Matt Olson: "to draw dividing lines that He has not drawn grieves Him, hurts the body of Christ"

Joel,

I have endeavored to be a gentleman in this discussion. You are not helping Northland with your comments. You are reading into others’ comments your own prejudices. It does not aid your argument at all. Name calling, personal attacks, assumption of evil motives, and illegitimate totality transfer are not working.

Now take a deep breath. It is clear that Matt has adopted Mohler’s triage as a paradigm for ministry. This is new for the administration at Northland. Remember that Mohler’s triage enabled him to sign the Manhattan Declaration. What a colossal error in judgment that was! What did it profit him or the cause of Christ when he signed a document that recognized Rome as legitimate Christianity! I know he wrote a full disclaimer; nevertheless, he signed it much to the chagrin of John MacArthur and others. That one act is clear evidence that his personal triage is flawed. I respect Mohler for cleaning up Southern at great personal cost and that he is a brilliant man who is a cultural champion of sorts. Nevertheless, he does not object to hiring on his faculty those who reject a literal, normal interpretation of Genesis 1-2. Bruce Ware is not a young earth creationist (I know my doctrinal legalism is showing). If I recall 2 Thess 3 accurately, the matter of work was not considered “a fundamental of the faith”; yet Paul makes a big deal out of it because refusal to work was a violation of the apostolic tradition. Some of these issues in level two or three would trump the work issue. The triage is somewhat arbitrary and reductionist and it is not at all consistent with the written, public policies of NIU historically or presently. Matt is the president of NIU, not the owner. Much money, sweat, and blood went into that school and camp long before Matt set foot there. If he in good conscience does not agree with the historical positions and policies of NIU, then he should acknowledge that.

Joel,

I worked as an auditor for almost a decade out in the secular world. It was (and is) a badge of honor to have someone say “They do what they say, and they say what they do.” That is what ISO certification is all about. If the secular world can see that, we as believers need to go way beyond, understanding it ultimately as an issue of integrity, not separation.

As you know, I don’t even really consider myself a fundamentalist, so what Northland does, in and of itself, is irrelevant to me. I’m not a fan of Don’s writing. I also don’t get why everyone is so enamored with SGM. I use some of their books and music (as I do everyone else’s) but to be honest, in structure and application they remind me more of your “Type A” fundamentalists than a sound model to imitate. Their definitions of roles within the church, and continuationist tendencies allow them to “leapfrog” their expository paradigm.

With all of that being said, people may not like what Olsen did just because he is not being consistent. That is not a bad thing to point out.

Garry

Brothers!

This will probably be my last point on this NIU thing. I will try and walk away from this if I can. Of course I’ve tried to walk away two or three times and have been compelled to come back.

Guys - my last post was attempting to mix fun with a point. I regret that was missed by a few of you and I really hope you’re not too wounded by that. So - actually I really don’t have a problem with pointing out a disagreement with a school like Northland. My point is that there is a better way to do that than what we’ve seen here. Once again friends who say they are friends to Matt/NIU are quick to say things in public and slow to say them in person. Now I’m sure some of the guys have communicated with Matt - but I wonder if there was really an attempt to dialog prior to the back and forth. Probably not is my guess. By the way - you will remember I said the exact same kind of things back months ago where there were some public shots at BJ. I asked the question, “Did anyone talk w/ Bob or Stephen?”

Again I apologize for lumping in statements I hear from X, Y and Z into the same response - I know that’s not the best - and usually I would be willing to take the time to do that - but that’s what I have to do in part because of the lack of time I have to deal with SI in general and this thread in particular. When I said that the attacks on NIU are guilty of all three forms of legalism - What I mean is that I’ve heard and I’ve seen attacks on Northland that are in my opinion sourced in Lifestyle, Doctrinal or Organizational legalism. So - if the mod’s want to say that assigns motive - I’m willing to submit to there wisdom - they are good guys and I trust them. So, if it helps I let me back off the “legalistic charge” and just say that I’m concerned that these three categories I mention demonstrate that some of NIU’s critics are possibly headed in a schismatic direction. I do want to be a gentleman here - so let me demonstrate with a more calm tone - “Lifestyle” (NIU’s music is going bad - heard that one!); “Doctrinal” (NIU is being careless in doctrine because of this connection with a CJ church, Matt is a 0-point Calvinist so we can’t support him - and if you listen to the context of that comment - Matt is far more Calvinistic than many 5 pointers would admit), “Organizational” (I’ve heard several of these - Matt doesn’t run things like Dr. O; The school brings in a Southern Baptist to teach a module class). It would be one thing to say, “I disagree with Northland on X, Y or Z.” We are going beyond that here - we are saying X, Y and Z actually violates Scripture - when actually Scripture is not violated but rather the opinion of man (or men) is being violated. The very most we could say is “Here is a doctrine or practice that good men differ - and we differ with Matt.” That’s not what I heard because that’s not was said - or written. Again this is taking a 2nd or 3rd or 4th level issue and making it a first.

So, I remain convinced here that Northland is a solid institution. I remain convinced that some of the same guys that think the world of fundamentalism must be ordered in such a way that has their blessing are once again ruffled by a ministry that dares to be different. By the way - I use A, B and C only to designate differences within fundamentalism - but despite what some of you think - and what especially one or two of you have said - I don’t worship my taxonomy! In personal dealings with ministries that are actually in my orb or direct contact - there is one category - “friends in the ministry” - and I don’t care if you are A, B or C as long as you are a “friend in the ministry” and you are balanced and obedient for Christ - and not judgmental against the differences we might have.

So there you are my friends. I rest my case and I trust that the Body of Christ including the world of conservative evangelicals and ballanced fundamentalists who might be tempted to support or not support NIU in general or specifically here - will use good desernment. The Scriptures call it “righteous judgement.” Almost always when I have to choose between the collective desernment of the body of Christ vs. a small group of people that think they know better - We are almost always better siding wtih the collective wisdom and desernment of the body of Christ. So I turn this one over to God, His people and let’s see where Northland is 5 years from now - let’s see where they are ten years from now. No suprise to friend and foe - I’m confident that Northland will remain faithful just like she’s been for decades. Then let’s compare where some of the critics of Northland are 5 years from now or 10 years from now. I’m sad to say they will probably be as schismatic as they are today.

One more personal point that covers this thread and the few threads where I get pretty “militant.” If you notice - that doesn’t happen very often. I am far more happy - working on my book, preping a sermon, visiting the sick, enjoying my lawn on the Lawn 4000!, watching College Football. In the early days I was more militant more often. You have to understand when I see God’s men and solid ministries under attack, especially when men who I love and trust are there - if you violate the rules of a fair fight - no, I’m not turning my back on that and I will defend God’s good people. For the record I hate to fight. Growing up in fundamentalism I”ve had a belly full of it! - and I really hate it. I’ve watched the ecclesiastical canabalism in the varoius sub-movements of fundamentalism for too long - fundamentalists chewing up fundamentalists. I know that happens in other parts of evangelicalism but this is where I’ve grown up. Ask anyone who really knows me - I would much rather sit around the camp fire, sing a few songs, enjoy some sweet fellowship and song - holding hands and ending our time with prayer and a hug. If you view me any other way you don’t know me. The reason I get involved in an occasional scrap is the same reason we had a leader in a civil war that was willing to have blood spilt to keep unity. Every time I’ve done this - the 3 lines in the sand episodes, this NIU episode, fundamentalists of all stripes are drawing lines and separating and undermining when they should not be. So in the words of a really cool German, “Here I stand I can do no other!”

Straight Ahead!

jt

Yeah, name calling, personal attacks, assumption of evil motives…all in good fun and the fault of others for simply not understanding it was just that…all in good fun.

It’s their fault, right. They didn’t understand that “name calling, personal attacks and assumption of evil motives” is really just fun.

However, your garrulous and manic style of writing is amusing so maybe that is also part of the “fun” you have in mind.

And no, it is not about taking a 2nd, 3rd or 4th level and making it first, it is about a first level issue (integrity) and maintaining it. The policy is explicit about Charismaticism and Olson is violating it without explanation. That is an integral failure which cannot exist in any group in order to succeed.

I’ve held off for as long as I could.

First of all I respect Matt Olson and I think NIU is a good institution (I’ve said in the past that I think it is disingenuous to call a Bible college a University when they don’t offer STEM majors but that is a minor thing to this conversation)

My views (and mine only):

• For Matt to commend grads serving in Philly is a good thing (perhaps I stated that on another thread)
• For a NBBC grad to serve in a church ministry with a different doctrinal perspective than NBBC is not “the sin” of NBBC. BJU grads sometimes serve in ministries that don’t agree with BJU and we don’t blame BJU for it.
• The issue unresolved for me (note italics!) is the employee who is in a church that is not in harmony with the NBBC doctrinal statement. I know the employee is a S/I member and please don’t take this as as a criticism of you. I would think that employees of the school would have to sign some kind of statement agreeing without reservation to the school’s position.

If I were Matt I would say:

• The doctrinal position of NBBC has not changed!
• There have been some changes but we believe they are healthy changes. These changes are: (list ‘em) .. and we made these changes for these reasons. Most people understand that change is a part of growth and adjusting to the world (waiting for someone to jump on “the world”) around us!
• I suggest that you address the employee issue directly. Perhaps he does agree with the NBBC doctrinal statement but finds himself in a location where the current church (the Philly church) is the best fit for him at this time. If said employee agrees with the SGM doctrinal statement and NOT with NBBC’s … well I think there is a problem that you need to address

Finally: It really is not a big deal to me because I am not in the NBBC orbit. I’ve been out of college for 41 years and I am not going back.

To Joel on name calling. Not good to joke about it on a public forum (my 2 cents). It did not come across as joking and I personally found it offensive. But I love you man!

Joel,

Thanks for trying to clear things up in your last post. It is not easy discerning between disagreeing brothers, disagreeable brothers, and disobedient brothers. The former can be to the extent that no ecclesiastical cooperation is beneficial or wise. The latter is that there is a clear pattern of persistent disobedience to Scripture with no repentance and remorse in sight making ecclesiastical cooperation impossible. A few months ago I met with a fine Northland representative in my office. I know the man personally and will vouch for his godliness, doctrine, and character. I just hired a Northland grad as a fulltime intern and am paying his way through DBTS. He is a godly separated man and he just married one of the godliest girls in our church who has the highest standards of conduct and decorum. Unfortunately, his parents who were long, longtime employees at NBBC were let go–Salt of the earth kind of people. Humble, godly, hard working, and scripturally sound. I think this young man by-and-large represents some of the best grads out of that institution. I have no interest in writing off NBBC/NIU or Dr. Matt Olsen. I hope these discussions will aid them in thinking through their decisions and in being more careful about the implications of their public writings. Fair enough?

Mike,

Fair enough.

Straight Ahead!

jt

There is an art to writing skillfully in succinct, concise, cogent, tightly-wrapped passages that are rich and deep with meaning.

Perhaps SI needs to develop shorter comment boxes in its next upgrade to encourage this type of advance in writing skills.

Also, in case anyone cares, I do not read posts with spelling errors, misspelled names, imaginary conversations, dramatic re-creations, etc. (I didn’t even read Dr. Bauder’s letters to himself :).)

Blessings on your day!

Proverbs 17:27

[Paul J. Scharf]

There is an art to writing skillfully in succinct, concise, cogent, tightly-wrapped passages that are rich and deep with meaning.

Perhaps SI needs to develop shorter comment boxes in its next upgrade to encourage this type of advance in writing skills.

Also, in case anyone cares, I do not read posts with spelling errors, misspelled names, imaginary conversations, dramatic re-creations, etc. (I didn’t even read Dr. Bauder’s letters to himself :).)

Blessings on your day!

Proverbs 17:27

There is also a skill to writing in a way that people won’t instinctively dislike you. If you can do that, people may actually care what you say and might even be influenced by what you say. ;)

“I understand that some feel that having an employee of NIU who is a member of an SGM church violates our doctrinal statement. Our statement clearly expresses our separation from the Charismatic Movement. Although SGM is charismatic they are in no way part of the Charismatic Movement.”

If Matt said something like that I do not think it would make any difference for those who have been hammering Matt for a lack of integrity and accusing him of violating NIU’s statement on separation. Those who oppose NIU’s direction will continue to confound and conflate the SGM with the CM. As I said earlier I am a friend of the church in question. I have significant enough differences with SGM that I would not join a SGM church but it’s not because they are part of the Charismatic Movement. They are not. But if I or anyone else says that repeatedly others will continue to cry foul that NIU is violating its position on the CM. For some there is no room for nuance. Frankly I am glad I am not part of whatever movement, fellowship, or mindset to which they belong.

Can someone point me to a source that explains the difference between being charismatic and being part of the Charismatic Movement? I have never heard that until this thread.

I am all for nuance when called for, and stood up for Olson in principle on the other thread, so I am not trying to be hostile. But if there is another way for his friends to defend him, I would try that. I think this one is a non-starter.

A few of the posts have a “Do Right NIU” vibe—different end of the spectrum and certainly a different issue, but a similar vibe nonetheless.

I was a member of Marquette Manor Baptist Church nearly twenty years ago (when it was the sending church a well-known blogger who takes an active interest in NIU). In those days NIU was disparaged by some for its inferior academics and, to some extent, for its servant leadership emphasis. It wasn’t recommended, but it was tolerated for students with less potential.

University is a misnomer, but they seem to have improved their academic standards. Perhaps, NIU should also adopt a more generic statement of faith such as BJU’s creed. I don’t know if that would assuage any concerns of inconsistency.

Friends - I’ve killed the post where I was trying to have fun with reasons NIU is still a great place. The post probably didn’t help my overall argument. The other posts before and after will stay because they represent well my point/view/heart/etc…. Straight Ahead Gang!

jt

Paul, the basic idea is that SGM and other “small-c charismatics” still (in theory at least…some might disagree but at least they assert this) hold Scripture over the charismatic gifts. So they believe the charismatic gifts have not ceased but must be used according to Scriptural regulation and must never be elevated over Scripture. Others in this camp include John Piper, Mark Driscoll, and Wayne Grudem. Check out his Systematic Theology, ch. 52-53, for this perspective. This is also known as soft cessationism; Mark Driscoll calls this “charismaticism with a seatbelt on.”

Big-C Charismaticism is where the spiritual gifts tend to run roughshod over Scripture (they wouldn’t agree with this characterization, of course). Experience is often elevated over Scripture, everyone should speak in tongues, etc.

I don’t agree with either position, but that is the distinction in a nutshell.

The question remains as to whether NIU’s doctrinal statement would stand against both camps or only to The Charismatic Movement proper.

If one has a special microphone set up near the front of the church for prophets to use when they receive a message, is that just charismatic or part of the Charismatic movement?

If prophesying is encouraged in small groups, is that just charismatic or part of the Charismatic Movement?

If one claims to be an apostle, is that charismatic or part of the Charismatic Movement?