John Vaughn (FBFI President/CEO): "one thing is clear: this video ends the fiction that 'Northland has not changed.'”

Understood. For myself, however, I don’t need or want the laboratory experience for Christian education. I didn’t come into ministry in a “normal” way. I left the military after a decade and then went into ministry. I wasn’t a kid anymore. I absolutely understand what you’re saying. You may be right when it comes to 18 yr old kids who are leaving home for the first time, but perhaps not for everybody.

When I was 19, in military police dispatch, I had to listen to a mother curse at me and tell me it was my fault her 7-yr old daughter died and I couldn’t get an ambulance to her in time - a few days after Christmas. She insulted me, said a bunch of unflattering things about both my ancestry and my mother, and screamed at me that her daughter’s death was my fault.

I can remember one instance, Christmas 2007, when I obtained search authorization (MP slang for “warrant”) to search somebody’s house for stolen property and was forced to unwrap all their Christmas presents because the suspect wouldn’t tell us where the property was. I remember how their children cried uncontrollably because they were confused and wondering why we ruined their Christmas and why we were so mean to their parents. I actually thought this was pretty funny at the time (I was only 23), and thought the woman deserved this shame. I am saddened now when I reflect on it.

I did my BA in the service while dealing with real-world situations. My last case before I got out was a $120,000 fraud case. I am grateful for the ability to skip all the nonsense that the tradition brick and mortar under grad experience entails because I don’t particularly need it. I’m past that stage in my life. That “coming of age” process that would typically happen for the young Christian man while in college happened while I was overseas.

At the same time, I recognize that mine is a decidedly weird experience. Having a lab environment works for some people, particularly if they’re young and immature. I get it. It’s not their fault they’re immature - they’re young! For others like me, online education is a blessing.

Good thoughts.

We are working on a program right now that would harness the local church involvement in Biblical education for ministry.

We are putting together a program that requires a person seeking to go into ministry to get their Associates at community college then transfer to an accredited University (here in SLC, UT we have several to choose from in close proximity) to get their bachelors in something relevant to ministry and possibly even vocation as many out here in the intermountain west need to be bi-vocational. Meanwhile, they will be taking non-matriculating classes and involved in mentorship relationships in our local church. It would be our goal that a young man who did both would have an accredited bachelors degree from a reputable university while also receiving 5 years of Biblical training and mentoring in the local church. Then as God leads, he could enroll in pretty much any seminary to continue the education.

The greatest benefits to such a program is the cost. Here in UT, one could get their accredited bachelors by combining community college with the university (no I don’t mean “THE university”). for less than 20,000 for four years. Another benefit is that practically all that they are learning theologically is put into practice in the local church and even in other local churches surrounding us. They have the benefit of not relocating, of keeping their jobs. Those without housing we are working on a program that allows them to live with members of the church at a cut rate deal.

The problems we have seen are what some call the “inbreeding” of education. The way we are seeking to combat this is through fellowship with other churches and qualified pastors/teachers. We are right now in the planning stages and I have spoken to one seasoned qualified local pastor who is willing to help teach when he retires possibly soon. We have other men locally very well-qualified who could also teach classes that we are hoping to approach soon. We also have verbal commitments by some qualified pastors and seminary profs/presidents who would be willing to come and do block classes and seminars. Then we would also supplement with online classes.

This concept is non-matriculating. The point is to replace the Bible college undergrad degree with an accredited degree from a university and to disciple in theology and practice at the local church (cost-free) level.

One of the reasons why I want to do this is that I have a hard time sending off young people to get an undergrad degree in what frankly, I believe could be taught in the church (granted churches in small population areas this would be difficult) in cities, only to have them pay from 40,000-80,000 then to send them on to Seminary for another 20,000-45,000.

Obviously, our planning is bigger and deeper than these few paragraphs. I would love feedback on this idea, let me know what we are missing or what dangers are lurking. But I do believe we have to rethink education itself now and into the future here. I believe the good Dr. Bauder himself has said similar things regarding accreditation.

My two cents on a rabbit trail post.

[Bill Roach]

Tyler,

Great questions…I was really trying to paint a broad stroke. I will attempt to make a more narrow one.

But first let me tell you where I sit, first before I tell you where I stand.

I believe the brick and mortar schools as we know them today in Christian circles will pretty much be irrelevant in about 20 years or so. I hope that education(I like to call it discipleship) will become more local and attached to the church and family for Christians. It will be replaced mainly by mentorship and apprenticeships. There will still be educational institutions for more technical fields, but for the most part, 85% of the fields that our children go away to school for, can be and should be, brought “in house” to the local community of Christians(including and especially theology and seminary.) I know this is a big task and a big vision, but I believe we have a foundation and a template in the homeschooling movement. Again, my opinion.

I know that last paragraph could be a debate all it’s own, and is full of controversy and different ideas. I just wanted you to know where I am coming from in my comments and what I advocate in this arena. And I’d be glad to answer questions about it in a different post or context.

What I applaud NIU for doing is to recognize that we have pretty much failed in reaching and keeping our young people in the faith. Barna rightly pointed out that 80% of our children are leaving the faith. I know that was pretty much a picture of the Southern Baptist Movement, but we would be deceiving ourselves to think that we are very much different at the end of the day.

I think a lot of it has to do with our theology, but I will leave that one alone. Except to point out one small annecdote. About 20 years ago after a major melt down with the Senior Class at a local Christian School where a good portion of the kids in our youth group attended, I sat down in the Youth Pastor’s office in my church where Matt Olson was a pastor in CO to talk about it. I talked with him about “success” in the Youth Group. He(the Youth Pastor, not Matt) mentioned to me that if 10% of the kids who came through his youth group went on to “really serve the Lord,” then we would be doing pretty well. When I told him that those numbers seemed “pretty bleak,” his response was, “Remember, we are in the last days.” I know that he was probably discouraged on that day and may have gotten his percentages wrong, but I knew then that we thought differently about these things, but I didn’t know what to call it at the time. Just so no one misunderstands me, I loved Matt and the Youth Pastor then, and still do today. We were just on a different theological journey.

So back to your question… :)

I’m sensing(and I could be wrong) that NIU is realizing that there is a problem with the discipleship of our children in the faith-a problem of getting them to think about discipleship, to live discipleship, and to teach discipleship. I think they are attempting to go outside of “the box” to reach a goal that they so very much desire. I sensed this when I sat done with Matt a few years ago in his office and chatted about these things. I knew he was fervently trying to “figure it out.” Maybe since they needed help they thought someone else had the answers. Thus the journey outside the norm(this time in realm of music.) My gut feeling on this one is that they like the “relational” aspect of the music. But I would submit that this journey started with our crowd not really putting heart and soul into our worship. Another subject, another day. Or as they say, that’s a whole different beer(or coke.)

For the record…knowing what I know now, I wouldn’t take some of these paths, but quite honestly it may be one that will make them realize more quickly what really needs to be changed. And I am in favor of someone attempting change to figure out what needs to happen, because what we have right now “ain’t working.” I know that’s dangerous, but I think it’s better than smugly thinking that everything is well and nothing needs to change. I also applaud BJU and their “rethinking” things.

So I guess you can put me in the category of hoping that this walk down the block will result in them getting on a different street that they were on before, and a different one that they are walking on now. Streets have a way of connecting, but they must be walked. I also admit that the danger is that there are also different streets out there that are worse than what we started on. It takes lots of faith to walk. But at least they are attempting to walk away from the problem.

I apologize if I totally went a different way than you were asking. It’s hard to do this in the written form. I’m much more relational than this format allows for. Not condemning it, just pointing it out.

Are there problems with the “youth group” ministry philosophy? No doubt. But it cannot be proved by these oft-quoted statistics.

Try to focus

[moderator direction]

Thanks

[TylerR]

jcoleman:

Historic fundamentalism was cross-denominational, which left plenty of room for disagreement on secondary issues.

Which was precisely my point. Historic fundamentalism wouldn’t have found the need to castigate people disagreeing on secondary issues as “outside of fundamentalism.” But that’s what happens all the time in today’s fundmentalism.

[dcbii]

Does new music mean that Northland has changed on fundamentals? No. But clearly, their musical standards have.

I think the debate is precisely around that though: a very large number of fundamentalists seem to believe that changing musical standards necessarily means that you have changed your fundamental philosophy.

[TylerR]

I must ask what you believe is the problem driving NIU to change?

I don’t think it’s a “problem” per se. As a recent graduate of NIU told me in reference to this: “Northland is very missional. And so they’re ready to make the sacrifices necessary to further the mission they see given to them.”

I unpublished a post after my moderator Rabbit trail directive

This thread is not about:

• Online vs brick and mortar or
• Accreditation (unless it relates to Northland (eg earlier on this thread)

So again Focus! Thanks

1. I appreciated what a brother (on another thread … might have ben Don Sailer) explained about the name change to NIU. That made sense to me and has settled that in my mind
2. Northland’s position on music has changed - I’m not bothered by it
3. I do think NIU needs to revise their position on CCM since they have now embraced it. To not do this is, in my mind, dishonest. Peel the bandage off quickly and it won’t be painful for long.
4. I hope for NIU that they find a constituency that will support them with students and $$
5. About whether they are fundamental. I consider the ACCC doctrinal statement the definitive statement on fundamentalism (image below). It was founded in 1941 and I would suppose that the doctrinal statement is as old. I don’t see anything in the doctrinal statement that addresses music or that would make musical style a fundamental of the faith (they do have a 2012 resolution on worldliness that speaks to music.)
6. I still regard NIU as a fundamentalist school. I still observe that the product - the grads - have a heart for ministry. I would suppose that 4th Baptist has 20+ NIU grads.

Totally agree with 1 & 5. As for 6 we’ll have to wait for several more years to see how these changes impact graduates going forward.

Having been a supporter of Northland for many years both sending my son there and bringing extension teams in to our local church (this was reason moving out of state was hard for me and my family), but I digress. Northland’s future is now going to be pegged to their acceptance of CCM as an institution. We will see but I’m wondering if they are going to lose one portion of their support, those with a much more conservative musical bent, and will the gain from the more moderate music philosophy be enough to off-set that loss? That question will be answered over the next several falls along with can the two “music philosophies” co-exist on Northland’s campus. If local churches are any indicator, they will not be able to co-exist .

I saw a good movie on Vietnam once. HBO produced it. Called “Path to War.” You should watch it. Anyway - in one of the scenes, an advisor to Johnson is getting angry and tells him, “You’re losing this war because you’re going to war by inches!” That quote has stuck with me, and though it is admittedly ripped out of context here, it is perfectly applicable to NIU. They simply must make a decision. The fundamentalists are nervous about them. Evangelicals are probably wary, wondering what this fundy school is up to.

Option #1 - Become a hard right evangelical institution and recruit as such. I wish them the best of luck. Evengelicals are not evil people. They’re just wrong … !

Option #2 - Repudiate CCM and the methodological shift it represents, and remain within the mainstream fundamentalist fold.

They cannot do both. They must choose. I believe they must also do so quickly, lest they fail to attract sufficient people from either camp.

…and that one thing is that any acceptance of music that is deemed to be ‘CCM’ or ‘worldly’ is the ultimate defining line of whether or not you are a Fundamentalist, as our friends and brothers at Northland are finding out.

How in the world did a movement predicated on doctrinal truths and the gospel ever become this?

I should have been clearer. It is not CCM per se, but the methodological shift I believe CCM represents, that is troubling. This goes back to the traditional roots of evangelicalism, which grew out of fundamentalism. Evangelicals had different views on methods. Briefly, they preferred infiltration and reformation from within, not separation. Surely you must grant this historical reality …

Hey Tyler-

I actually didn’t see your most recent post(s) at all…was just thinking a little more about this whole NIU thing. I don’t disagree with them at all.

You know who I feel bad for? The students in the Redeemed video.

Here’s some puppies as an offering to prove my innocence. :)

I’ll see your puppies, and raise you two kitties … Now somebody has to post something distinctly manly to set things right again!

Option #2 - Repudiate CCM and the methodological shift it represents, and remain within the mainstream fundamentalist fold.

Is your fundamentalism as mainstream as you think? With over 1,200 churches in the GARBC (General Association of Regular Baptist Churches) and I believe around 1,200 churches in the IFCA (Independent Fundamental Churches of America), the vast majority of these churches, especially in Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana, either utilize CCM influenced music such as Chris Tomlin or Sovereign Grace music in their churches and the many that mostly use hymns see it as a preference issue and have no problem with it (as long as it isn’t in their church). That’s a pretty large group of churches within fundamentalism that you would consider outside mainstream fundamentalism.

Ironically I always had the belief that the GARBC and IFCA represented mainstream fundamentalism! That those connected to BJU, Maranatha , and Northland represented legalistic fringes of the fundamentalist movement. And that the KJVO from Sword of the Lord, PCC, Hyles-Anderson, and etc……..were the lunatic fringe of fundamentalism.

One of the reasons that I actually enjoy Sharper Iron is because it blew away my stereotypes that I had against these other fundamentalist groups. I had to admit that there was more than meets the eye and that I could not necessarily paint such negative broad brushes of them. Of course, I still disagree with them on issues such as music………

Joel:

What I am speaking of here:

Evangelicals had different views on methods. Briefly, they preferred infiltration and reformation from within, not separation. Surely you must grant this historical reality …

are historical realities about the genesis of evangelicalism as a movement. I believe this is often misunderstood by those who haven’t studied the history of these issues. The challenge is - how do you apply the historic fundamentalist paradigm of “separation, not infiltration” to the challenges of today?

I contend that those who utilize CCM are broadly representative of a philosophy that says, “infiltrate or imitate the world to some extent and reform from within.” This model is an evangelical model. This is why I say NIU must choose.

Anybody’s perspective of “mainstream” fundamentalism is necessarily narrow. Your characterization of what is “mainstream” does trouble me a bit! I hope it isn’t quite as pervasive as you suggest …