Mark Dever Keynote Speaker at Lansdale Conference

I don’t know much about Dever other than reading 9 Marks blog a few times.
I can understand why Don and Bob and others would find Dever’s remarks about premillennialism and calvinism to be troubling.
(I personally think the one about premil. in a doctrinal statement to be surprisingly off the mark… I mean, I’m premil, but I would not begrudge a presbyterian church putting amil. or something in their doctrinal statement. If they want, a local church can put their views on tap dancing in their doctrinal statement)

But really, his opinions on these things are not separation issues. The more relevant question for ecclesiastical separation is what does he do? That is, does he participate in ecumenical evangelism? Does he partner with ministries that deny the fundamentals of the faith? Any of that sort of thing? As far as I know, that’s not his custom, so…

I do think that events sponsored by academic institutions are a bit different. It’s part of the character of a school to expose students to diverse views. So having a conference speaker shouldn’t really be assumed to be a blanket approval of all he does—at any conference really—but this is maybe a bit more obvious when a school is hosting the event.
It’s never been clear to me why being “on the same platform” was considered a kind of rubber stamp “This guy’s one of us” thing.
But some have long seen it that way.

Capitol Hill and Mark Dever refused to participate in a local Billy Graham Crusade.

He presented a paper on JI Packer at Beason.

One was non-cooperation for the gospel, the other was academic discussion (and he criticized JI Packer at times to boot). In his 9Marks discussion with Mark Minnick, they agreed on the principles of separation, but differed in application. He sharpens my understanding and application paradigm on the issue often.

Although I don’t comment here often, I wanted to state that this conference is an exciting development that I would love to attend, although I will not be able to. I just attended a 9 Marks conference at Southeastern Seminary in Wake Forest, NC last weekend, which I greatly enjoyed. It wasn’t my first conference where Dever was speaking, and I hope it isn’t my last. It would be great to hear Bauder and Dever at the same conference. Dever is an example, along with others, of what I think is good about conservative evangelicalism. And Bauder’s writings on fundamentalism has shown me a fundamentalism worth saving (to borrow a phrase).

Joe G.

There are just about enough appealing conferences now that if I got paid to attend them I could be a “pro”
…and probably pretty good work—if you can get it. :D

I welcome this development. I attended the 9Marks Weekender Conference this last spring and found it highly beneficial. Although I disagree with some aspects of Dever’s theology and find the “having a millennial view in your doctrinal statement is sin” statement strange, I’m glad he is willing to speak at this conference and that Calvary is willing to have him.

[Aaron Blumer] So having a conference speaker shouldn’t really be assumed to be a blanket approval of all he does—at any conference really—but this is maybe a bit more obvious when a school is hosting the event.
It’s never been clear to me why being “on the same platform” was considered a kind of rubber stamp “This guy’s one of us” thing.
But some have long seen it that way.

When BJU asked Sexton to speak at Bible Conference, it gave made some here on SI upset….BJU is a school. Maybe it’s different because it’s Bible conference, though.

I’m trying to digest all this….

I think you’re right Becky.

I was surprised to see this announcement too.

Aaron shared the same perspective in a different context on another thread recently. If we are going to live by principles, we have to let them cut both ways. I was one who complained about Sexton in the past. While I appreciate “much” of what Dever does, until he is ready to push for the removal of all disobedient churches within the SBC (separation), I do not think I am not willing extend this level of fellowship to him.

[Aaron Blumer] There are just about enough appealing conferences now that if I got paid to attend them I could be a “pro”
…and probably pretty good work—if you can get it. :D

Aaron, what do you do in your “real job”?

[Becky Petersen]

[Aaron Blumer] So having a conference speaker shouldn’t really be assumed to be a blanket approval of all he does—at any conference really—but this is maybe a bit more obvious when a school is hosting the event.
It’s never been clear to me why being “on the same platform” was considered a kind of rubber stamp “This guy’s one of us” thing.
But some have long seen it that way.

When BJU asked Sexton to speak at Bible Conference, it gave made some here on SI upset….BJU is a school. Maybe it’s different because it’s Bible conference, though.

I’m trying to digest all this….

While I agree with Don that Dever is problematic and that we shouldn’t just give a blanket endorsement of everything he says and does, I think Sexton is different for two reasons:

1. Sexton’s http://templebaptistchurch.com/statement_of_faith/ position on Bibliology is wrong. The doctrinal statement of his church reads:
   

   The Masoretic Text of the Old Testament and the Received Text of the New Testament (Textus Receptus) are those texts of the original languages we accept and use; the King James Version of the Bible is the only English version we accept and use. The Bible is our sole authority for faith and practice.

   
   (Again - I have no problem with preferred MSS or versions…I have one! However, if you are going to acknowledge the KJV as “THE ONLY ENGLISH VERSION” we accept, then I don’t see how you can avoid a double inspiration position. That’s a heretical position.)
   
   
2. BJU’s Bibliology is orthodox, yet by sharing a platform with someone who argues for a KJV Inspired position, they give him and his teachings (indirect) support and uphold him as a kind of model, especially since they are a University / Seminary. This is exactly why BJU argues Graham was so bad for Christendom (and they argue it correctly - I agree with them there.)
   
   
3. Differences on positions in eschatology do not result in the Fundamentals of the Faith being compromised. I disagree with Dever strongly, and have considered the normal, literal hermeneutic as one of the Fundamentals of the faith. But a person can be saved and sanctified and be a post-mill Christian. A person that teaches that you must use only the King James Bible is wrong (again, I’m going off of the logical steps from a KJV-Inspired position).
   
   Becky, is this thread ( http://www.sharperiron.org/filings/3-24-10/14345] Together For The Gospel: Jack Schaap and John Vaughn?? ) the right one? I’m trying to find it now.

Dave Doran has posted a comment on his blog explaining his thought process in determining who he willwork with and how and applied it specifically to this upcoming coference at Calvary. I found it enlightening.

http://gloryandgrace.dbts.edu/?p=400] http://www.gloryandgrace.dbts.edu/

*** Forum Director ****
I updated the above link to point to the specific blog post instead of the site in general
*****************

I don’t know what you are asking when you asked if that was the article? It is certainly one of the articles that discussed speakers at conferences, but since that was a church, it’s a bit different situation.

The topic of a speaker causing waves has been an issue several times here at SI.

I think this is well worth a read in this context.

Clearly the answer to the question, “Are conservative Southern Baptists fundamentalists?” is “No.” This answer does not mean that Southern Baptists are not good people who genuinely want to serve the Lord or that the conservatives have not made advances within the Convention. Rather, the answer reveals that the conservatives are not going in the same direction as fundamentalists. Organizations which have been historically identified as separatist and fundamentalist need to decide whether they are willing to partner with conservative Southern Baptists and thus depart from their historic direction. If they are willing to do so, they should drop the fundamentalist identification.

http://sharperiron.org/are-conservative-southern-baptists-fundamentalis…] The rest here .

Aaron, but we aren’t talking about Southern Baptists. In this discussion we are talking about a particular Southern Baptist, Mark Dever. And even more, isn’t the more important question not whether or not someone wears a label but whether or not they practice separation?

I really am puzzled who get listened to on the internet … you can be a ministry drop-out, working in the secular world with a blog site and be certified to comment on a man like Mark Dever. Or you can be a pastor of a pretty small church but because you are all over the internet making comments and are blunt, then you are qualified to speak. Mark Dever has done more than most men for the cause of Christ. Do I like his view of eschatology … no. But he is not the enemy.

Where was the loud cry when John Vaughn spoke for Clarence Sexton and with Jack Schaap. Oh yea, and Mike Schrock was there also.

So, given the choice of hearing Mark Dever or Jack Schaap … hummmmmmmmm this is really a tough choice to make … NOT! Mark has done much to help redirect the SBC ship and, if you actually know anything about him, his music, preaching and style of ministry, is as strong as anything … no its really stronger than most everything in fundamentalism.

I for one wish I could go to Lansdale in February and am glad both Dave and Kevin have chosen to ignore the lunatics and do what is right.

Keep up the good work guys

Jeff Straub ;)

Careless fellowship would be to limit or include fellowship where the Bible is silent. Unanimity seems to be the kind of fellowship that fundamentalism has embraced all these years. I for one am glad to see this breakthrough which was attempted last year with the Standpoint conference, but getting too many EV’s and Fundies together in the same room was problematic. We just had Steve Lawson (SBC and 5 Point Calvinist) for a preaching conference at our church and we had people from the FBFI, GARBC, IFCA, as well as a broad array of Evangelicals all in one building: all together with one goal in mind: to preach the word faithfully and expositionally! That’s something we can all unite around without compromising our individual theological commitments.