FBFI Annual Fellowship, Tuesday, June 16- A Liveblog Report
Reported by Matt Olmstead
Upon picking up my registration materials: a plastic bag full of conference “stuff” and my pin-type name tag (I prefer lanyards), I began to look around at the crowd. I noticed the usual attire— that being men in coats and ties…
After finding out that the only hotspot on campus is far away from the auditorium, I sat down and examined the contents of the plastic bag. It included: (1) a conference booklet, nicely spiral bound; (2) The May/June copy of Frontline magazine titled “Separatist, Baptist Fundamentalism;” and (3) various advertising materials.
The booklet is professionally printed and formatted well. The notes pages for the sessions and workshops are basic, with the name of the speaker and lines only. The resolutions are printed in the booklet. They are titled as follows:
- Regarding the Definition of the Gospel
- Regarding Fundamentalism and Culture
- Regarding Limited Participation
- Regarding Separatist Baptist Fundamentalism
- Regarding Personal Holiness
I’m sure the content of the resolutions will be posted individually later.
As I was typing in the last few moments the board members descended from their meeting on their way to dinner.
––––—
Reported by Greg Linscott
Two preaching sessions were scheduled for this evening. However, itinerant evangelist Will Galkin was unable to be here due to the waning health of his father-in-law, Dr. Ralph Roland. Prayer is requested for the family as this servant of the Lord nears death. Dr. Chuck Phelps, recently of Maranatha Baptist Bible College, was the sole speaker for the evening.
Notable service preliminaries included exchanging “rocks” (a fist bump) rather than the typical Fundamentalist “howdy time” handshakes. The music presented was prepared well, with the song selections, theatrical song-leading, and the rousing style of delivery typical of what one would expect of a Fundamentalist conference. The corresponding children’s program for the week is themed “When I Grow Up, I Want To Be A Fundamentalist.”
Phelps’ message was entitled “Living In The Grip of the Glorious Gospel.” The primary text referenced was John 6. In his introduction, Chuck listed several of what he termed growing “potholes” in the road traveled by today’s fundamentalists. Included were…
- Easy Believism- Pencostal-influenced Arminianism was raised as a significant factor here, as were the pragmatic methods of Billy Graham. This methodology resulted in “syncretism over separatism” and produced the “worldly evangelicals.”
- Lordship Salvation- This was painted as an (over)reaction to Easy Believism. Phelps provided this quote from John MacArthur’s Hard to Believe:
“Don’t believe anyone who says it’s easy to become a Christian. Salvation for sinners cost God His own Son; it cost God’s Son His life, and it’ll cost you the same thing (note: Phelps’ emphasis). Salvation isn’t gained by reciting mere words. Saving faith transforms the heart, and that in turn transforms behavior. Faith’s fruit is seen in actions, not intentions. There’s no room for passive spectators: words without actions are empty and futile. Remember that what John saw in his vision of judgment was a Book of Life, not a book of Words or Book of Intellectual Musings. The life we live, not the words we speak, reveals whether our faith is authentic.” Phelps reminded his Christian listeners that their only commission was to tell the lost to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. - The final pothole cited by Chuck was NeoCalvinism. A article recently published in Time listing NeoCalvinism was cited by the speaker, as was an awareness that raising the issue was already offending some in the audience. The fact that Time had commented on the article, however, meant “We have to talk about it in 2009.”
This led into Phelps’ main points, which he took from John 6.
- Salvation is a Gift- giving was demonstrated to be emphasized throughout the chapter (such as vs. 27).
- Salvation Received By Faith- there is no ordo salutis in John 6, only that one must believe. An anecdote of “Jesus died for all mankind” being understood by a neighbor as “Jesus died for Old Man Kleine” was shared.
- Salvation Is Eternally Secure
- Substitutionary Work of the Savior.
The last two points were not elaborated on as much (likely due to time). The content was an articulation of the position many would typically associate with the membership of the FBF. Noticeably absent in this message was any mention of the significance of repentance in salvation.
The message ended with an observation that the problem we face is not one of dissection (implied were Calvinists are guilty of over analysis and lack of action) but of distribution. Phelps confessed that over the last two years while serving at MBBC, he had only personally led one soul to Christ. He subsequently invited people to stand if they had led someone personally that week… the last two weeks, month, and so on. An invitation was extended targeted to those who were convicted of their own gospel ineffectiveness in leading souls personally to Christ.
FBFI President John Vaughn expressed appreciation for the message and testified of his own sense of conviction from it. In his concluding remarks, he noted that though the FBFI board had not resolved all of the business before them, the board had agreed to the following statement:
“We are together with the gospel only with those who are separated unto the gospel.”
- 14 views
[Jay C] Are they going to be releasing MP3’s of the messages? I’d like to get them, if they do.There is an order form for the recordings. As far as I know, that is the only way they will be available.
Father of three, husband of one, servant of the Lord Jesus Christ. I blog at mattolmstead.com.
I’m with BryanBice here. What if we do answer those questions in the affirmative? Yes, I’m comfortable with Particular Redemption. As far as the WCF goes, I believe he’s referring to this:
[WCF] By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death… . The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His own will, whereby He extendeth or withholdeth mercy, as He pleaseth, for the glory of His Sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonour and wrath for their sin, to the praise of His glorious justice. (Chap. III — Articles I, III, VI and VII)I do believe God has ordained all things. And, yes, I do believe God’s display of justice and wrath brings glory to His name, so I guess I’d agree with Beza. I’m also in general agreement with MacArthur on the Lordship idea of salvation. So, with BryanBice, I’d ask, “What is Phelps implying with his question?” Are we not really fundamentalists? Are we not welcome in fundamentalism? Or does he just have strong feelings against our doctrine? I’ll have to get a hold of this message somehow and listen for myself. I’d be disappointed if they decided not to post these online.
I am in the process of getting permission to post the audio online. If I get permission (and I’m told that it is “usually” granted), I will submit them to SI.
Father of three, husband of one, servant of the Lord Jesus Christ. I blog at mattolmstead.com.
Thanks, Matt. I hope everything goes through for you and us to get the audio!
"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
[BryanBice]I’m glad I’m not the only one. Obviously I believe salvation is by grace through faith, and not of works, but I took MacArthur’s statement to be a paragraph-long explanation of Matthew 7:16 which states “You’ll recognize them by their fruit.”
And, frankly, I don’t really see what’s wrong with the quote from MacArthur. Sounds like he’s echoing some of the emphases in James and 1 John.
[Norm]Exactly…and 1 John 2:17, in contrast to the world and its desires passing away, “whoever does the will of God abides forever.”[BryanBice]I’m glad I’m not the only one. Obviously I believe salvation is by grace through faith, and not of works, but I took MacArthur’s statement to be a paragraph-long explanation of Matthew 7:16 which states “You’ll recognize them by their fruit.”
And, frankly, I don’t really see what’s wrong with the quote from MacArthur. Sounds like he’s echoing some of the emphases in James and 1 John.
[Bob T.] “What is Neo Calvinism?Bob, I’m not sure I follow you here. Those who believe the five points accurately describe the Bible’s teaching of the gospel (along with other points), naturally believe that all the rest of Scripture “fits” that. And those who understand soteriology differently also exegete all of Scripture to fit theirunderstanding of the gospel. Whatever the correct view of the doctrines of grace is, all Scripture must fit it.
It is an emerging emphasis on 5 point Calvinism that is highly argumentative, has a tendency to bash Dispensationalism, and has a temperament of pseudo intellectualism. Their time and efforts have little place for evangelism much to say about those who do.
Some will deny that there is such a thing. However, it is my impression that not only does it exist, but it is perpetuated by some in Pastoral ministry who endeavor to make this the great “sine qua non” of their ministry. Like the “old light” European Calvinism of the Puritans of New England, it is critical of many evangelistic efforts as having undesirable methodology and presenting an easy believism no Lordship Gospel. There is often some truth to criticism. There is some truth to their criticism. However, there is often the presentation of those they criticize with exaggeration and misstatement of facts.
To the Neo Calvinist all scripture can be exegeted to fit into the wonderful world of the “5 points box.”
So my point there is that this part of what you’ve described is not “neo,” and shouldn’t be all that surprising either. Any view of these doctrines worth holding is a view worth fitting the rest of Scripture to.
As for the other things, though, yes, I’ve met a few five-points-obsessed and arrogant Calvinists over the years. I don’t think “neo” describes them very well either though. It would work just as well to describe them as “ornery and arrogant Christians.” Their Calvinism is pretty much irrelevant.
What I mean to say is that folks of that temperament are that way about whatever they happen to believe.
If there seems to be more of these of the Calvinist stripe these days it might be because there are just more Calvinists these days than there used to be.
If my theory is correct that x% of believers of any soteriological persuasion will be in-your-face about it, then wherever there are more Calvinists there will be more in-your-face Calvinists. … and where there are more left handed Norwegian believers, there will be more obnoxious left handed Norwegian believers, and so on. The average % of these is probably a constant.
So I guess I’m skeptical of the idea that there are any neo-Calvinists or that there is a neo-Calvinism… unless there is something else out there I haven’t heard about yet (certainly possible!)
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
As the quantity of communication increases, so does its quality decline; and the most important sign of this is that it is no longer acceptable to say so.--RScruton
[Brent Marshall] Bethel Baptist Church is posting the FBFI messages on SermonAudio.com. You can find them here.Well, then, that saves me $10!
Brent
Father of three, husband of one, servant of the Lord Jesus Christ. I blog at mattolmstead.com.
Thanks for the link, Brent.
Greg,
actually Phelps quoted the original form of page 93 of Hard to Believe. I believe you have posted the revised version of the paragraph in question. Quick question, do you think that anyone within the FBF will ask for Phelps to apologize for attacking MacArthur over a non-issue? A simple googling of “Hard to believe page 93” produces a wealth of information on JohnnyMac’s explanation for this editor’s mistake. If nothing is done and Pastor Phelps makes no public apology I think you will have in a nutshell the reason why so many are leaving fundamental circles. IMHO silence on the issue is nothing short of sweeping it under the rug—someone needs to stand up and make this right.
Matthew Richards
Indianapolis, Indiana
actually Phelps quoted the original form of page 93 of Hard to Believe. I believe you have posted the revised version of the paragraph in question. Quick question, do you think that anyone within the FBF will ask for Phelps to apologize for attacking MacArthur over a non-issue? A simple googling of “Hard to believe page 93” produces a wealth of information on JohnnyMac’s explanation for this editor’s mistake. If nothing is done and Pastor Phelps makes no public apology I think you will have in a nutshell the reason why so many are leaving fundamental circles. IMHO silence on the issue is nothing short of sweeping it under the rug—someone needs to stand up and make this right.
Matthew Richards
Indianapolis, Indiana
[Matthew Richards] Greg,Well, Dr. Phelps is moving to your area soon. Perhaps you can interact with him and let us know how it goes. :P (tongue in cheek and all that sort of jolliness)
actually Phelps quoted the original form of page 93 of Hard to Believe. I believe you have posted the revised version of the paragraph in question. Quick question, do you think that anyone within the FBF will ask for Phelps to apologize for attacking MacArthur over a non-issue? A simple googling of “Hard to believe page 93” produces a wealth of information on JohnnyMac’s explanation for this editor’s mistake. If nothing is done and Pastor Phelps makes no public apology I think you will have in a nutshell the reason why so many are leaving fundamental circles. IMHO silence on the issue is nothing short of sweeping it under the rug—someone needs to stand up and make this right.
Matthew Richards
Indianapolis, Indiana
Father of three, husband of one, servant of the Lord Jesus Christ. I blog at mattolmstead.com.
Matthew,
will do—LOL!
Matthew Richards
will do—LOL!
Matthew Richards
Discussion