Updated: Matt Olson rehired by Northland

[Larry]

Since at least 2 of Doran’s kids are NIU grads, this is even more interesting.

Why does it make it “even more interesting”?

It just adds another layer to the soap opera. Surmise at will.

[Greg Linscott]

I’m not going to waste my time, but I’m sure it would be incredibly easy to show the GARBC to be contradictory on this matter.

I think this statement reveals a lack of familiarity with recent decisions and overall direction of the GARBC, which has been to distance itself and eventually directly separate itself from churches and institutions that could not affirm their Articles of Faith. I would also say this decision has far less to do with Northland’s “Pizza and Praise” than it does with the uncertainty brought on by the dropping of their doctrinal statement that articulated clear positions on a pre-trib, pre-mill dispensationalist understanding of Scripture, and a cessationist position in regards to the work of the Holy Spirit. While Northland may end up re-affirming those things, it certainly is not a sure thing at this point. While the GARBC has allowed a wider breadth of expression in areas like music/worship, they have generally been much tighter and more specific in drawing their doctrinal lines than say, their BJU-influenced counterparts.

I suppose… maybe the GARBC has been absolutely consistent… well, lately, they have been consistent, I guess.

The issue really is, who cares?

Neither the GARBC nor NIU nor BJU has any biblical authority or standing to propose doctrinal “lines” or to practice separation along such lines. It is similar to if I were to declare that some federal law is unconstitutional. Nobody would care and nobody should care. Scripture never calls for organizations like the GARBC or for any kind of Christian doctrinal positions being advocated and defended by any group outside of the church.

Christ did not give the “keys of the kingdom” to the GARBC (Matt. 16:19), nor did he declare that Christian colleges are the “pillar” of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15). These recent events make the idea that spiritual matters belong to the church alone more and more readily apparent.

Watching these institutions, their allies, enemies, alliances, networks, the political posturing and the people who are now taking advantage of the chance to be in the spotlight or move up the ladder of influence by leveraging certain beliefs becomes humorous after a while. It is jousting at windmills, a tempest in a teapot - if you understand that this is all outside of what God has called his people to do.

Of course there is also an aspect of this that is tragic when considering that we are to forsake all for the church (Matt.6:33), yet we see here a host of people who have forsaken all for the Bible college, the Christian camp and church alliance groups instead.

I think Joshua Caucutt is overstating the biblical case for his position.

…at least enough to post what you have to this point.

And, as far as that goes, the GARBC is an association of affiliated churches. It isn’t an organization charting lines for churches to follow- it is a group of churches collectively articulating this is where we stand, and this is how we’re going to manage our fellowship and parameters. Unlike a group like the FBFI and its self-perpetuating board. every affiliate congregation has the opportunity to appoint messengers to go to the annual meeting and vote on the decisions, issues and policies.

In this case, those tasked with making the decision to reassess the speaker would have been taking into account the position articulated and affirmed by all the affiliate congregations. In this case, they had invited a speaker who, when they invited him to address the delegates, would have been assumed to be in agreement with the doctrine of the institution he presided over, which would have compared favorably with the doctrine of the Association and each one of the affiliate congregations. When that changed (or at least left the door open to change), an adjustment was made to invite a speaker who still would be in those parameters.

BTW- if you really want the an interesting thread in all of this, as memory serves, I believe InterCity (where Doran serves) was at one time associated with the GARBC. I am not absolutely sure on this, though- nor when they would have ceased that association.

It just adds another layer to the soap opera. Surmise at will.

That doesn’t seem to clarify anything. And I tend to think that “surmising” is a great part of the problem.

So what exactly is the relevance of Doran’s two sons graduating from NBBC to his speaking at the GARBC conference?

[Don Johnson]

I think Joshua Caucutt is overstating the biblical case for his position.

Colossians 1:12-14

…giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of the saints in light. He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

And if for some reason you do not believe this passage is speaking of the church, please read to the end of the chapter.

Here’s the deal - a debate over whether or not the church is the kingdom would take us completely away from this thread. I’m willing and would love to have such a debate because I think that Scripture clearly indicates that the church is the kingdom, but that debate should be moved to a different place, I suspect.

Let me bring it back - Don, as a good dispy, I’m fairly sure that you have many options for the kingdom: Israel, heaven, the church (sometimes, but not always, and especially when it doesn’t suit you), the United State, the family, etc. The problem with this approach is that it makes the kingdom whatever WE want it to be in whatever context and twist the meaning so that it supports what WE want to do with our lives.

If we happen love frisbee golf and want to do that for the rest of our lives, we stamp “ministry for the kingdom of God” on the side of our frisbee golf entity and then ask people to give money “for the kingdom” to our frisbee golf team, or camp or college … Being facetious here, but I hope you get my point. This is why para-church institutions always decline: because they are not the kingdom. They are institutions run by constituencies, politicians, non-ordained ministers, by the whim of whoever, and worse.

[Larry]

It just adds another layer to the soap opera. Surmise at will.

That doesn’t seem to clarify anything. And I tend to think that “surmising” is a great part of the problem.

So what exactly is the relevance of Doran’s two sons graduating from NBBC to his speaking at the GARBC conference?

I’m willing to give you this one - it’s probably nothing.

[Shaynus]

[mmartin]

In Matt Olson’s blog post today he says that there is a terrific attitude on campus, a unity amongst faculty and staff, that the Lord has confirmed the direction NIU is taking, etc., etc.

It is easy to think and say that when most dissenting voices have either resigned or been dismissed.

mmartin,

What you’re insinuating is this: the only reason there is unity on campus is that all dissension has been ended by orders from the upper ups. Couldn’t another reason be that there is actually unity created by the Spirit of God? Are these authorities that powerful that they could order this great unity that apparently exists today, but not so great that they sowed dissension two weeks ago? The logical and obvious reason there is unity on campus is that those on campus are unified.

I didn’t say that all dissension has been ended by orders from the upper ups. You are over-analyzing my comment. I do think some of that has happened, but not with everyone that has left NIU. Recently four board members resigned and over time many employees have left on their own free will. A few parents have taken their children out of NIU after the school year had started.

You said, “The logical and obvious reason there is unity on campus is that those on campus are unified.” Exactly my point! All or most of the people against NIU’s recent changes have been let go, downsized, resigned, or retired. And that includes apparently Dr. Ollila if you read the conversation about his upcoming meeting at Colonial Hills Baptist Church.

A related read about this topic is Dave Doran’s recent blog post titled, “Leadership is a Stewardship.” While he doesn’t directly label NIU, it does sound like he is referring to it.

[Joshua Caucutt]

[Chip Van Emmerik]

Too bad the Bible never indicates this is how we receive confirmation from the Lord regarding our choices.

Right, God only makes such confirmations through the church. Acts 15; 1 Cor. 6; Matt. 16, 18; 1 Tim. 3:15; etc.

God doesn’t confirm His plans with humans. He does give humans the opportunity to agree with Him or disagree with Him. He confirms His plans through scripture. For instance, a church has the authority to dismiss a pastor, and they may do so unanimously. But this does not necessarily indicate it is confirmed by God. Many a godly pastor has been run out of a church by a “ruling faction” within the body who reject the pastor simply because they cannot control him. God has not confirmed their decision no matter how unanimous it might be. Crowds don’t dictate right or wrong.

[Chip Van Emmerik]

God doesn’t confirm His plans with humans. He does give humans the opportunity to agree with Him or disagree with Him. He confirms His plans through scripture. For instance, a church has the authority to dismiss a pastor, and they may do so unanimously. But this does not necessarily indicate it is confirmed by God. Many a godly pastor has been run out of a church by a “ruling faction” within the body who reject the pastor simply because they cannot control him. God has not confirmed their decision no matter how unanimous it might be. Crowds don’t dictate right or wrong.

Right, and Scripture is confirmed through … the church.

When the Jerusalem church made a decision about circumcision, that decision was seen as coming from the Holy Spirit (Acts 15:28). The church has been given the keys to the kingdom (And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Matthew 16:18-19). Also, check out Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians 6 - there are plenty more.

In each instance, we see the church - since it is the Body of Christ - as the institution through which God works.

As for your example above, there are all kinds of questions - is this a biblical church or a false church? And who makes this determination - you or the church? Is this truly a godly pastor? And who says so - you? This “ruling faction” probably should have been disciplined out long before they had the clout to dismiss a pastor, assuming he was a worthy elder. Also, your example and position has no solution - if the church is not the place that speaks on behalf of God, who/what is?

On one hand, you dismiss the supposed unity and good spirit at NIU as an illegitimate confirmation (rightly so), now you have dismissed the church as the source of confirmation. What does that leave?

I can answer that: mass confusion. Which is what we see at nearly every parachurch org, NIU just being the latest example.

No, it leaves the scripture. They are always right; we are not.