasis ethnocentric Revivalistic Taboos which have crept in to Fundamentalist musicology. IF this is the case, they may be looking for a head of their music department who has a more knowledge of international music.

Please note the conditional and tentative phrasing of my last sentence.

Dr. O has always been a man that I greatly respect and have always been convicted by His love and commitment to the cause of Christ. I do not know Matt Olson personally, although I did preach in his church many years ago while he was in India. I do not question either man’s motives and I would also like to have a statement from Dr. O before attributing all in the letter to both men. That being said, I am very concerned by the need for many in the Fundamental realms to have the approval or dialogue with Neoevangelicals. While I may appreciate John McCarther’s books and may even quote them from time to time in my sermons, there must be a clear understanding of separation from him. This must be explained from the pulpit in a loving, biblical way. Dr. Mark Minnick in one of my classes helped me as a younger man to understand this very fact. He stated, “no more believers will be in heaven because Billy Graham compromised.” In other words, my congregation must be led by the overriding philosophy that we do what is right, not by what seems smart or successful at this present time. I am willing at this time to take Matt Olson at his word and graciously accept his mild apology. Maybe he made a mistake, maybe he doesn’t see the issue, or maybe he plans on taking Northland in a wrong direction? It is too early for me to pass judgment upon a place that has touched so many lives for the cause of Christ. I will be praying for Dr. O and Matt Olson that they will make the right choices in the months and years to come.

that being said, I am very concerned by the need for many in the Fundamental realms to have the approval or dialogue with Neoevangelicals. While I may appreciate John McCarther’s books and may even quote them from time to time in my sermons, there must be a clear understanding of separation from him. This must be explained from the pulpit in a loving, biblical way. Dr. Mark Minnick in one of my classes helped me as a younger man to understand this very fact. He stated, “no more believers will be in heaven because Billy Graham compromised.”

Bro,

There is quite a huge difference between the conservative evangelicalism of John MacArthur and the neo-evangelicalism of Billy Graham. John MacArthur does not join with liberal mainliners and RC’s in his evangelistic efforts as Billy Graham did throughout his entire evangelistic ministry. In fact, MacArthur doesn’t tolerate them whatsoever.

I also have disagreements with John MacArthur, but not nearly enough to take an all or nothing approach to separation with him.

I attended Northland in the first 4 years of Dr. Olson’s tenure and have returned there twice since graduation. I came having only been saved a hand full of years and was in serious need of discipleship. My first few years the demerit system was the best thing to happen to me. I became more discipline in many areas of my life. Yet, when I became an upperclassmen and had more freedom and was in a room with an RA I can now look back and see that I became undisciplined. There were inward changes that needed to be made and I think I could have benefited from this “way of discipleship.”

I can also tell you after sitting in classrooms and taking part in dorm room theology that what I am seeing now in no way reflects a change in what was expressed to me by the faculty and what I was hearing was the opinion of many of my peers. In fact the actions being taken now are actions that are MORE consistent with what was being taught in the classroom. MacARTHUR was never harpooned, but was in fact, held up as an great example of expositional preaching and someone who firmly believed and practiced such things as, separation, church discipline, and anti-worldliness.

On the subject of music I can tell you that the message was beyond mixed. Things that passed which shouldn’t, things that didn’t that should have. You also have to consider that growing influence of data based music (as opposed to CD’s). Something that was impossible to control/check. On the positive side I can say that CCM was not glorified in any way, but there was an encouraging to look at the music from a theological perspective and not a “throw everything out because Bill Gaither (sp?) was in the same town when this was written.”

I just wanted to give a testimony of someone who was there at the end of The Doc O era and the beginning of the O2 era. I see what is happening as a more consistent application of the philosophy that was already in place.

I love Northland and would not hesitate to send any of my 30 teenagers there. Every person I have brought from my church has walked away feeling like their walk with Christ was better for it. Is that not the purpose?

[jwstima] I am very concerned by the need for many in the Fundamental realms to have the approval or dialogue with Neoevangelicals. While I may appreciate John McCarther’s books and may even quote them from time to time in my sermons, there must be a clear understanding of separation from him.

Why must there be? Paul says not to associate with a brother who is walking an unruly life. Obviously you don’t have an accusation against Dr. MacArthur in that way - you don’t even know him, or how to spell his name.

So then, perhaps you can enlighten as where his doctrine goes wrong, and I’d like chapter and verse, not categories like “neoevangelical,” as if saying it makes it both evil and reality.

I do know the man, and love him. He has taken more stones and arrows from people who simply despise biblical truth than you’ll ever know, from feminists, to legalists, to liberals, to fundies, to evangelicals, to emergents, to charismatics, to hypocrites. And it continues to this very day.

Let’s see you man up and tell us why, biblically, a man who preaches verse-by-verse, whose sermons and books are published for all to see, translated into multiple languages around the world and used in churches everywhere, and who is used to by Christ to bring souls into a saving relationship with Himself, and who is continually despised by so many religionists, is someone who “must be” separated from.

[Susan R]…but can we pretend just a bit harder that we are staying on topic? ;)

I think we are still on-topic, at least tangentially. NIU has said that their philosophy of music will not change, but that their execution of that philosophy will change. Culture and (more importantly) history is on their side; any of the previously-discussed shifts, either in culture or in leadership personnel, has led to a new outworking of a relatively static philosophy. This is human nature - three people can look at one principle and come to four different conclusions about how to act in light of that principle. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I see the entire letter (not just the music part) as a natural progression. New guy takes over; to his credit he didn’t just pile on the change in his first six months; and now, finally, the fact that he is not Les Ollila comes out. He’s a different man, younger, with a different background and approach to the same principles NIU/NBBC’s always held. His letter is littered with evidence to this (all emphases mine):

[Dr. Olson]

In reality, it is a re-commitment to a means of discipleship that has already been present at Northland.

Our standards and expectations remain the same.

Philosophically, it is unchanged…. What we have always been trying to do, and will continue to do into the future, is to make sure Northland’s practice of music (as with every aspect of the Christian life) is built principally on clear teachings from the Bible….

Even though we haven’t changed our music at a philosophical level….

We see this as appropriate in the academic context and the type of thing we have done in the past for the very same reasons.

Biblically, we worked through a process of decision making and felt these choices and the context in which they were made were consistent with what we have always believed.

We affirm that Northland stands in the historic tradition of Fundamentalism and is committed to remain as an independent, Baptist, separatist institution.

This is not the language of change. This is the language of, “How should the outworking of our unchanged beliefs look in this generation?” My point with the music thing was just to point out that the acceptance of new instruments, styles, etc., can and do come about organically, as new leadership rotates in, and as the next generation applies the same principles they were taught by the previous generation within their cultural context. Some of my “Christian practices” have changed as I grew, but as one man who knew me before and after those changes remarked last week, “You’re still the same guy.” By the same token, based on this letter, I think you have to say that NIU’s still the same school.

Ted, he was told by Dr. Minnick what to believe. Isn’t that enough? Who are you to question Dr. Minnick?

[James K] Ted, he was told by Dr. Minnick what to believe. Isn’t that enough? Who are you to question Dr. Minnick?

Is this helpful to the discussion?

[Rob Fall] My point is it looks like Northland is going to shift their music to deemphasis ethnocentric Revivalistic Taboos which have crept in to Fundamentalist musicology. IF this is the case, they may be looking for a head of their music department who has a more knowledge of international music.

Please note the conditional and tentative phrasing of my last sentence.

That makes sense, and fits with the context of the letter. I think the speculation of 1)Olson is having tea and crumpets with Holland + 2) Olson is talking about changes to their music policies = 3) Rock Bands Performing in Chapel sound a bit paranoid. Unless there is a compelling reason to believe that is the direction they intend to go, why head there at warp speed with our hypotheses?

I agree with mounty that it is entirely possible to hold to the same basic philosophy and yet realize your application has been faulty. I mean, if you’ve got kids, you have experienced this at least once, I’d think.

As a Northland grad, I appreciate their attempts at being focused on the main thing - Great Commission living. The extra-biblical preferences that “our people” like to insert into Christianity really divert our attention from where it should be - on a lost and dying world. All this bashing-by-blog, or “BBB syndrome” is basically unbiblical.

My prescription for those feeling under the weather with “BBB syndrome” is as follows: (1) keep own eyes clean of beams or logs (Matthew 7:4), (2) daily use a soft answer with a gentle tongue (Proverbs 15), and (3) for good bodily health, use gracious words (Proverbs 16:24). The above prescription can usually cure the ailments typically associated with “BBB syndrome.” Matthew 18:15 has some good principles for managing conflict or disagreements in our preferences - not a bad place to start.

What also worked for me is actually going up there to the northwoods (bring a GPS device) and speak to Dr. Olson and Dr. Ollila personally, as I did, and I got all my questions answered. The spirit of the student body is as good as it is ever been!

And, yes, we as leaders are always trying manage change and its potential conflicts politically - that is part of good leadership. No lying, no deceit - those are sin, but using a soft answer and wise lips are signs of spiritual maturity. Proverbs 16:23 says “The heart of the wise teacheth his mouth (or in today’s lingo “makes his speech judicious”) and addeth learning (or again today “persuasiveness”) to his lips.”

If after time, you notice detrimental results from Northland’s approach, then you can separate. As we know, “all the ways of a man are pure in his own eyes, but the Lord weighs the spirit” (Proverbs 16:2).

The purpose of this discussion was about Northland and not to get into a long discussion about John MacArthur or Billy Graham. John MacArthur has written many good books and has been bashed by many groups, but the point is that he is still a conservative evangelical (Neo-evanglical). He continues to chose to associate himself with many in those circles.

I was challenged to give biblical reasons for separation from John MacArthur. II Corinthians 6:14-17 really sums it all up. His position on the blood and Lordship salvation have always puzzled me. His clarifications have only led to greater confusion.

For the most part his explanation and exposition are sound, but his application (or lack thereof) is where we must part ways.

The great commission is about salvation and sanctification. I am concerned that in our quest for the salvation of souls that we forget to bring men and women along in sanctification (Christlikeness). The unsaved world looks at Christians to reflect their Savior not the world around them. The difference must not only be in the message but also in the messenger.

To those who may question my listening to Dr. Minnick, I believe that he is an honorable and Spirit-filled man and someone that walks with God. Yes, I will listen to that type of man all day long.

[jwstima] The purpose of this discussion was about Northland and not to get into a long discussion about John MacArthur or Billy Graham. John MacArthur has written many good books and has been bashed by many groups, but the point is that he is still a conservative evangelical (Neo-evanglical). He continues to chose to associate himself with many in those circles.

I was challenged to give biblical reasons for separation from John MacArthur. II Corinthians 6:14-17 really sums it all up. His position on the blood and Lordship salvation have always puzzled me. His clarifications have only led to greater confusion.

For the most part his explanation and exposition are sound, but his application (or lack thereof) is where we must part ways.

The great commission is about salvation and sanctification. I am concerned that in our quest for the salvation of souls that we forget to bring men and women along in sanctification (Christlikeness). The unsaved world looks at Christians to reflect their Savior not the world around them. The difference must not only be in the message but also in the messenger.

To those who may question my listening to Dr. Minnick, I believe that he is an honorable and Spirit-filled man and someone that walks with God. Yes, I will listen to that type of man all day long.

You may not want to get in a discussion about MacArthur, but you have made very serious accusations, and now have used Scripture to support them. The discussion is upon you.

2 Corinthians 6:14-17 passage presents only two black and white opposites: righteousness or lawlessness, light, or darkness, unbelief, or belief, Christ or Satan, the temple of God or idolatry. It does not deal with degrees of darkness, degrees of unbelief, of degrees of Satan, or degrees of idolatry, or degrees of anything. So please don’t go there in your response..

By citing this passage in the context of why MacArthur “must” (your words, not mine) be separated from, you are calling him lawless, in the dark, an unbeliever, an idolater, and a co-laborer with Satan.

You must either now support those accusations. If you cannot support them, or do not believe them to be true, then you owe us several responses:

First, why have you misused Scripture, and done so in a way that is injurious to a man who preaches Christ.

Second, a public apology for claiming that MacArthur should be separated from, when he in fact should be embraced by all those who loved the Lord Jesus with an unfeigned love.

[jwstima] I was challenged to give biblical reasons for separation from John MacArthur. II Corinthians 6:14-17 really sums it all up. His position on the blood and Lordship salvation have always puzzled me. His clarifications have only led to greater confusion.

Please help me to connect the dots!

Re: “Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers”

How is J Mac yoked with unbelievers?

Enlighten me because I don’t get it!

[jwstima] His [John MacArthur] position on the blood … have always puzzled me. His clarifications have only led to greater confusion.

Be confused no longer!

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/blood.htm

By the way, they (BJU) has never made this right!

If I believed that John MacArthur was an unbeliever, I would not be reading his books or quoting him from the pulpit. Worldly music endeavors to mix light and darkness and Dr. MacArthur uses worldly music in his youth group. When Dr. MacArthur writes a book that roundly criticizes tongues speaking and then brings in Chuck Smith, I am perplexed. John MacArthur is a good man and I am sure loves the Lord, but I cannot have close fellowship with a man who in my opinioin is close to the world in these areas.

[jwstima] If I believed that John MacArthur was an unbeliever, I would not be reading his books or quoting him from the pulpit. Worldly music endeavors to mix light and darkness and Dr. MacArthur uses worldly music in his youth group. When Dr. MacArthur writes a book that roundly criticizes tongues speaking and then brings in Chuck Smith, I am perplexed. John MacArthur is a good man and I am sure loves the Lord, but I cannot have close fellowship with a man who in my opinioin is close to the world in these areas.

The difference between you and John MacArthur is that when he uses Scripture, he interprets and applies it according to its original meaning. When he is wrong in his understanding of Scripture, as in the Eternal Sonship issue, he own up to it. When you are wrong in your understanding of Scripture, as in 2 Corinthians 6:14-17, you do not.

Are you now saying Chuck Smith is an unbeliever? And by the way, what year was it that he was “brought in?”

And, please, tell us, what is “worldly music?” And how does one repent from it sufficiently so they might have the pleasure of your fellowship?

I guess the Amish are more sanctified than just about everyone here on this board—they are much more “separate” and “peculiar” so must be more “holy”…they would make great fundies!

matthew richards

indianapolis, indiana

Aha … The other side of conservative evangelicalism … Chuck Smith.

Bigelow and Stima, I don’t have time at the moment. But I must slip in a little comment later concerning my introduction to both GCC and CC. And in my neck of the woods in S.E. Idaho, I do appreciate the influence of both for different reasons.

John Stima, you said you are confused about the blood issue and about Lordship salvation? Perhaps you should not be so quick to do what you have been told by Dr. Minnick until you do understand.

I know it is hard for those whose categories exist in the mindset of 1960 fundamentalism, but you are so hopelessly confused you simply will not be able to understand.

Kevin Bauder has tried to help some of you understand, but you just will not. A hard heart to match the hard categories.

[Becky Petersen]

[James K] Ted, he was told by Dr. Minnick what to believe. Isn’t that enough? Who are you to question Dr. Minnick?

Is this helpful to the discussion?

Actually yes. It is yet another great example of the chicago way being alive and well in fundamentalism. Like a good soldier, we follow orders.

[James K] John Stima, you said you are confused about the blood issue and about Lordship salvation? Perhaps you should not be so quick to do what you have been told by Dr. Minnick until you do understand.

I know it is hard for those whose categories exist in the mindset of 1960 fundamentalism, but you are so hopelessly confused you simply will not be able to understand.

Kevin Bauder has tried to help some of you understand, but you just will not. A hard heart to match the hard categories.

James, I agree with you that there is no need to “separate from” John MacArthur. But it’s not for you to judge someone’s heart simply because he disagrees with you or even with Dr. Bauder.

Thanks for that, Greg.

James… I think there is some risk of employing “the chicago way” when attacking “the chicago way.”

I’d kind of like to return to Jim’s question to jstima from a while back…

[Jim Peet] Re: “Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers”

How is J Mac yoked with unbelievers?

After that question I saw… “blood” “lordship salvation” “Chuck Smith”…. still no unbelievers. Just wanted to point out that that particular question is still kind of hanging.

I personally have no quarrel w/NIU for having Holland in to speak, though I may have sounded that way. Entirely their prerogative. My concern has to do with (a) it is a departure from their previous custom and (b) I can’t figure out why it was worth doing. (Shortage of chapel speakers? Couldn’t “get to know him” without hearing him preach in person in front of the student body? Or what?)

I think these questions are important. Where’s the virtue in change for change’s sake? If your institution has a history of drawing “the line” in a particular place, of course it doesn’t have to have the line there forever, but if it’s going to move its line, it’s important to know why.

If the thought is, “We think this will get us more students”… well, I can think of worse reasons. But haven’t heard that reason given yet. So my predominant emotion about the whole remains mostly “curious.”

I am concerned. Northland, Clearwater, Lansdale - all trying to lead “fundamentalism” down a new path. I am concerned that those who would question or challenge the thinking and actions of these institutions are attacked in every way by “scholars” demanding chapter and verse, loyalists who know the “heart” of a man or cynics who simply want to shame and humiliate.

I do not know Dr. Olson and have never been to Northland, but his letter is clear. There is no need to watch and see what might happen. He has declared a new path and is trying to suggest that fasting, prayer and the Holy Spirit are guiding him down this path. A suggestion meant to express a deeply spiritual thing has occurred leading to the changes at Northland. The Spirit will not lead in any way contrary to the Word, but I sense many in fundamentalism looking to and hoping for the Holy Spirit to do things (‘greater things’) or show them things when knowing and living the Book with the help of the Holy Spirit is sufficient.

The demerit system has never made anyone spiritual, but young people are there training for the ministry and training demands discipline (Proverbs 22:6). Rules are not negative or anti-Bible in any way (John 14:15). I believe the change to be made sincerely, but long term will be harmful in the training of young people for His service.

The change in music to a “missional” focus, preparing for “worship and music globally” seems to be stepping onto the slippery slope. Without a doubt fundamentalism is not sure what to do with music. I am noting a strong push to the words of music and cultural considerations in music, rather then any focus on the music itself (which has a message without a single lyric being written). I have been in ministry in several cultures around the world and in each I have heard both cultural music that honored the Lord and cultural music that was man centered/flesh driven. The primary issue in music is the music. The fact that Kevin Suiter is leaving is troubling. We should hear from him on this matter.

I have no interest in attacking the men that Northland is bringing to the institution. It is the effort to “affirm… Northland stands ….historic tradition ……committed to remain….separatist institution.” The statement and the actions do not match up. The men coming are who they are doing what they believe God wants them to do - great, God bless them. However, to bring them to “us” and defend the action as historic, committed and separatist is just not true. This is compromise from historic, committed, separatist fundamentalism.

There is no attack on these men, Northland or Dr. Olson in my comments, but honesty is demanded. Northland, Clearwater, Lansdale and perhaps Central and Detroit are heading in a different direction, but it is not historic, committed, separatist fundamentalism.

I am concerned that those who would question or challenge the thinking and actions of these institutions are attacked in every way by “scholars” demanding chapter and verse

The reason people demand chapter and verse is because much of cultural fundamentalism from the past has gotten a free pass to take verses such as II Cor. 6:14-17 out of context as what was done earlier in this thread.

The demerit system has never made anyone spiritual, but young people are there training for the ministry and training demands discipline (Proverbs 22:6). Rules are not negative or anti-Bible in any way (John 14:15). I believe the change to be made sincerely, but long term will be harmful in the training of young people for His service.

I went to a Baptist school in the 1980’s that used something similar to a demerit system that stressed strict discipline and rules. The atmosphere among most my fellow students was quite spiritually toxic. What was intended to help actually hurt. In the 1990’s at this same institution there was a change towards teaching Biblical discernment and discipleship rather than the strict rules it once had. From 2004-2007, I had the opportunity to adjunct teach at this same institution. I braced for the worst. I was completely shocked how things had changed for the better. Teaching students Biblical discernment and to be a disciple of Jesus was working! My students were passionate for living for Jesus, evangelizing and discipling, and serving others. Give Dr. Olson the benefit of the doubt. Their emphasis on discipleship and missional will help the students go deeper with their walk with Christ as they pursue their education.

The change in music to a “missional” focus, preparing for “worship and music globally” seems to be stepping onto the slippery slope.

One of my favorite responses to the “slippery-slope” argument that seems to make its way into these arguments….. :bigsmile:

http://www.stufffundieslike.com/2009/02/slippery-slope-arguments/

[CGrif] I am concerned. Northland, Clearwater, Lansdale - all trying to lead “fundamentalism” down a new path.

WOW! Maybe someone should come up with a sermon on “Forsake Not the Old Paths” or even better, “Remove Not the Ancient Landmarks”. I don’t think anyone has ever preached on those topics before.

Removing tongue from cheek and exiting sarcasm mode.

And yes, I realize that this did not “contribute to the discussion.”

That will be 20 demerits for me.

I’ll start at the top. Makes the most sense.

[CGrif] I am concerned. Northland, Clearwater, Lansdale - all trying to lead “fundamentalism” down a new path. I am concerned that those who would question or challenge the thinking and actions of these institutions are attacked in every way by “scholars” demanding chapter and verse, loyalists who know the “heart” of a man or cynics who simply want to shame and humiliate.

In much the same way that those making the changes are attacked by loyalists who demand unquestioning and even unthinking adherence to the way things have always been?

[CGrif] I do not know Dr. Olson and have never been to Northland, but his letter is clear. There is no need to watch and see what might happen. He has declared a new path and is trying to suggest that fasting, prayer and the Holy Spirit are guiding him down this path. A suggestion meant to express a deeply spiritual thing has occurred leading to the changes at Northland. The Spirit will not lead in any way contrary to the Word, but I sense many in fundamentalism looking to and hoping for the Holy Spirit to do things (‘greater things’) or show them things when knowing and living the Book with the help of the Holy Spirit is sufficient.

You just got done complaining about folks who “know the ‘heart’ ” of a man (or institution) and then you boldly proclaim that “[t] here is no need to watch and see what might happen”? Do you know the ‘heart’ of Dr. Olson? I doubt it, since you admit you do not know him and you have never been to his school.

[CGrif] The demerit system has never made anyone spiritual, but young people are there training for the ministry and training demands discipline (Proverbs 22:6). Rules are not negative or anti-Bible in any way (John 14:15). I believe the change to be made sincerely, but long term will be harmful in the training of young people for His service.

Proverbs 22:6 applies to children. With a few exceptions, college students do not fit the definition of “children,” at least not as far as that passage is concerned. These students do not show up at college with no behavioral patterns established. They are there because they have reached a certain level of independence and are ready to hone their skills. And let’s be fair, here - NIU is dropping the demerit system, but they will still have a handbook. They’re not going anarchic.

[CGrif] The change in music to a “missional” focus, preparing for “worship and music globally” seems to be stepping onto the slippery slope. Without a doubt fundamentalism is not sure what to do with music. I am noting a strong push to the words of music and cultural considerations in music, rather then any focus on the music itself (which has a message without a single lyric being written). I have been in ministry in several cultures around the world and in each I have heard both cultural music that honored the Lord and cultural music that was man centered/flesh driven. The primary issue in music is the music. The fact that Kevin Suiter is leaving is troubling. We should hear from him on this matter.

I’m glad you self-identified your own logical fallacy. This entire paragraph is confusing. Any focus on the cultural considerations of music must involve a focus on the “music” (melodies and harmonies). Words do not carry cultural connotations. And since there is no real “ethnic American” music like you use “cultural,” I’m not entirely sure what you’re getting at. Perhaps Kevin Suiter thinks that he is not qualified to deal with the world cultural ramifications of music education. Perhaps is is not comfortable with the philosophical changes. Whatever the case, do you know him? Can you say why he is leaving? No, because you state that we, collectively, should hear from him. If he has any sense of professionalism, though, he won’t dish like it seems you’re wishing. It’s the height of unprofessionalism to be given a gracious sendoff then turn around and badmouth the same people that wished you well on your way out. I doubt he will, on the record, contradict what Dr. Olson has said. Finally, if we are called to minister to the world, what is so woeful about preparing for “worship and music globally”? Are we simply supposed to transplant our wonderful American ideals and culture on unsuspecting different cultures because God has decreed American forms of music to be superior to everyone else’s?

[CGrif] I have no interest in attacking the men that Northland is bringing to the institution. It is the effort to “affirm… Northland stands ….historic tradition ……committed to remain….separatist institution.” The statement and the actions do not match up. The men coming are who they are doing what they believe God wants them to do - great, God bless them. However, to bring them to “us” and defend the action as historic, committed and separatist is just not true. This is compromise from historic, committed, separatist fundamentalism.

There is no attack on these men, Northland or Dr. Olson in my comments, but honesty is demanded. Northland, Clearwater, Lansdale and perhaps Central and Detroit are heading in a different direction, but it is not historic, committed, separatist fundamentalism.

The funny thing is, most of Christendom outside of “historic, committed, separatist fundamentalism” would disagree with you. A great many fundamentalists think those schools are still fundamentalist. A vast majority of evangelicals would affirm the same, as would a host of non-religious outside observers, going by the popular definition of “fundamentalist.”

You have been honest; now let me be honest. The fact is that Northland is trying to “separate” from the type of Fundamentalism you represent, the type that hopes nothing ever changes and is quick to pounce on anyone who dares to suggest that maybe separated, committed Christianity functions differently in the culture of 2010 than it did in the culture of 1910. Clinging to historic truth is good because truth doesn’t change. Clinging to historic culture is the quickest way to make yourself and your movement irrelevant.

I just had an email discussion on this subject with a great man of God and I wanted to lay out some things for your consideration while they are still fresh on my mind.

First of all, no one publicly answered my question on which colleges they will recommend if they stop recommending Northland. If you are going to stop recommending Northland, what schools do you recommend? I know some men who will not recommend Northland but will recommend PCC. Now PCC, had a Letis on a video on KJV only. Does’nt that kind of mute out the concern over a school having speakers from outside the group? Some of the men would recommend West Coast over Northland, and I was just looking at an ad in their magazine called “The Baptist Voice” where they list Jack Hyles as a giant of the faith. Now, I honestly would think young people would be in better hands under Holland, Ware, Dever, and others than under Letis and Hyles. Am I wrong in thinking this way?

Secondly, when we practice separation, we do so to obey God and preserve the purity of the church. If we are going to preserve purity, then we must practice purity in the process of preserving it. For example, when it comes to separation from a brother that makes a wrong decision, sepration is the last thing we do not the first thing. When Peter did wrong in Galatians 2:11-14, Paul did not cut him off, he opposed him. Yet, I am hearing some of my friends say that they are done with Matt Olson and Northland. Really, how is that promoting purity? If he did something wrong, you try to help him, not cut him off. Trigger happy separation from a brother at this stage is just not right. Here is another frustration for me -We often misrepresent people we believe are wrong. An example of this would be calling a conservative evangelical a new evangelical. I studied new evangelicalism and it was birthed out of a desire to repudiate fundamentalism. While the conservative evangelicals are not where the fundamentalists are on things, they do not repudiate fundamentalism, do they? Also, at the heart of new evangelicalism is a philosophy of “in them to win them” as the preachers boys were taught by Wayne Van Ghelderen Sr. at BJU when we were there. Conservative evangelicals reject that. They even preach sermons where they condemn that mindset and lament its devastating effect on evangelicalism.

So, are we pure in the practice of preserving purity by cutting Northland off? Are we pure in the practice of preserving purity by incorrectlly labeling others?

[Dan Burrell]

[CGrif] I am concerned. Northland, Clearwater, Lansdale - all trying to lead “fundamentalism” down a new path.

WOW! Maybe someone should come up with a sermon on “Forsake Not the Old Paths” or even better, “Remove Not the Ancient Landmarks”. I don’t think anyone has ever preached on those topics before.

Removing tongue from cheek and exiting sarcasm mode.

And yes, I realize that this did not “contribute to the discussion.”

That will be 20 demerits for me.

Thanks Dan. And an extra 20 demerits for making me spit my post-prayer meeting beverage all over my keyboard.

A couple of random thoughts:

Are not Dever, MacArthur and Olson are brothers in Christ?

I grow weary of people using the term “new evangelical” as an epithet when it’s evident they don’t know what the term means.

Does “separation from a brother” count if the brother doesn’t know that you’re separating from him?

My brother CGRif,

I’m grateful for your candor and care with which you make your case. This sounds like you are either a middle-aged guy with a mature heart or else you are seasoned and have earned the right to comment because of your faithful service. We who are younger must take your observations with respect. I have and do. However, our first loyalty has to be to what we understand to be right - so I will try to disagree with you and be respectful at the same time.Let me respond to your response:

1. There is much variety with these different ministries. While it may look like these guys are moving in concert - that is not reality. I’m sure that as I will note later these institutions do influence, but each school has it’s own constituency and internal “check’s and ballances” that frankly keep a firm grip on the direction these ministries go. However, it is true that these ministries while independent are coming to similar conclusions so I can understand your wanting to lump them all together in the same canoe. To be clear here - these ministries are not trying to lead fundamentalism down anything “new.” They are motivated to lead towards that which is “true.” If you would take the time to speak with each of the leaders, they would articulate for you how changes are actually moving ministries towards a more Biblical pattern of ministry.

You sound like you are seasoned my brother. No matter what your age I want to be careful, sensitive and respectful. I’m not sure if you understand what I’m about to say, but the men that you are calling into question have paid the price to examine carefully the meaning, intent, content and an approach to application of Scripture that is God-honoring and accurate. These ministries are lead by men who have invested decades of their life into the intended meaning of the text and have paid the price to apply those teachings in a ministry setting. They do this in a context where you will have 6, 7, 8 or more Godly men who hold each other accountable and who work towards a consensus on what is responsible Biblical approach to separation, unity, ministry and a healthy version of fundamentalism. I don’t mean to be unkind, but how many men have you interacted with at that level? Have those men paid the same kind of price to understanding the teachings of the Scripture that you will find at Northland, Central, Calvary, DBTS, etc…..? The very fact that so many men within the circles that have previously been associated with “fundamentalism” per se are thinking through these issues should challenge men like you to be thoughtful here and probably a bit gaurded. I say this with all respect but with all seriousness. By the way for the last 15 plus years Godly men from these different schools (and others) have been meeting and thinking through these (and other) issues carefully, “line upon line.” Can you imagine presenting your view of fundmanentalism, separation, unity and such in the face of 30 other Godly men who have invested not just years but decades to study Greek, Hebrew, Church Historhy and such. I’m not saying that your opinion does not matter here brother - but I don’t think your view has had to pass through the fire that these institutions have had to work through internally within it’s own faculty and constituency. If there is movement or change, you need to know that “that” has taken place in a careful matter. None of the men in these places are irrisponsible. They are Godly men, principled and are very away of the “slippery slope” idea you make reference too. Frankly they are attempting to do two things - they are attempting to move forward with a care and loyaty to the Scriptures, fostering needed change while at the same time working hard to encourage the 20 and 30 years old’s to not go over the Niagra Falls by way of excess.

2. You make mention of Historic Fundamentalism. Let’s go there - over the first decades of fundamentalism, the movement focused not on separastion per se, but rather “miltancy.” So actually fundamentalism has made “a change in course” before. Fundamentalism changes when it believes honesty with the text demands change. If the ultimate authrority for fundamentalism is the opinions of former generations than your concerns should be unquestioned. Most of us believe that the source of authority is God’s Word - not the opinions of older men, or younger men. Back to historic fundamentalism - the movement included men and ministries that were both “stay-in-and-fight” as well as “leave-and-separate.” There was a change in the 50’s primarily because the majority of evangelicalism embraced newevangelicalism which caused a rift between the majority of evangelicalism and fundamentalism. If you’ve been reading Bauder’s work you will understand the change that has been happening. Most conservative evangelicals hate eccuminicalism as much as we do. The day is different my brother. We have too many quote in quote “fundamentalists” that are heretics on the KJV, the nature of Christ and issue of Salvation (faith and repentence). We have many evangelicals that are acutally more healthy and Biblically responsible than many “fundamentalists.” The change my brother is a return to the authority of Scripture as the source of direction -not the opionions of old men……or young men. This in fact is a good thing. It is a God thing.

3. Music - Will let others touch this. You’ve said alot. I actually am also concerned that we be careful with all that is “missional.” I don’t have room here to even touch this one.

4. Demerits - The verses you quote hardly result in a demerit system. I’m fairly sure Paul wasn’t handing out “pink” slips while making his missionary journey’s. One can easily make a Biblical case for what Northland is doing with discipline. It will look more like the discipline found in the early NT church.

5. Invite Kevin Suiter to come on over to SI. Let him share his thoughts. If he can present arguements that demonstate how these institutions are headed for trouble….great. He should be warned…..his thoughts will have to stand on their own…..not because of his name. That is the same for all of us.

6. It’s very telling that you start off your article undermining those of us who ask you for chapter and verse. I thought that was our authority?

A few counter thoughts for you my brother. Please know that those of us who love the heritage of the fundamentalist movement but come to the conclusions that there are needed an occasional change in direction, do not do so devoid of Biblical thought and do not do so without a respect for men such as yourself that might be more conservative.

I pray you will consider this appeal.

Straight Ahead!

jt

Well, Mike B. candidly said over on Don’s blog, he would recommend IBC rather than Northland. And of course, he mentioned his new college in Utah.

The independent Baptist way is to start a new college when struggling with the direction of other colleges. None are really flourishing in the West except one. And it continually moves forward in a national way.

And as I appreciate a man like Pastor Rick Holland connected to John MacArthur, I appreciate a man like Pastor Kurt Skelly who is connected with Paul Chappell. I could listen to both as chapel speakers.

Look at the humble Christlikeness of these men. This is not phoney baloney being displayed. These are real mccoy examples in America for students to hear. Sinners saved by grace and who love the true Jesus of the Bible.

And what I am blabbing about is not new to any of you on SI. We could backtrack to my beginning articles on SI in what I have learned and appreciated. Brothers and sisters from Pensacola, BJU, Northland, IBC, Lancaster, Masters, Southern, etc. and etc. are my brothers … my sisters. With all their nuances and quirks, they are my family.

And believe it or not, there is a stark difference between these brothers and sisters and the world, the false teacher, and the blatant, unrepentant professing believer. It is so clear in my mind. So very clear.

[mounty] Are we simply supposed to transplant our wonderful American ideals and culture on unsuspecting different cultures because God has decreed American forms of music to be superior to everyone else’s?

Note: We have transplanted our American music globally already. If you have doubt about it, visit places in Europe where people don’t speak English. Go in the malls and listen to what’s over the loudspeakers and on the radio.

Dan,

I don’t think sarcasm has a real place here in the discussion, because both sides have very strong feelings about the issues. Both feel like each other is pulling the “don’t defy me or disagree with me because I’m the leader here and I believe I’m right” card whether from ‘tradition/history’ or ‘prayer and fasting’.

Demerits:

I can’t see how demerits either are or are NOT spiritual. They are simply a way of enforcing rules. I’d imagine that it is actually easier to enforce rules with demerits, so, eliminating demerits probably just added a lot of work to their day. But you know this whole thing kind of blew my image of NIU. I already thought their students were superior spiritually to any other college. (In many ways, I’m not joking here….by MO stating what he did, it made me see in black and white for sure that they are dealing with normal, college-aged kids probably not spiritually superior or more dedicated to the Lord than most other fundamental schools in the states such as Maranatha, BJU, CCC, WestCoast, or even PCC, Heartland, or IBC or HAC. ;)) I’d imagine that most smaller schools actually don’t start out by using demerits. I thought that generally colleges add these kinds of things as needed to deal with problems when you have a larger student body. I mean, you don’t use demerits at home do you? Don’t you work on Christian discipline among your children in your own homes without them? (I’ve never heard of a family that uses them—maybe some do.)

To the person who said one college in the west is growing…—Todd, I thinkl—which college in the west is actually growing? Maybe it all depends on our definition of the west. For me, that needs to be at least the last 1/3 of the contiguous USA…so from about MT/CO over to the Pacific Ocean. Would that be West Coast?

[Pastor Joe Roof] First of all, no one publicly answered my question on which colleges they will recommend if they stop recommending Northland. If you are going to stop recommending Northland, what schools do you recommend? I know some men who will not recommend Northland but will recommend PCC. Now PCC, had a Letis on a video on KJV only. Does’nt that kind of mute out the concern over a school having speakers from outside the group? Some of the men would recommend West Coast over Northland, and I was just looking at an ad in their magazine called “The Baptist Voice” where they list Jack Hyles as a giant of the faith. Now, I honestly would think young people would be in better hands under Holland, Ware, Dever, and others than under Letis and Hyles. Am I wrong in thinking this way?

Well, Joe, I guess that settles it then, doesn’t it? I mean, no one answered YOUR question, so now you get to answer it for them? Do you imagine that those who support PCC, West Coast, etc actually would list Northland as their second choice?

If you must build straw men, please do it in a less obvious way!

[Pastor Joe Roof] Secondly, when we practice separation, we do so to obey God and preserve the purity of the church. If we are going to preserve purity, then we must practice purity in the process of preserving it. For example, when it comes to separation from a brother that makes a wrong decision, sepration is the last thing we do not the first thing. When Peter did wrong in Galatians 2:11-14, Paul did not cut him off, he opposed him. Yet, I am hearing some of my friends say that they are done with Matt Olson and Northland.

I am not sure who introduced the idea of “the purity of the church” into this thread… Ok, just did a search… the first person to use the word ‘purity’ was Dan Burrell in post #20. Bob Hayton quoted him in post #23. Next was you in post #132. NOBODY ELSE USED THE TERM.

So what we have are three supporters of the Northland changes bringing this up as if it is the argument of those who are concerned about the changes. That is another example of building straw men. “Purity of the church” isn’t what is being argued. It isn’t what this dispute is about. I would suggest you deal with what opponents of the Northland changes are actually saying, rather than putting words into their mouths.

Don,

First of all, Pastors all over the world-wide web are understanding your article as a call for separation for Northland. It is not right. You do not immediately cut off a ministry because they sent out one letter that explained a couple of speaker decisions that made the greater fundamentalist body concerned. Separation would come at the end of a biblical process, not at the beginning. The rush to separate from Northland is just not Scriptural. I also find it inconsistent that we can go around and find other schools that have made bad speaker choices from time to time and there were no articles on those schools. Christians are not stupid people and they see these glaring inconsistencies.

I have never been to Northland, but my guess is that if I were there today, the singing at the chapel service would be way on the conservative end of the spectrum of professing Christendom in this world. They may sing a contemporary song or two with a piano, which is done at most Christian colleges in every fundamentalist camp. Yet we have had a bru ha ha that is leading people to get a false idea that Northland could be a place where Matt Olson might be dancing in the isles sporting his new mohawk while his worship team is rapping. It is just a false picture, but rushes to separate stir these kind of images in this polarized culture that we find ourselves in.

Secondly, hasty separation does breed a false image of people that makes them out to be worse people that they really are. I am out of time. Have to take the kids to school but would be more than glad to expand on this more later if needed.

If we are concerned about purity and holiness then we must be concerned about these things. So, stop dismissing them as straw men.

Thank you for your kind and thoughtful words. I am even now considering things you have mentioned. I appreciate the spirit in which they were offered. Chapter and verse is our authority and may it always be! I will not try and clarify the point I was making - perhaps better to stop digging?!!

Several points you made are certainly valid. I do not find biblical precedent for a demerit system, nor do I find the system void of benefit. There must be a balance of both training and discipleship, I am sure Northland has taken this into consideration as decisions were made.

I couldn’t agree more that fundamentalism should not be defined by men, but by the Word! I appreciate past leaders in fundamentalism and current leaders in fundamentalism, but my loyalty, as yours, is to Christ and the Bible. I do follow Kevin Bauder’s weekly posts with interest and sometimes with questions.

I do not know Kevin Suiter, but I would love to hear from him. I think there is too much assumed by us all (me included) as to why he is not continuing at Northland. Music is a difficult area and some meaningful dialogue might benefit us all.

Thanks again for a gracious spirit and thoughtful words!

[Don Johnson]

Well, Joe, I guess that settles it then, doesn’t it? I mean, no one answered YOUR question, so now you get to answer it for them? Do you imagine that those who support PCC, West Coast, etc actually would list Northland as their second choice?

Becky,

I look forward to you calling out Don Johnson for his use of sarcasm.

Or perhaps it might be better that we get treated like grown-ups who don’t need someone to monitor our postings for using literary devices that someone doesn’t like.

Dan

Kudos to Joel T for showing how to communicate and actually influence people.

You see clear examples in this discussion of people who would like to influence but (fortunately in my opinion) have absolutely no chance to because of the way they go about it.

I constantly need reminders of this. Taking arrogant, rude and dogmatic stands entertains your base but does little else. When some people just open their mouth, they drive people away from their position.

I just wanted to point out that because it is extremely rare to see anyone soften on their position on SI and yet we just saw it with CGrif because of Joel’s approach.

Slowly inhale while counting to ten… slowly exhale, counting to ten. Let your arms go limp at your sides while you exhale.

…maybe Yoga isn’t such a terrible thing after all.

Now, on sarcasm: you do find it in the Bible occasionally so it’s hard to say it’s bad across the board. On the other hand, are discussions on sensitive subjects usually short on emotion? I mean, are we in danger of too much clear thinking happening? Probably not. And the sarcasm ups the emotional ante. I’m not going to berate people for using it but… do please reflect on whether it’s helpful at this point. (In addition to adding more of what we already have too much of, who is it going to persuade to change their thinking? It just hardens or further agitates those who don’t share your opinion)

To move back toward topic…

Well, is there anything more to say on topic? I’m not sure there is. :)

Edit: OK. Maybe this.

CGrif expresses what I don’t doubt lots of folks are thinking. And I sympathize. It’s not quite my point of view, but times are changing and that’s unsettling. I’m old enough to like stuff to stay the same (except when I’m tired of it and change it myself!). All I can say to CGrif is that applying the unchanging principles of Scripture to “life where we live” is shooting at a moving target. Much has shifted in the years since Okenga called for a new evangelicalism and the National Association of Evangelicals was founded. And the scene continues to change. So lines and boundaries are not only going to chage. They absolutely have to.

It’s just going to be unsettling and controversial as it happens because it’s not easy to figure out how they should move and where.

(One more thing for CGrif: I like demerits, too. Well, sort of. It think abandoning the system is OK, but it will just be replaced by a system of fines or something else. You can’t really run an institution without rules with teeth. It doesn’t have all that much to do with sanctification. It has to do with running things decently and in order.)

I attended two chapel services two weeks ago at Northland, and the music was ultra conservative - piano, lots of hymns and maybe some newer slow stuff. To all those who are 100% against societal and cultural changes - Relax, nothing to sweat yet!

[Pastor Joe Roof] Don,

First of all, Pastors all over the world-wide web are understanding your article as a call for separation for Northland.

They would be seriously misunderstanding what I am saying, then. My article was criticism of a political letter designed to quell the fears of those who might object to change by saying that changes mean Northland is staying the same. You are familiar with the story of “The Emperor’s New Clothes”, right? That is how I see Matt’s attempt to explain his changes as non-changes.

[Pastor Joe Roof] You do not immediately cut off a ministry because they sent out one letter that explained a couple of speaker decisions that made the greater fundamentalist body concerned. Separation would come at the end of a biblical process, not at the beginning. The rush to separate from Northland is just not Scriptural.

Please show me where I was calling for separation from Northland. I will be happy to publish a clarification of those points in a new article. I am serious, I am not being sarcastic. Show me where I called for separation.

[Pastor Joe Roof] Christians are not stupid people and they see these glaring inconsistencies.

Umm…. maybe I should leave that one alone… but could we perhaps change it to say Christians are no more stupid than anyone else?

[Pastor Joe Roof] I have never been to Northland, but my guess is that if I were there today, the singing at the chapel service would be way on the conservative end of the spectrum of professing Christendom in this world. They may sing a contemporary song or two with a piano, which is done at most Christian colleges in every fundamentalist camp. Yet we have had a bru ha ha that is leading people to get a false idea that Northland could be a place where Matt Olson might be dancing in the isles sporting his new mohawk while his worship team is rapping. It is just a false picture, but rushes to separate stir these kind of images in this polarized culture that we find ourselves in.

Joe, who is talking like this? Matt mentioned music in his letter. He brought the subject up. I have no idea what he means by it, but clearly something is changing at Northland about music. But I didn’t raise the point in my article because whatever Matt means by ‘missional’, this isn’t the area of greatest concern or clearest problems for me.

But Matt dancing in the isles (Pacific isles, maybe???), sporting a Mohawk? Come on, man, you’re hyper-ventilating. No one in the discussions I have read could possibly be construed to be presenting this kind of argument. You are building straw men again. You’re going to have to stop that if you hope to be taken seriously.

[Pastor Joe Roof] If we are concerned about purity and holiness then we must be concerned about these things. So, stop dismissing them as straw men.

Stop building them then. Deal with what people actually say, not your emotional reaction to what you think they are saying.

Yes. West Coast. Large, growing influence among independent Baptist Churches west of Denver.

Our Christian community in our S.E. Idaho town experiences the influence of three Christian men in California: John MacArthur, Chuck Smith, and Paul Chappell.

And thank God, none of these men are in league with the very powerful, religious General Authorities of the I-15 Corridor.

This thread is a perfect example of why people are running out of the church. You can’t make a move without being second guessed by everyone around you! Enough already!!

[RickyHorton] This thread is a perfect example of why people are running out of the church. You can’t make a move without being second guessed by everyone around you! Enough already!!

I don’t see it this way

Prefatory remark: I support Matt Olson’s decision. I emailed my comment to NIU directly. Content:

Subject: Thoughts on Holland / Ware kerfuffle ¹

Dear Brother Olson,

I applaud you for the course Northland has followed and the direction it is going

If a school is known by the quality of its graduates, the young people who have graduated from Northland and are now serving at 4th Baptist is a strong positive indicator of NIU.

Keep up the good work!

Sincerely

Jim Peet

Deacon

4th Baptist Church

Plymouth MN

–––-

The Olson letter / Holland & Ware invitation / the “change” since 2005 (And I do think it is a change for the positive):

• Raise interesting points about secondary separation or degrees of separation
• If NIU is a “fundamantalist in name” institution (and I think it is!) and Holland / John MacArthur are not “fundamentalists in name” ², it is a bridge (some say negative … others positive) that is not frequently crossed
• The use of Ware for the D Min class is in my view a very positive academic direction. Were I to pay for that class, I think I would profit from his experience and work in the field.
  

Notes

1. I like the word http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/kerfuffle] kerfuffle
2. I don’t know Holland but in my view MacArthur is a fundamentalist in practice (but not to the degree some fundamentalists acknowledge or value!)
   On second guessing Matt Olson: I personally am not second guessing him; but because he made his letter open to supporters I think it is fair game that people would discuss it
   
   On people running out of churches because of this discussion: Don’t see that this discussion threatens anybody or endangers the church!
   
   Edit - fixed glaring typo for kerfuffle. JC

[GregH] Kudos to Joel T for showing how to communicate and actually influence people.

You see clear examples in this discussion of people who would like to influence but (fortunately in my opinion) have absolutely no chance to because of the way they go about it.

I constantly need reminders of this. Taking arrogant, rude and dogmatic stands entertains your base but does little else. When some people just open their mouth, they drive people away from their position.

I just wanted to point out that because it is extremely rare to see anyone soften on their position on SI and yet we just saw it with CGrif because of Joel’s approach.

I believe iron can sharpen iron when a brother offers gracious thoughts and meaningful words. It does not always mean the mind is changed but I am thankful for a friend (though I do not know the man) who has given me more to consider and contemplate. Our points of view (great phrase) are often different and rightfully so, but it is refreshing to be able to share thoughts about a situation that still concerns me, and hear another mans perspective. I am encouraged and will continue to think and pray for Brother Olson, Northland and myself! I am looking for the mind of God, from the Word of God in these changing (no negative connotation implied) times! May God help us!

[Todd Wood] Yes. West Coast. Large, growing influence among independent Baptist Churches west of Denver.

However, I’ve seen little influence in Northern California.

I imagined you would say that, Rob.

My article was criticism of a political letter designed to quell the fears of those who might object to change by saying that changes mean Northland is staying the same. You are familiar with the story of “The Emperor’s New Clothes”, right? That is how I see Matt’s attempt to explain his changes as non-changes.

Underlining was added by me.

If I may offer one small illustration of “change” in the midst of “not changing”…

The intent is to use an illustration that is exceedingly obvious for the sake of clarity; I do not wish to be unclear.

Public speaking! Personally, I have never really enjoyed the activity; I’m generally a quiet person, who speaks rarely. However, for God we often do things that we would rather not do. We are His “doulos,” and it is our duty and privilege to obey. Sometimes a public speaking endeavor will take place with an audience of children. 1st through 3rd graders are a fun bunch to work with! Especially with the 1st graders, you never know what the random comment will be about. It is both a challenging and rewarding time working with children. It forces one to reduce a message to its most essential parts, and then one has to present the material in such a way as to be understood. Keeping their attention is also difficult at times, and it has often shown me how my gaze wanders from the One who I should be focused on. God’s patience is obviously so much more than my own. The point is that I have a message. Ultimately it should be solidly founded upon the Scripture. The message, the content of what I must speak, must never change. If the message is not from Scripture, then it ceases to have its authority; and my speaking is reduced to opinion. Certainly, I’m further along than the kids; and I may know more than them; but the sheer authority is massively (understatement) lessened. The content must not change, but certainly my method of communicating to the kids must be tailored to the kids. I cannot plow through Greek or Hebrew grammar and use heavy theological words that will leave them with no comprehension. However, it is surprising how quickly they do pick up the theological terms when explained! The purpose is two fold. I must be faithful to Scripture, and I must communicate clearly to the kids.

However, if I am talking to a professor on line, or if I am discussing historical theology with someone who is a history buff, then I will say the same thing in a much “different” manner. My audience has shifted! It would be intellectually demeaning to a professor to talk to him like he was a 6 year old. I’m writing on line right now, and I used the Greek word “doulos” with the realization that probably most of my readers fully understand what the word means. Again, my method of communication is tailored to who I am talking to. HOWEVER, my purpose is still two fold. I must be faithful to Scripture (as my speech must be seasoned with salt, and people should know me for my kindness and peacableness), and I must communicate clearly to my audience.

Again, this is a demonstration of “change” in the midst of “not changing”.

These words above are written to explain how one can charitable read Matt Olson’s words. The foundation is still the same; nothing has changed. However, obviously things have changed. This is not politics, deception, or compromise. A charitable reading recognizes the nuance, as Christians are to be known for their charity. Certainly, our ultimate allegiance is to the LORD, but that allegiance demands christian charity to our brothers and sisters in Christ; the allegiance does not exclude it.

Perhaps this small attempt to promote understanding will be helpful to others.

Caleb