The Gospel Coalition: Can God Save a Fundamentalist School?
Let me start with “Fire in the Hole!”….now continue.
The Redeemed video I have seen on youtube features the group singing “One Way” by Hillsong United, an unabashedly charismatic publisher. You have no problem singing that in your fundamentalist church? More than charismatic, Hillsong is so called Word of Faith! Don’t believe it? You can watch Hillsong church services on the many of the satellite/cable channels, TBN, etc. Would any of you let a Word of Faith pastor preach in your church? Even friends of James MacDonald revolted over him inviting T.D. Jakes to the Elephant Room. Now you want that song in your church?
[Jay]Au contraire. They quite clearly understand the arguments you make (you meaning both you and anyone like-minded) they simply disagree with them. They do not say argue you did not appeal to the Scriptures, you misrepresent them, implicitly (do I have to explain this? I bet I will). They argue they are inferior Biblically based arguments.They’re so concerned about approaching music from a conservative place that they can’t see the Biblical support for those of us who are ‘not conservative’, and I think THAT leads to the attitude that Bob Bixby was commenting on.
Hence, Bixby’s argument is at best a narcissistic caricature of those with whom he disagrees.
MMartin and Greg-
I see your point. I assumed that Bruno knew that NIU would separate from him, but it certainly could be taken either way.
Regardless, it is several on the ‘conservative’ side who would break from me over music. I have no desire to be ‘separated’ from Mike Harding, for example (and I pick on him only because he’s clearly come out and said so - not because I dislike him or whatever). Mike’s stated clearly on SharperIron that he would have to have only limited fellowship with me, lest the error of my music philosophy damage his church or himself (I’m not sure which). I’m sure he doesn’t bear me any ill-will, and I don’t bear any ill-will towards him - just that we won’t be able to fully cooperate, even if I met the man some day. Since I only know of him from the internet, the whole point is nearly moot anyway, because it would be extraordinarily difficult to separate from his presence in any meaningful way when all we’ve done is talk on a website.
Mike is a good man and a fellow brother in the Lord, but in this case, I do believe that the separation would be one sided and would come from the ‘conservative’ side of the music spectrum. Maybe I’m mistaken on that.
"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]Mark, what are your standards as far as which authors/composers’ songs you will sing?Let me start with “Fire in the Hole!”….now continue.
The Redeemed video I have seen on youtube features the group singing “One Way” by Hillsong United, an unabashedly charismatic publisher. You have no problem singing that in your fundamentalist church? More than charismatic, Hillsong is so called Word of Faith! Don’t believe it? You can watch Hillsong church services on the many of the satellite/cable channels, TBN, etc. Would any of you let a Word of Faith pastor preach in your church? Even friends of James MacDonald revolted over him inviting T.D. Jakes to the Elephant Room. Now you want that song in your church?
-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)
Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA
Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University
Jay, not directing this at you. I’m not arguing for or against who is doing what. Just asking for people to be honest with their arguments.
Fact: Fundamentalists separate from those they do not agree with. Yes, this is true. Not new news, I know.
Fact: Progressives separate from those they do not agree with. If they don’t separate from a group on the right a la Bruno (fundamentalists) they do in fact separate from those to the left of them.
So can we get off this used and abused horse that separation is primarily a one way street and admit that it goes both ways all the time.
Every group has a line they won’t cross and will separate over.
I don’t have an exhaustive list, but I’ll start with excluding this:
I don’t know about BJU, but speaking as a Maranatha grad and current MDiv student, their total attendance is at record levels and growing. They had 1,200 enrolled this past school year, in Bible College and Seminary.
They are charting an accurate course in fundamentalism and are doing it very well. Things are alive and well there. The constant lament that “all fundamentalist schools are dying” is not quite so simple …
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
TylerR,
How can Maranatha be growing like that if they are still a fundamentalist school? Are they “Relevant” and “Gospel Centered? ;-)!
Indeed, mmartin!
Relevant:
The musical arrangement for Convocation this year included singing, piano, and bells … Yes, bells. It was very nicely done. It was a beautiful arrangement by a very strong Music Department. It was God honoring. Critics would charge us with being stuffy, elitist, and possibly racist, if some of the accusations on another thread are to be believed.
Gospel Centered:
Dr. Marriot made frequent mention of Maranatha’s slogan, “To the Praise of His Glory,” which is written on the trim above the auditorium stage. It certainly is “Gospel centered.”
I got my undergrad from a secular university in a non-Christian discipline. I am thoroughly impressed with what Maranatha is producing. They’ve had regional accreditation for 20 years. They commissioned four brand new “butter bar” 2nd Lts. in the U.S. Army following Convocation this morning. They sent out over 100 adults into the world with accredited degrees today, ready to make an impact for Christ in the world. They can compete academically with any college in the country. Their enrollment is growing. If the stats cited earlier are accurate, they have nearly 3x the students NIU has.
A serious study of the different paths NIU and Maranatha have taken, academically and theologically, may bear some fruit down the line.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
[Don Sailer]Greg,
The issue is secondary separation. One group separates over it; the other group doesn’t.
The separation is one way.
That is true to a point. However, what I am finding more often than not is that there is a built in paradox when you argue from the side of “relaxed” or “no-longer-an-issue” types of issues in Christianity. Historically, you have the orthodox view that fundamentalist have had in areas of music, entertainment, dress, worship, evangelism, separation…take your pick. As time has progressed, some have moved away from those positions to a new philosophy that embraces freedom of choice in areas of music, entertainment…(the same list). As these two groups discuss or “philosophize”, the old school says “this is where we stand and here is the reason why.” The “new school” says, “we believe that since Scripture isn’t clear on these issues, we choose not to make them an issue.” And then they argue that their position is correct (which if they were honest then their position would include embracing those with the orthodox view). The argument has gone so far as to say that those who hold to a more conservative view of music, entertainment…(the same list) aren’t “gospel centered” in their ministry and that the only way to get there is to move away from those views. However, this only reveals the underlying attitude of legalism where only those who have “loosened or relaxed” their standards are “Gospel centered” in ministry. If my beliefs on areas of separation are beliefs that I hold from Scripture, then being encouraged to move from them in order to become more “Gospel centered” in ministry is by definition legalism (a system where outward compliance with rules and structure gains favor with God).
I realize that these are generalizations, but I am wearied of being defined as a legalist by those with more relaxed standards…because I choose not to accept their relaxed standards.
As a side note, I find that in many of these discussions, those with stricter standards than we are often labeled legalist and those with looser standards liberal.
Isaiah 64:8 But now, O LORD, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand.
[mmartin]Todd Himes,
I’m not saying that NIU and/or Dr. Olson themselves have said that. It is definitely what Bruno’s article implies and the general attitude very often communicated by the progressive side.
Don (& indirectly Jay),
Bruno said in his article, “So in the summer of 2002, we packed up and moved to Minneapolis, where I started the apprenticeship program at Bethlehem Baptist Church.
But I knew this move would lead to a separation from Northland. While I certainly maintained relationships with many on campus, I assumed that I would never be able to have close ties to my alma mater.”The content and context of the paragraph suggests it was Bruno who chose to separate from NIU because he didn’t agree with their stand on certain things. He is not saying that it was NIU who separated from him. He was the one who moved, not NIU. So, yes he did in fact say he was separating from them. Yes, I did read it carefully. Greg Linscott’s point on this particular topic is correct.
He isn’t talking about geographical movement. He knew from watching how Northland’s leaders separated from others that he would be separated from if he went to Piper’s church. He sadly paid that price and did what God led him to do. He assumed that he would never have close ties to his alma mater again, not because he didn’t want to, but because he wouldn’t be allowed to.
This story can be repeated into the thousands. Graduates being rejected by NIU because they faithfully served God where God was leading them.
We alumni are overjoyed and hopeful that the new direction started by Matt Olson will continue. We want to be in fellowship with our alma mater. Now it seems possible again.
[mmartin]Jay, not directing this at you. I’m not arguing for or against who is doing what. Just asking for people to be honest with their arguments.
Fact: Fundamentalists separate from those they do not agree with. Yes, this is true. Not new news, I know.
Fact: Progressives separate from those they do not agree with. If they don’t separate from a group on the right a la Bruno (fundamentalists) they do in fact separate from those to the left of them.
So can we get off this used and abused horse that separation is primarily a one way street and admit that it goes both ways all the time.
Every group has a line they won’t cross and will separate over.
The issue isn’t separation. The issue is secondary separation. It is sad that NIU would separate from any of its alumni just because they served in the BGC, EFCA, IFCA, CBA, etc.
[TylerR]I don’t know about BJU, but speaking as a Maranatha grad and current MDiv student, their total attendance is at record levels and growing. They had 1,200 enrolled this past school year, in Bible College and Seminary.
They are charting an accurate course in fundamentalism and are doing it very well. Things are alive and well there. The constant lament that “all fundamentalist schools are dying” is not quite so simple …
Maranatha had the foresight and independence to seek regional accreditation years before NIU and BJU.
NIU and BJU are now paying for this lack of common sense.
[TylerR]I don’t know about BJU, but speaking as a Maranatha grad and current MDiv student, their total attendance is at record levels and growing. They had 1,200 enrolled this past school year, in Bible College and Seminary.
They are charting an accurate course in fundamentalism and are doing it very well. Things are alive and well there. The constant lament that “all fundamentalist schools are dying” is not quite so simple …
…they have an approved list of churches… :)
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
[DHarry][Don Sailer]Greg,
The issue is secondary separation. One group separates over it; the other group doesn’t.
The separation is one way.
That is true to a point. However, what I am finding more often than not is that there is a built in paradox when you argue from the side of “relaxed” or “no-longer-an-issue” types of issues in Christianity. Historically, you have the orthodox view that fundamentalist have had in areas of music, entertainment, dress, worship, evangelism, separation…take your pick. As time has progressed, some have moved away from those positions to a new philosophy that embraces freedom of choice in areas of music, entertainment…(the same list). As these two groups discuss or “philosophize”, the old school says “this is where we stand and here is the reason why.” The “new school” says, “we believe that since Scripture isn’t clear on these issues, we choose not to make them an issue.” And then they argue that their position is correct (which if they were honest then their position would include embracing those with the orthodox view). The argument has gone so far as to say that those who hold to a more conservative view of music, entertainment…(the same list) aren’t “gospel centered” in their ministry and that the only way to get there is to move away from those views. However, this only reveals the underlying attitude of legalism where only those who have “loosened or relaxed” their standards are “Gospel centered” in ministry. If my beliefs on areas of separation are beliefs that I hold from Scripture, then being encouraged to move from them in order to become more “Gospel centered” in ministry is by definition legalism (a system where outward compliance with rules and structure gains favor with God).
I realize that these are generalizations, but I am wearied of being defined as a legalist by those with more relaxed standards…because I choose not to accept their relaxed standards.
As a side note, I find that in many of these discussions, those with stricter standards than we are often labeled legalist and those with looser standards liberal.
So true.
But what I’m getting at is this: there was no discussion! When I graduated from TEDS and started a BGC church in West Bend, Northland separated from me. Period.
Now the founder, Paul Patz, my grandfather, supported me financially in my church planting efforts. My uncle Darrell Patz was an elder at a BGC church and sat on the board of Northland. But when I requested that Northland send a music group to my church, they refused because I was a pastor of a BGC church. Meanwhle, I was friends with the pastor of the Baptist church in West Bend. Northland would send a music group to his church, but not to mine. So my church developed a relationship with New Tribes instead of Northland.
Now who separated from whom? And what was the logic for it?
I do know that Northland leaders and administrators called me a new evangelical!
So my experience is pretty clear. Northland separated from me while I wanted to have fellowship with them.
Discussion