Faith Baptist Bible College has removed Saylorville [formerly Baptist] Church from its approved churches list

[Greg Linscott] Pat has been progressive in his practice in the last 10-15 years compared to most of the other pastors and churches in the association (which is among the most conservative groups in the GARBC). It is to Faith’s credit, I would argue, that a similar decision to this did not take place much sooner, simply due to competing philosophies of ministry. The differences in practice were certainly there, most prominently seen in music, but I would say not exclusively so.

If there are doctrinal issues, then make the stand on doctrinal issues. They staked their position in this decision on a label.

[Greg Linscott] Whether one agrees with Faith on the reasoning behind the principle, I believe you have to admire them for being consistent with their stated beliefs, even though it will have painful consequences.

[Aaron Blumer] I’m supportive of the idea that schools that have historically claimed a particular doctrinal tradition should maintain that tradition in both substance and name, whether it’s Baptist, Presbyterian, Reformed or whatever. These labels have historical significance and if there’s anything we need more of these days (especially in schools) its historical awareness. Not that there isn’t a downside to the labels as well. I’m not sure what the bottom line is. But I have to respect institutions that honor their roots.

You are hitting on my point exactly. There is NO significance to the title Baptist any more. You have right wing nut cases like Westboro Baptist, First Baptist Hammond and Faithful Word Baptist on one side and pro-abortion, pro-homosexual Baptist nut cases on the left. Identifying as a Baptist on the street-side sign or church stationary literally communicates nothing, or next to nothing, about a church anymore.

But FBBC’s main public argument for separating is not because of their differing ministry and music styles, but because Saylorville doesn’t have Baptist on their church sign.

I would argue, for the sake of this discussion, that the removal of “Baptist” from the church was an indicator of “differing ministry style.”

Again, as I said elsewhere, I realize that isn’t a universal principle (keeping “Baptist” in the name). I would even go so far as to say that there are issues that could have been addressed more clearly and directly other than the “Baptist” label. It strikes me as a process very similar to the way the Cedarville issues was handled in the GARBC. There were definite concerns with their position and practice amongst much of the GARBC constituency for years, but there were also concerns of preserving the unity that led to a moderating kind of effort, or what I called in conversing with a friend last night a sort of “non-confrontationalism.” Eventually, they did say what needed to be said and do what needed to be done, but not before doing things like re-vamping the approval system for schools and institutions into a “Ministry Partnership,” and eventually disposing of the system altogether in an effort to distance themselves with taking the issue head-on. It was, as I understand it, after all these steps were taken and Cedarville desired to keep advertising in the Baptist Bulletin and use the National Conferences as opportunities for promotion and alumni gatherings that the issue finally came to a head in 2006 (see here: http://sharperiron.org/2006/06/29/garbc-messengers-separate-from-cedarville-adopt-separation-statement).

At the same time, with Faith and the Baptist label, this isn’t the only church to which this policy would apply in the Des Moines area. The outcome of the policy in the immediate vicinity, for them, has been an effective filter in helping them maintain their course, which has definite parameters that would include but not be limited to some of the issues discussed in this thread (they are committed to a pre-trib/pre-mil dispensationalism, for example).

I can also understand the remarks being made about local church autonomy. I would ask, though- what other solution would you propose for them to pursue that would allow for local church autonomy yet permit Faith to preserve the course they have committed to traveling?

[Greg Linscott]

I would ask, though- what other solution would you propose for them to pursue that would allow for local church autonomy yet permit Faith to preserve the course they have committed to traveling?

OK, I’ll bite. I don’t usually involve myself in these discussions but FBBC is where I first cut my teeth theologically. Solution? Christian liberty. Let any student who wants to take classes at FBBC do so—Catholic, Mormon, Charismatic, KJV only Fundamentalist. If they do the work, give them a degree. Let students become members of whatever church they please. It is the duty of the board and administration to assure doctrinal orthodoxy of what is taught, not the students. What does where a student attends church have anything to do with “preserving the course” Faith has “committed to traveling.”

A diploma from FBBC does not certify anyone’s fitness for ministry. FBBC does not ordain, churches do. Any church that treats an FBBC diploma as a Baptist union card does so at its own peril.

Let any student who wants to take classes at FBBC do so—Catholic, Mormon, Charismatic, KJV only Fundamentalist. If they do the work, give them a degree. Let students become members of whatever church they please.

Okay… what about faculty? Does church affiliation not matter, either? That is a major issue in this matter, I would say.

[Donn R Arms]

[Greg Linscott]

I would ask, though- what other solution would you propose for them to pursue that would allow for local church autonomy yet permit Faith to preserve the course they have committed to traveling?

OK, I’ll bite. I don’t usually involve myself in these discussions but FBBC is where I first cut my teeth theologically. Solution? Christian liberty. Let any student who wants to take classes at FBBC do so—Catholic, Mormon, Charismatic, KJV only Fundamentalist. If they do the work, give them a degree. Let students become members of whatever church they please. It is the duty of the board and administration to assure doctrinal orthodoxy of what is taught, not the students. What does where a student attends church have anything to do with “preserving the course” Faith has “committed to traveling.”

A diploma from FBBC does not certify anyone’s fitness for ministry. FBBC does not ordain, churches do. Any church that treats an FBBC diploma as a Baptist union card does so at its own peril.

This is an important point. Church DO take diplomas as a significant sign of qualifying for ministry. All the policies and diplomas in the world are not going to guarantee doctrinal fidelity. Motivations may be noble, but the execution is, IMO, defective. The role of the local church in preparing men for ministry has been supplanted instead of enhanced. Again, in my opinion.

Perhaps one reason these policies are in place is to ensure a place of moral purity for students (and parents). After all, if our doctrine is right, our conduct will be right. Right?

Is there evidence, by the way, that Saylorville is indeed devolving into false doctrine? Other than the name change? Have they revised their SoF or church constitution? Did I miss that?

Is there evidence, by the way, that Saylorville is indeed devolving into false doctrine? Other than the name change? Have they revised their SoF or church constitution? Did I miss that?

No. Even now, though- has Cornerstone University changed doctrinally in their statement since they were Grand Rapids Baptist (Bible- dropped earlier)) College? I don’t have one in front of me, so if they have, that would be interesting to know. But have they changed practically?

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2009/11/cornerstone_un…

http://www.rexmrogers.com/home/42-education/137-cornerstone-university-…

This may not present a problem for some of you, and that is fine for the purposes of this discussion. I am observing that Faith desires to prevent the same thing from happening to them that happened to CU. This move is how they are going about it. If this isn’t the best way to accomplish that, what would you suggest would be a better way?

Preface: I was a full-time student at FBTS from 1994 to 1998 and received two master’s degrees there. I have been away from Iowa since 2000, though I attempt to keep in contact with my alma mater. I have no direct connection to Saylorville, other than that my beloved professor, the late Dr. Ralph Turk, was once the senior pastor there — in part while he was my teacher. For the sake of full disclosure, I do part-time, freelance writing and editing for Regular Baptist Press.

Premise: This situation has to be understood in a very specific context. You may ultimately disagree with either this decision or the way it was executed, but please be careful about viewing it as part of some larger, unrelated issue.

Faith offers the student an intimate academic experience at a (relatively speaking) small school — located in the major metro area of the state. More importantly, Faith promotes a very specific view of theology — a balanced fundamentalism intertwined with traditional dispensationalism — and traditional views of scholarship, ministry and excellent, conservative worship. In my view, they do all of this in a way that does not come off as being heavy-handed, legalistic, stuffy or ingrown.

In other words, it is an excellent school! I have said that it is the best-kept secret in fundamentalism — since it seems I run into many people who are unaware of this historic institution.

While I was a student there, there were full-time seminary students who pastored churches that were not identified as “Baptist,” including one IFCA and one United Brethren. Several more non-Baptist pastors attended seminary modules — including those from Bible, Grace Brethren and EFCA churches. These men were fully welcomed as colleagues and fellow students. Many, if not all, of the faculty have also had significant interactions with the larger evangelical world. The school has also allowed non-Baptist groups to make use of its facilities. Hence, my suspicion is that this matter is not ultimately about the name, “Baptist.”

As Greg noted, for whatever reason, “Bible Churches” seem somewhat hard to find in Iowa, so in the past the normal practice of the school was naturally to be involved with local “Baptist Churches.” Historically, Faith has also carried out its mission against the backdrop of its ties to the GARBC and the IARBC, which has given it a slightly different culture than other Baptist Bible colleges. I would argue, in fact, that it has caused less of an appearance of the college standing in authority over the local churches.

Application: My purpose is not to attempt to settle this situation, as I am not in position to offer any authoritative statement on it. But, personally, I would be very surprised if this signals a radical new course for the school in terms of either doctrine or practice.

My specific prayer is that Faith, Saylorville, the GARBC and the IARBC will each continue to fulfill God’s particular purposes for them under the Great Commission, until Christ returns, and this matter will cause each one to “sharpen” its theological and ecclesiastical “iron.” I also hope that this will not signal any long-term, widening division between Faith and the GARBC. May God give us wisdom.

Within the GARBC context itself, one can look at the history of the transition of Grand Rapids Baptist College to Cornerstone University to see why an issue like this is of concern if a school like Faith has a desire to maintain its institutional distinctives, measures like this seem prudent. A big issue with the Grand Rapids situation at the time of the transition (I lived in GR in those days and was in a GARBC church, though I never attended the school) was the push for students and faculty to be able to attend Calvary Church, pastored at the time by Ed Dobson, and quite literally almost adjacent to the school property.

I was a student at Grand Rapids Baptist College (now Cornerstone) from 1987-1991 and a very part-time seminary student at Grand Rapids Baptist Seminary (now Grand Rapids Theological Seminary) from 1992 until I graduated in 2006. Students were allowed to attend whatever fundamental or evangelical church that they desired. However, it was later during the early 1990’s that faculty and administration were allowed to attend conservative evangelical churches such as Calvary church.

… for the correction.

No. Even now, though- has Cornerstone University changed doctrinally in their statement since they were Grand Rapids Baptist (Bible- dropped earlier)) College? I don’t have one in front of me, so if they have, that would be interesting to know. But have they changed practically?

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2009/11/cornerstone_uni…

http://www.rexmrogers.com/home/42-education/137-cornerstone-university-f…

This may not present a problem for some of you, and that is fine for the purposes of this discussion. I am observing that Faith desires to prevent the same thing from happening to them that happened to CU. This move is how they are going about it. If this isn’t the best way to accomplish that, what would you suggest would be a better way?

Cornerstone’s doctrinal statement is different than it was when it was Grand Rapids Baptist College. It no longer embraces the more traditional dispensationalism that it once did. However, I must say that most of my Bible professors at the College and Seminary embraced a more progressive dispensationalism already during the 1980’s and 1990’s so this is not surprising.

Attention Pastor Linscott - I have two degrees from Bob Jones Baptist University :)

There is much more than meets the eye with Grand Rapids Baptist becoming Cornerstone. In some ways its circumstances were different in that it was in the process of absorbing Grand Rapids School of Bible and Music, a non-denominational fundamentalist Bible school (IFCA). Also, the school was slowly dying right before it became Cornerstone. Finances did play a part in the decisions that were made with the name change.

You ask a very good question whether Faith could have done something better. I’m really not sure since I do not have strong connections to the GARBC in Iowa nor Faith, nor Saylorville to really know everything that was going on. I do wonder, however, how Faith will deal with Baptist churches that resemble Saylorville in philosophy of ministry/music but still retain the name Baptist? Will they allow their students to serve in these churches even when there is such a polarization when it comes to cultural issues such as music, dress, and etc… For instance the two largest GARBC churches in the Grand Rapids area, Blythefield Hills Baptist Church and Kent City Baptist Church are very contemporary in these areas. They still have Baptist in their name.

My only recent connection with Faith Baptist Students was when I spoke at Lincoln Lake Baptist Youth Camp a few years ago and got to know some of the counselors. Two young men from Faith that I was especially impressed by their godliness were also closet Christian Hip-Hop lovers, especially Lecrae. That really surprised me.

By the way, are certain people really bullying Faith about this?

Another aspect to this situation, as pointed out to me by a reading non-SI member, is that Saylorville has planted 3 non denominational churches which are not GARBC or baptist in name or anywhere in any of their documents. One of these church plants merged with an E-Free congregation. Some of these plants have been planted very close to GARB churches in the metro area. So it seems to many (this person I spoke with made this clear) that Saylorville is trying to play both sides of the street, so to speak. I wasn’t fully aware of these things until today. But it really helps put the thing in perspective.

That is very interesting. To be honest, planting churches near other churches of like doctrine doesn’t necessarily bother me because there are enough people that don’t know Christ for everyone to evangelize and disciple. I co-planted a non-denominational church (we are part of the Gospel Coalition) 3 blocks from a GARBC church whom we were (and still are) neighborhood missionaries with in inner-city Grand Rapids. Since we were leading several thugs (gang-bangers and drug dealers) to Christ, we would have damaged this church if we’d have forced our way because the systems did not allow those whom we were discipling a way to become spiritual leaders in the church. For instance, its child protection policy absolutely allows no repeat felons to be approved as youth leaders (we’re not talking about crimes that were sexual) even if the crime took place 10 or 15 years ago and yet they were the best ones to reach back on the streets with the gospel because they came out of that lifestyle. Yet they could not be approved to mentor a gang member that had started attending the church.