The Project 14 Global Missions board of directors will lead Northland Baptist Ministries

"We will merge our global mission efforts at Project 14 Global Mission agency, Global Bible University, OneLife Christian Camps, and BluePrint Church Planting program to Northland campus in strategic ways to be determined soon."

12929 reads

There are 35 Comments

Pastor Joe Roof's picture

From the looks of the board, it appears this "revived" Northland will have more of a Sword of the Lord flare to it.  When I first became familiar with Northland, it was in the BJU fundamentalism, then it swung towards conservative evangelicalism, and now it's swinging more towards an SOTL. 

Andrew K's picture

Pastor Joe Roof wrote:

From the looks of the board, it appears this "revived" Northland will have more of a Sword of the Lord flare to it.  When I first became familiar with Northland, it was in the BJU fundamentalism, then it swung towards conservative evangelicalism, and now it's swinging more towards an SOTL. 

As a Northland alumnus myself, I was a bit disturbed over the wave of apparent nostalgia that prompted so many of my fellow alumni to jump on board to "save Northland." Was this merely devotion to a place? It should have been apparent from the beginning that this won't be the Northland they knew and loved.

Aaron Blumer's picture

EditorAdmin

Pastor Joe Roof wrote:

From the looks of the board, it appears this "revived" Northland will have more of a Sword of the Lord flare to it.  When I first became familiar with Northland, it was in the BJU fundamentalism, then it swung towards conservative evangelicalism, and now it's swinging more towards an SOTL. 

Where are you seeing who's on the board... and what's giving you the impression it would be a move toward the SOTL flavor of fundamentalism (as in revivalist tradition vs. expositional tradition)?  It does seem pretty clear that they are not aiming for an academic institution, but I have to say that "practical training" has been more of Northland's focus for as long as I've been familiar with them, which would be since about the early 80's.

Joel Tetreau's picture

This is aimed at no one in particular. I know we all know this. A quick reminder. It seems like near the end of Luke 9 Jesus says something like, "don't stop them.....they aren't against us".... (implication -  "they are with us in connection to God.....gospel.....kingdom.....etc......even though they are not part of our group"). So even though you or I might not agree with everything connected to one group or another, if they preach the gospel, love Christ, love God's Word, are committed to discipleship, NT Christianity, etc......even if they have an emphasis (or music, polity, etc....) that might not be totally consistent with "our group" ..... how is it bad the group is doing what they are doing? We have to remember who the real enemy is. That helps you remember who our brothers are and who qualifies to be viewed as "friend" and "co-labor." This is why I plead for brothers to remember fellowship / separation with other brothers is rarely 100% or 0%. Frankly I'm rejoicing over Northland and Project 14. If God has raised up p-14.... and the campus of Northland connects with p14.....and this can be used to further missions.....even if I would be limited with this group (and I don't know how close or apart my approach is compared to these brothers....).....I rejoice in how God will use it. For those who will say.....there is a limited amount of resources out there for God's work......haven't understood the Bible. God's resources for God-ordained ministry has no limit....even for cessationists :)). A quick thought..or two.....Straight Ahead! jt 

Dr. Joel Tetreau serves as Senior Pastor, Southeast Valley Bible Church (sevbc.org); Regional Coordinator for IBL West (iblministry.com), Board Member & friend for several different ministries;

Pastor Joe Roof's picture

I agree Joel.  That is why I simply noted the swing.  I did not make a judgment about this swing but just noted that you do not see many ministries arrive at all of these points on the swing of the pendulum.

 

Jim's picture

I really doubt there will be a Northland like the Les Les Ollila-fast growth Christian college of old.

Perhaps a robust camp, but even that market is crowded.

The remoteness which is charming is also it's weakness. And Christian college without regional accreditation is difficult to market.

But I wish them well!

 

Ron Bean's picture

Was there any of that Luke 9 Spirit when the SBC was interested?

"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan

Don Johnson's picture

Ron Bean wrote:

Was there any of that Luke 9 Spirit when the SBC was interested?

You mean when local churches were being coerced to join the SBC?

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

Jay's picture

I'm not shocked at all that Marc Monte is involved with this; I knew exactly from the get go that his kind of Fundamentalism would be the only kind that would be able to pull together enough support and enough money to make the 'new Northland' happen.  I am a little disappointed because I thought Jeff Kahl had more sense than that, but I guess I was mistaken.

Someone mentioned that there didn't seem to be a common thread with the various parties behind the new Northland.  I beg to differ...there is a massive common thread there. The common thread is to have a school that teaches and preaches traditional, fundamentalist Christianity with a very specific set of conservative practices or conservative cultures.  Everyone that I have talked to about 'saving Northland' (and it's been more than a few) wants a very specific subtype of Christianity with very specific theological practices.  They want the KJV, they want very traditional standards, and above all else (because this is what they mention time and time again), they want conservative music. I have yet to meet anyone who disagrees with me on doctrine, but they'll go to war every time about music, probably because the importance of conservative music has reached the point of an non-negotiable, core doctrine that is the sine qua non of their identity with Christ.  They separate, therefore they are (in Christ).

If you don't believe me, tell them you disagree with them on music and watch the reaction.  If you think that it's acceptable to use some CCM of any type, they will tell you that you are in error.  That's why they felt it was so important to continually document how the school was falling into error - so that they would not send their children there, lest they become "un-separated" and "compromise with the world".  They withheld their students, they withheld their money, and they withheld their blessings.  Then when the school couldn't make it, they rushed in to reclaim the thing that they helped destroy "for the sake of Christ."  Go back and re-read the blogs that documented it, or go peruse the old NIU threads.  People objected and were rational about it until music was brought into the fray. Then everyone lost their collective minds (and I include myself in this group as well).

I doubt very highly that the kind of Christianity that wants to run NIU will be able to keep it open very long, if they can raise that last 400+K they need to pay off the debts, and I'm 99% confident that the people who are going to support it are going to come from the SOTL and Hammond type spheres, because that's where the money and the allies that the cultural conservatives need are going to be at, and in delivering Northland to that kind of fundamentalism, they have completely cut the heart and soul of what made Northland special out.  It will become just another hyper-fundamentalist school that will eventually run out of money and die.  And that's a terribly sad thing for me to write, but it's the truth.

"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

Rob Fall's picture

to remember there has been at best a tension at worst out right animosity between the Southern Baptist Convention since the demise of the Triennial Convention. in the mid 1800s.  This condition was\is a two way street.

Don Johnson wrote:

 

Ron Bean wrote:

 

Was there any of that Luke 9 Spirit when the SBC was interested?

 

 

You mean when local churches were being coerced to join the SBC?

Hoping to shed more light than heat..

Andrew K's picture

Joel Tetreau wrote:

This is aimed at no one in particular. I know we all know this. A quick reminder. It seems like near the end of Luke 9 Jesus says something like, "don't stop them.....they aren't against us".... (implication -  "they are with us in connection to God.....gospel.....kingdom.....etc......even though they are not part of our group"). So even though you or I might not agree with everything connected to one group or another, if they preach the gospel, love Christ, love God's Word, are committed to discipleship, NT Christianity, etc......even if they have an emphasis (or music, polity, etc....) that might not be totally consistent with "our group" ..... how is it bad the group is doing what they are doing? We have to remember who the real enemy is. That helps you remember who our brothers are and who qualifies to be viewed as "friend" and "co-labor." This is why I plead for brothers to remember fellowship / separation with other brothers is rarely 100% or 0%. Frankly I'm rejoicing over Northland and Project 14. If God has raised up p-14.... and the campus of Northland connects with p14.....and this can be used to further missions.....even if I would be limited with this group (and I don't know how close or apart my approach is compared to these brothers....).....I rejoice in how God will use it. For those who will say.....there is a limited amount of resources out there for God's work......haven't understood the Bible. God's resources for God-ordained ministry has no limit....even for cessationists :)). A quick thought..or two.....Straight Ahead! jt 

Fine sentiments, Joel, and I certainly agree.

Nonetheless, there are those of us who would prefer not to see the errors of SOTL and Hammon perpetuated to another generation--for all the good that has happened under those ministries. Now I can rejoice under the good God can and will likely do under this particular alliance without rejoicing at the alliance itself. And I maintain that, had many of my fellow-alumni taken a closer look, they might have chosen to place their time/money/enthusiasm/etc. somewhere else.

Years ago, I was rejected by a fundamentalist mission board solely on the grounds that I did not hold to a pretrib rapture. They had every right to that decision, and I believe it was the right one for them. They had a particular eschatological vision they wished to perpetuate and I did not hold it. The organization was not obligated to support me simply because we held to the same gospel, and I hope they rejoiced over any fruit God brought about in my subsequent ministry regardless of whether I was working with them or no (I went ahead by myself anyway).

Likewise, I and others reserve the right to express my reservations about this most recent state of affairs. I have serious reservations about the future of Northland and Project 14, but I do hope that I am wrong.

Jay's picture

Don Johnson wrote:

Ron Bean wrote:

Was there any of that Luke 9 Spirit when the SBC was interested?

You mean when local churches were being coerced to join the SBC?

Odd...I don't remember anyone being concerned for those local churches when some bloggers were saying that they can no longer recommend the school to prospective students.  Where was the concern for those churches (and the families of the employees that NIU had to let go as a result), then?

"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

Bert Perry's picture

Boy, I sure don't get how one month, the Patz family was offering the place to the SBC, and next, they're offering it to a group closer to SOTL.   And when I look at the list of directors--Monte who advertises "Old Time Religion", H-A graduate and KJVO Cazis--I've got to agree that it appears closer to SOTL. Not my cup of tea, but whatever.  

Regarding the "business plan", it's not a business plan, properly speaking.  Rather, it's more of a draft marketing plan that has a few vague nods to actually running the camp--and no real explanation why the IFBs of 14 states would send campers and such an additional few hundred miles to be at Northland.  I see it running into serious trouble when pastors present it before boards of deacons that might include businessmen and those with "green eyeshades", and quite frankly I'm surprised that people who have administered entities of any size bought off on this.  

I hope I'm wrong, but my gut suggests that this could be a time bomb that could end up killing off Northland and a few other camps across the upper Midwest.  The data I see suggest that we have a LOT of emotional investment in Northland, but not a lot of real planning per Proverbs 21:5.  

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

Mark Mincy's picture

I echo Joel T's sentiments...I pray that the gospel will advance because of this.  Jeff Kahl seems like a sincere and capable Christian leader.  What they have done so far (specifically as it pertains to Northland's financial obligations) is quite remarkable.  I pray that God's fame will continue to spread through this partnership.

FWIW, this is the website of one of their board members, so perhaps they aren't in any particular "box"

Mark Mincy

Bert Perry's picture

Per Mark's comment, if indeed the participants range in perspective, we should be really, really worried, because anyone who knows Northland knows from bitter experience that the H-A, BJU, and "Big Daddy Weave" factions simply don't play well together.  No?

And while I concede that it is possible that enough adherents of these factions will repent of the sins they've committed in the name of their ministries to make the new Northland work, in such a case it would be the repentant parties' first task to apologize to the people they have wronged and fix the damage done in their own communities, not to open a camp hundreds of miles away.

Such repentance would also be far bigger news than the resurrection of Northland, to put it very, very mildly.  Would love to see it and am praying that I will, but I'm not holding my breath.

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

Steve Newman's picture

It's interesting that though the "pedigree" of some of these men are SOTL IFB, the term "fundamentalist" is not even used. Instead, the term "conservative" is used. So, while we know where some of these folks have been, we don't really know where this is going. Let's give it some time!

 

Greg Linscott's picture

Ken McCoy
Chairman
Story:
Ken is the founder of Project 14 Global Missions and is the current Chairman of the Board. He retired after 30 plus years in the coal industry

http://p14gm.org/about-us/our-team/p14gm-board-of-directors

Northland's influence was tightly connected to one individual and his family (Patz). Something I would wonder about in light of the past is the stability of an organization so strongly influenced by a donor (2 board members are father/son). Not saying it is inherently a bad thing, or that "laymen" should have no influence. Just something that caught my eye, not really knowing the specific individuals

Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN

Jay's picture

Steve Newman wrote:
It's interesting that though the "pedigree" of some of these men are SOTL IFB, the term "fundamentalist" is not even used. Instead, the term "conservative" is used. So, while we know where some of these folks have been, we don't really know where this is going. Let's give it some time! 

Since I brought up the term conservative...let me mention discuss that briefly.

I don't think it makes sense  to discuss the various spheres of Fundamentalism (like BJU, NIU/CBTS, TMC/TMS, HAC/Hammond, etc) any more.  I think that what we have largely seen is a breakdown along lines of culture and practice.  (Yes, we're talkin' 'bout practice. Smile )

So when I say 'conservative' fundamentalists, I'm primarily thinking of men who are traditional in their practices - KJV, conservative music, high dress standards, more authority led than group led, etc. I could suggest specific individuals, but I'll pass on that.  Please know that I'm not using that term with malice or evil intent, although I disagree with the philosophy itself.  I'm just describing the fault line as I see it.

When I refer to 'my' fundamentalists ('my' being the 'young fundamentalist group from the 2005 survey'), I'm thinking more of men like myself who are ESV-NKJV-NIV-NASB preferred, who are more liberal with the music (although we're not in the 'let's bring Big Daddy Weave to lead "worship" at our church on Sunday group), who are more group led/plurality of elders, etc.

I'm not attacking the 'conservatives' when I call them that.  I'm using the only term that seems to fit well.  If there's a better term that they want to use, I'll use that instead.  Likewise, if someone has a better name for the latter group, then we'll use that.

But there are a few reasons why I mention an axis instead of spheres-

  • Groupings by 'orbit' break down too easily.  I know BJU alumnae from my class I would never in a million years want to work with, and there's probably some HAC guy somewhere that lines up with where I am on the two axes I mentioned above.  Group by philosophy and approach instead of 'orbit'.
     
  • It seems to me that all men are continually moving in one direction or another.  I was very, very strongly conservative when I graduated from NIU.  Now ten to fifteen years later, I've walked away from a lot of that and am much more comfortable with the latter group.  My doctrinal positions haven't changed, but my practices certainly have, similar to the way that NIU described itself at one point as 'not changing' even though they were clearly were changing in how they did things.  So I'm not convinced that it's wise to say, "Jay's a liberal" or "Jay's a conservative" - I'm very conservative on the inerrancy debate, for example, but I'm very liberal at the same time because I have little time or patience for the textual theory stuff and a lot of time to help someone find the best translation for them.
     
  • Finally, it seems like the real issues that flare up, especially here on SharperIron, are at best incidentally about doctrine and almost always exclusively about practices and philosophy. The group you work with may indicate where a person is coming from, but it's not a very reliable barometer of where they actually are.  That means that I can't say that am with the "TMS" group or the "BJU" group or even the "NIU" group.  Hammond and HAC, IMHO, are the exceptions that prove the rule on this.

Make sense now?

"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

Joel Tetreau's picture

So.....as I noted originally if the group sticks with the gospel, bible, etc........God bless them and even if they are too different in denominational practices for me to cooperate - the gospel is preached and great! Just a reminder - many KJV - Type A Fundamentalist Baptist while extreme in separation and careless in discernment on a variety of issues......are still none the less in the court yard of orthodoxy and as such "on the right side" of the great commission.....even if they are really on the "right" side (lol......). However..... If this new relationship between P-14 and Northland (or any ministry for that matter) jumps over the fence of orthodoxy into a cultic identity such as the ministry mentioned from Indiana then not only cannot I not rejoice but I will finally be drug into the masses of those who have mourned what has happened in Dunbar. I have no doubt we will see which way this new ministry goes - I still am hoping and praying and expecting the best for sake of the Lord's work.......even if they are more conservative than I am (and it sounds like that may be the case). Straight Ahead friends! jt

 

Dr. Joel Tetreau serves as Senior Pastor, Southeast Valley Bible Church (sevbc.org); Regional Coordinator for IBL West (iblministry.com), Board Member & friend for several different ministries;

Bert Perry's picture

Joel, I wish I could be as sanguine about the matter as you are, but it strikes me that there is at least one Hyles-Anderson graduate on the board who is currently shepherding a KJVO church.  Now  perhaps in some ways Mr. Cazis has outgrown HA, but he's spent his entire career in KJVO churches. Hence I don't know that he's moved very far from the "cultish" HA you refer to.

Add Mark Monte to the mix, and the most likely outcomes are either it goes full SOTL/KJVO (it's pretty close already in the choice of acceptable Bibles), or there is ongoing strife on the board.  Could be a time bomb detonated over northwoods fundamentalism, to put it mildly.

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

Steve Newman's picture

Jay, I understand what you are saying, but I was really referring more to the fact that the P14GM uses the term conservative on their web site to refer to what they are doing  It is all good and fine for us to try and characterize them, but let's hear what they say about themselves. They haven't really "put their cards on the table" in terms of identification. That's not to say I'm for or against the work there. I am on the board of Camp Chetek, which might be seen by some as "competition", but it's just too soon to say what this effort is going to be. I'm in the "wait and see" group on this one.

Jay's picture

But I'd feel an awful lot more comfortable with this if one of the board members wasn't heretical on the KJV Only issue:

We believe the Bible to be the revealed Word of God, fully and verbally inspired of God. We believe the Scriptures to be the inerrant, infallible Word of God, as found within the 66 books from Genesis to Revelation. We believe that God not only inspired every word, but that He has preserved them through the ages. We believe that the King James Version is the preserved Word of God for the English-speaking people. (Psalm 12:6; II Timothy 3:15-17; I Peter 1:23-25; II Peter 1:19-21) - International Bible Church website

That definite article makes all the difference in the world to me.  I've clashed too many times with KJV Only folks to ignore it. 

I know that Monte is strong on the KJV only position, although I don't know exactly where he falls, and I suspect that Pastor Mendoza from Iglesia Bautista Betania is as well.  Pastor Mendoza's church website doesn't have a full doctrinal statement online, but a review makes it look like it's been heavily influenced by FBC Hammond.  That would be three of seven that are at a minimum KJV only in practice, and I'm stopping only because it's getting very late.

"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

Craig Toliver's picture

The cynical side of me wonders if the Patz family is glad to have the debt paid off and the Northland "monkey" on someone else's back. 

Bert Perry's picture

Craig Toliver wrote:

The cynical side of me wonders if the Patz family is glad to have the debt paid off and the Northland "monkey" on someone else's back. 

....wonders, if what Jay and I have been saying is true, so many men that I respect are endorsing an endeavor that is going to have the KJVO/SOTL monkey on their backs.  I can see letting the Patz family do this to get the monkey off THEIR backs, but it boggles the mind that people from Fourth--which produced an anti-KJVO conference and book--are endorsing this.

And yes, let things play out, see where it goes, but history does not suggest this is going to work out well.

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

Jay's picture

I'm really surprised that people want to make alliances with the KJV Only people in the first place, but that goes back to my point earlier about what are they looking for in Fundamentalism.  And I've seen this enough to know that they're looking for a safe cultural haven.  And whatever you may think about KJVOs, they offer a safe cultural haven (even if it's based on heretical doctrine).

Sad.

"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

alex o.'s picture

Why would anyone be transformed by Christ when whitewash is available to make them look the part? I mean, one can just keep their favorite sins and biases in the closet and live for themselves? No?

I would argue this is what these external standards facilitate. I am not saying that everyone who has good externals are covering themselves but these standards may be used that way. The argument is not to be slovenly or offensive either.

As far as KJVO issue and how I have seen it used by some adherents controls the text. I mean why do the hard work of study when the bible can be read anachronistically for one's own purposes as they see fit or mystically mean what they want it to mean? Why not just open the bible at random, point the finger to a text and apply it to one's situation? At least they are "getting something out of it." None of that "dry reading." Seems reasonable, yes?

 

Do I really have to supply a "lol?"

"Our faith itself... is not our saviour. We have but one Saviour; and that one Saviour is Jesus Christ our Lord.  B.B. Warfield

http://beliefspeak2.net

Bert Perry's picture

I'm trying to figure out if Alex is using a bit of sarcasm there.  :^)

Seriously, it's a good question to ask; if we insist on "conservative" cultural standards--whatever that means--we will do well to ask ourselves whether this is a Biblical requirement, whether it is simply a practical and advisable restraint, or whether it is indeed "whitewash" we apply to be a safe cultural haven.  If we react angrily when someone challenges the rule, five will get you ten it's whitewash for the tombs.

Love my KJV, love my ties and wear them, love old music (a lot of it far older than will be played at the new Northland) and can't stand most CCM, but let's not confuse what I like with what the Scripture says.

Regarding KJVO, the worst of it isn't that it's often read anachronistically or without knowledge of pre-Elizabethan English, or that a small group of people tends to control the narrative.  Rather, it's that you need to argue that the eclectic text/Alexandrian texts are corrupted.  Since you cannot show that with actual evidence--the text families are different but that could be just mistakes in copying--you necessarily end up making your case with personal attacks, fraudulent "evidence", and the like.

Get into that habit with Bibliology, you're going to have a tough time doing any better in any area of theology or practice, no?  I suggest this is one of the big reasons there are so many nasty fights in the KJVO wing of fundamentalism--they're inadvertently or purposefully training people to be bellicose.

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

Pages