Matt Olson has posted a detailed explanation of NIU’s changes… Excerpts below.
We have, however, made a number of changes as we apply these foundational beliefs to our ministry in the 21st century. We have not done this perfectly, but we believe we are headed in a biblical direction that is focused on pursuing God’s pleasure.
Over the past several years we have written and spoken about our changes through our emails, letters, website, chapel messages, vidcasts, and blog sites. I see that these may have been inadequate, and I personally apologize for any unclear communication on my part.
Here are the changes we are talking about:
- Northland went from being unaccredited to accredited with TRACS in 2004. Earlier this month Northland’s accreditation was renewed for an additional 10 years.
- Northland went from the exclusive use of the King James Version in the pulpit and classrooms to allowing other translations.
- Northland went from a standard that did not allow women to wear slacks on or off campus to a policy that would require them to simply dress modestly and appropriately.
- Northland went from a demerit system to a discipleship platform for our students. Yes, we still have rules: we still confront, and we still have consequences. We just believe we have a better and more biblical model now. It is built on relationships. We are always looking for better ways to accomplish our mission.
- Northland went from practicing some forms of “secondary separation” to what we now understand to be a more biblical separation. Where we would not have had men like John MacArthur, Rick Holland, Ken Ham, Bruce Ware, or Mark Dever, we would now. We see no reason to separate from these men. We would consider them to be in the spirit of historic fundamentalism; they believe in the orthodox faith, will separate over it, and live godly lives.
- Northland went from only allowing “traditional” styles of music to accepting more modern styles as well. A blend of traditional and current music is used in our programs and chapel.
- We created an overarching name of Northland International University to give our students greater opportunities with the gospel worldwide. The change was driven by our passion to reach every tribe, tongue, people, and nation.
Also…
Some may ask, “Are you fundamentalists?” If you are talking about believing the fundamentals of the faith, being willing to separate over them, and being committed to living a holy life before God—then the answer is a resolute, “Yes.” If you are talking about our being willing to separate over “cultural fundamentalism” and its demands to separate over Bible translations, music, dress, methods of ministry, secondary associations, etc., the answer is an equally resolute, “No.” We cannot. Our consciences before God will not allow us to draw artificial lines of separation where God Himself has not drawn them.
Discussion
NewNotable Omission....
What Olson doesn’t address is relationships with continuationists like those in Sovereign Grace churches. That is a major issue, and one that receives less attention than it should with those who are concerned with the trajectory of Northland and its affiliated ministries.
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
NewQuestion
Hey, Greg. In your mind, what level of relationship is acceptable, if any, with a “continuationist like those in Sovereign Grace churches?” And, if there is a level of relationship that can be experienced, in what way/s did NIU violate it? What Scripture or Scriptural principle would you use? Would they be considered “false teachers’ in your mind or “disobedient brethren” or what? Thanks.
Andrew Henderson
NewRegardless
Andy, regardless of what I think, I would like to see how their attitude/inclination reconciles with their doctrinal statement, which in its most recent incarnation drew clear lines of demarcation with the Charismatics/continuationists…
I am personally not inclined to pursue active ecclesiastical partnerships with continuationists. I believe it is a matter of the sufficiency of Scripture. But again, regardless of that, good men that I respect have had diverse positions and applications on the length they will pursue fellowship and collaboration. I would just like to see NIU and Olson clarify where they are, because recently their movements have placed that subject into a legitimate state of flux and uncertainty.
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
NewNothing New Here
Dr. Olson’s post, while needed to a point, contains nothing new. It a few questions, but leaves a large number unanswered.
Quality communication is still lacking.
NewWhat questions?
Hey, mmartin. Other than the charismatic question that Greg mentioned, what other questions need to be answered by Matt that were not answered in his article?
Andrew Henderson
NewCharismatic movement
Greg, do you think that NIU would consider the brand of continuationism that is prevalent in the SGM to be different than that brand of the charismatic movement that we grew up with? I realize that many may not agree with him, but I know a lot of people see a significant difference in those two groups. If that were the case, they may not see a disconnect between what is contained in their doctrinal statement (in opposition to charismatic movement) and having one of their off-campus staff as a member in a SGM church or even having someone in to speak on a different topic altogether who may hold to the SGM view of continuationism. Just curious.
Andrew Henderson
Newtwo threads going
Andrew, I addressed this topic in the other thread, but I’ll point you to this:
This is from p. 12 of the NIU graduate school catalogue. Your questions about SGM are irrelevant. The NIU statements are unequivocal and allow for no technical niceties about SGM being “Charismatic-lite” or what have you. SGM designates itself unashamedly as part of the Charismatic movement.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
NewModerator action
Please use the. Filing thread for further comments
Twitter
Jim's Doctrinal Statement