Don Johnson responds to Bauder on Separation
- 5 views
Why are people asking for names of convergents? Because some of us have been warned for years about “nameless creatures” outside the camp who were a danger to us. The result was a distrust of any person, school, ministry, or book that did not originate in our village. As I was told more than once, “If it’s new or different, it’s probably bad.”
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
I regret that you were taught that.
I never was. I look at what people believe and say. There are many that I get something from, say John MacArthur, with whom I do not agree with. Do I fellowship with MacArthur’s camp though? Not so much.
the Fundamentalists? According to this logic, simply by my asking myself this I am a Fundamentalist.
It really is that simple.
[wink]
My guess is, if you are asking yourself, who are the convergents? IT IS YOU. At least that is what the FBFI thinks. Own it! If you think alcohol is ok in moderation, you are a convergent. If you think John Piper is the cat’s meow, you are a convergent. If your favorite theological flower is the TULIP, you are a convergent. If you ask yourself “what would Mark Dever do?” at his church, you are a convergent.
It really is that simple.
SamH
[Mark_Smith]I cannot speak for Don. I do not speak for the FBFI. I suspect Don is being polite. He is much more diplomatic than me. I also suspect there is a little theological “battle” with Bauder, but that is my guess.
My point is the obvious. It is as plain as day. If any FBFI member reads the SI posts for some time, and they were of the standard FBFI positions, they would conclude the SI posters are in the category “convergents” or else full-blown conservative evangelical.
Mark, thank you for making my point. Given that Don has not defined his terms, I believe that he is being cagey, while you think it is obvious from the context, and we (and others) are arguing about the matter. This is exactly what I predicted in my comment earlier today—really it’s a natural consequence of needless ambiguity. Note that you as well are assuming with moderate confidence that another theological battle is going on with Dr. Bauder—we could even argue over that one, couldn’t we?
This kind of needless ambiguity is a really, really bad habit, dear brother. It sets people at each other’s throats for no good reason.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
[Mark_Smith]So, let me get this straight. A group you never belonged to and think is in error is not acting the way you want them to….
Do you see the problem here?
the point, Mark, is that many of us not in the FBFI camp are actually trying to help them out by encourage them to openly define their terms. I disagree with a lot of what Don and others seem to be saying, but quite frankly, that said I still value the contribution those who taught Don and others made to preserving the fundamentals of the faith, and it’s my desire to make this part of fundamentalism better.
Side note: I think the “convergentists” here need to figure out a secret handshake or something. :^)
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
Side note: I think the “convergentists” here need to figure out a secret handshake or something. :^)
If only the appropriate people knew who to shake hands with…but I think that if I’m guilty of being a convergent in Don’s opinion, then I am going to hold out for a secret decoder ring first. :)
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
This is my interpretation of the FBFI magazine articles. I do not represent FBFI in any way.
Do you despise FBFI but like Mark Dever, John Piper, and John MacArthur? You are a convergent.
Do you drink alcohol but not to get drunk? You are a convergent.
Do you love all the Getty music? Love the Sovereign Grace music? You are a convergent.
Would you rather go to Westminster Seminary than BJU? You are a convergent.
I could go on and on. I know this. You know it.
I would suspect that convergents don’t despise the FBFI. Personally I appreciate their history and have many friends in their ranks.
I also know FBFI members who like Dever and the rest, use some Getty and SG music, and went to schools other than BJU. Usually they qualify these practices with some sort of disclaimer.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
Mark, keep in mind that the descriptions you’re giving describe the vast majority of Christians who say they affirm the Fundamentals, probably including a hefty portion of Catholics to boot. It’s so vague as to be meaningless.
Really, if Don wishes to argue against beverage alcohol, modern music, Calvinism, and the like, he’s welcome to do so, but lumping it all together as if it were a monolithic movement is just odd.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
So, let me get this straight. A group you never belonged to and think is in error is not acting the way you want them to….
Do you see the problem here?
Actually, Mark, I thought about joining the FBFI this year so that I could read the latest Frontline with all this convergent news, but I decided against it. The discussion here is far more interesting.
If I didn’t care about the FBFI, I wouldn’t be talking about this. I just wish the FBFI would stop sniping at imaginary enemies and start focusing on more important things. I’ve said that for years - go back and skim the threads I linked to in my previous post.
Tolkien put it best - “We are all friends here. Or should be; for the laughter of Mordor will be our only reward, if we quarrel.” (The Two Towers).
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
[Mark_Smith]-noThis is my interpretation of the FBFI magazine articles. I do not represent FBFI in any way.
Do you despise FBFI but like Mark Dever, John Piper, and John MacArthur? You are a convergent.
Do you drink alcohol but not to get drunk? You are a convergent.
Do you love all the Getty music? Love the Sovereign Grace music? You are a convergent.
Would you rather go to Westminster Seminary than BJU? You are a convergent.
I could go on and on. I know this. You know it.
-no
-no
-yes.
Betcha I’d still be considered “convergent.” ;)
I was reading this discussion earlier today and these verses came to mind when I was re-reading Mark’s definition:
- Do you drink alcohol but not to get drunk? You are a convergent.
“To what then shall I compare the people of this generation, and what are they like? They are like children sitting in the marketplace and calling to one another, “‘We played the flute for you, and you did not dance; we sang a dirge, and you did not weep.’ For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine, and you say, ‘He has a demon.’ The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ Yet wisdom is justified by all her children.” -Luke 7:31-35
- Do you love all the Getty music? Love the Sovereign Grace music? You are a convergent.
And they brought it to Jesus, and throwing their cloaks on the colt, they set Jesus on it. And as he rode along, they spread their cloaks on the road. As he was drawing near—already on the way down the Mount of Olives—the whole multitude of his disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen, saying, “Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!” And some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to him, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples.” He answered, “I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out.” -Luke 19:33-40
Mark, I would strongly consider re-thinking your definition if I were you.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
then it is back to “are you in the right ‘camp,’ or are you associated with the right people?
I had thought someone had moved beyond this?
What if I rather had attended DBTS (over BJU)?
But, now we have some working definitions, correct?
[Mark_Smith]This is my interpretation of the FBFI magazine articles. I do not represent FBFI in any way.
Do you despise FBFI but like Mark Dever, John Piper, and John MacArthur? You are a convergent.
Do you drink alcohol but not to get drunk? You are a convergent.
Do you love all the Getty music? Love the Sovereign Grace music? You are a convergent.
Would you rather go to Westminster Seminary than BJU? You are a convergent.
I could go on and on. I know this. You know it.
SamH
Given the history of this, I’d like to propose another definition. Mark’s got a good start, but as I pointed out earlier, it includes the vast majority of the Bible believing world and thus has a lack of specificity.
I would submit this definition: A convergentist is a person within a traditional fundamental church who seeks to change that church to align more with conservative evangelical churches in terms of theology and culture. Specific areas of change he may be working for include, but are not limited to, modern music in the church, acceptance of beverage alcohol, “New Calvinism”, and the acceptance of non-fundamental colleges as viable places for young people to study.
That narrows it down quite a bit, I think, but it still suffers from the question of whether it is “or” or “and”; that is, does it suffice that a person has one or two characteristics, or is it necessary to do the full Mark Driscoll/CJ Mahaney to get into the club? Then there is also the question of whether the signs (and wonders?) of convergentism are uniformly bad.
And in that light, unless we can draw a firm connection between these factors, I’d encourage (again) FBFI to address them individually, defining their terms. Otherwise we are all going to get pretty muddled in our thinking.
On the light side, I only score 1/4 on Mark’s scale. I don’t know that I get that decoder ring, or to learn the secret handshake. :^)
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
Discussion