Central Baptist Theological Seminary Statement on Fundamentalism & Evangelicalism

~ Bob Hayton ~ 3 Comments

Central Baptist Theological Seminary of Minneapolis, MN recently posted a statement which helps define where they think fundamentalism is or should be going. It makes some careful delineation of terms and goes out of its way to repudiate some of the more extreme versions of fundamentalism.

I appreciate the desire this statement has for working with conservative evangelicals, as much as fundamentalist ideas and principles can allow. I’m going to excerpt a few key statements in this and recommend you go read it for yourself.

Ethos Statement on Fundamentalism & Evangelicalism

To be an evangelical is to be centered upon the gospel. To be a Fundamentalist is, first, to believe that fundamental doctrines are definitive for Christian fellowship, second, to refuse Christian fellowship with all who deny fundamental doctrines (e.g., doctrines that are essential to the gospel), and third, to reject the leadership of Christians who form bonds of cooperation and fellowship with those who deny essential doctrines. We are both evangelicals and Fundamentalists according to these definitions. We all believe that, as ecclesial movements, both evangelicalism and Fundamentalism have drifted badly from their core commitments. In the case of evangelicalism, the drift began when self-identified neo-evangelicals began to extend Christian fellowship to those who clearly rejected fundamental doctrines. This extension of fellowship represented a dethroning of the gospel as the boundary of Christian fellowship. It was a grievous error, and it has led to the rapid erosion of evangelical theology within the evangelical movement. At the present moment, some versions of professing evangelicalism actually harbor denials of the gospel such as Open Theism or the New Perspective on Paul. We deny that the advocates of such positions can rightly be called evangelical.

On the other hand, we also believe that some Fundamentalists have attempted to add requirements to the canons of Christian fellowship. Sometimes these requirements have involved institutional or personal loyalties, resulting in abusive patterns of leadership. Other times they have involved organizational agendas. They have sometimes involved the elevation of relatively minor doctrines to a position of major importance. In some instances, they have involved the creation of doctrines nowhere taught in Scripture, such as the doctrine that salvation could not be secured until Jesus presented His material blood in the heavenly tabernacle. During recent years, the most notorious manifestation of this aberrant version of Fundamentalism is embodied in a movement that insists that only the King James version of the Bible (or, in some cases, its underlying Greek or Hebrew texts) ought be recognized as the perfectly preserved Word of God.

We regard both of these extremes as equally dangerous. The evangelicalism of the far Left removes the gospel as the boundary of Christian fellowship. The Fundamentalism of the far Right adds to the gospel as the boundary of Christian fellowship. Neither extreme is acceptable to us, but because we encounter the far Right more frequently, and because it claims the name of Fundamentalism, we regard it as a more immediate and insidious threat….

We wish to be used to restate, refine, and strengthen biblical Fundamentalism. The process of restatement includes not only defining what a thing is, but also saying what it is not. We find that we must point to many versions of professing Fundamentalism and say, “That is not biblical Christianity.” We do not believe that the process of refinement and definition can occur without such denials. The only way to strengthen Fundamentalism is to speak out against some self-identified Fundamentalists.

We also see a need to speak out against the abandonment of the gospel by the evangelical Left, the reducing of the gospel’s importance by the heirs of the New Evangelicalism, and the huckstering of the gospel by pragmatists, whether evangelicals or Fundamentalists. On the other hand, while we may express disagreement with aspects of conservative evangelicalism (just as we may express disagreement with one another), we wish to affirm and to strengthen the activity of conservative evangelicals in restoring the gospel to its rightful place.

The marks of a strong Fundamentalism will include the following:

1. A recommitment to the primacy and proclamation of the gospel.
2. An understanding that the fundamentals of the gospel are the boundary of Christian fellowship.
3. A focus on the importance of preaching as biblical exposition.
4. An emphasis upon progressive sanctification understood as incremental spiritual growth.
5. An elevation of the importance of ordinate Christian affections, expressed partly by sober worship that is concerned with the exaltation and magnification of God.
6. An understanding of Christian leadership primarily as teaching and serving.
7. A commitment to teaching and transmitting the whole system of faith and practice.
8. An exaltation of the centrality of the local congregation in God’s work.

These are features of an authentic Fundamentalism that we all feel is worth saving. These features describe the kind of Fundamentalism that we wish to build. Their absence in either Fundamentalism or other branches of evangelicalism constitutes a debasing of Christianity that we intend to oppose. (emphasis mine)

Be sure to read the whole thing. (The link takes you to the statement as published by Sharper Iron, where additional discussion follows.)

Personally, as I read the entire statement, it still comes across as, well, quite Fundamentalist. At least this is consistent! I still don’t see how their 5th point regarding a strong Fundamentalism is not also adding “requirements to the canons of Christian fellowship”, however.

John Piper on Glorifying God in Your Movie-Watching

~ Bob Hayton

Desiring God just posted John Piper’s thoughts on watching movies, from an Ask Pastor John live event from some time back. From my vantage point I see his thoughts as a helpful corrective to contemporary Christianity. When Christianity Today can publish a glowing review of the “Sex and the City” movie, something is obviously wrong. May we all take care in our entertainment choices and guard our hearts.

Here is the video clip of Pastor John answering the question. Below you’ll find the edited transcript of his answer.

Is it possible to glorify God through the enjoyment of music, movies, literature, etc. produced by secular artists?

Yes. I assume the computer you are holding there was probably not built by Christians, and I hope that you are glorifying God as you tap away at it. And of course out from there, there are a 1000 things that we use all day long, and God says, ‘whatever you do, whether you eat or drink, do all to the glory of God.’ And he knows that you are eating this meat that may have been sacrificed to idols, so that means it was probably butchered by an unbeliever, or handled by an unbeliever, shipped by an unbeliever, it may have been cooked by an unbelieving cook. And here you are savoring the product of all those unbelievers’ work because you are in that moment giving thanks to God for it, recognizing that the earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof and taking the strength and the joy that comes from it to render back to him.

Now with the arts and with media it is more morally complex than with food. But it is the same principle. The complexity of it is, in those moments what do you do with the moral elements of it that are so contrary to your faith?

I’ll just point out one principle because we can talk about this forever. What concerns me is the distinction between entertainment and cultural analysis. To watch something, to study the culture, learn from the culture, be more able to interact with unbelievers for the sake of the glory of Christ is one thing. To just sit and bask in nudity, or bask in fifty f-words, or bask in a world view that is shot through with arrogance to the core, and enjoy it? Hmm. That seems to point to something going on in the heart. And frankly, I have tasted it big time. I think today we are going to have to work at not being shaped by the world because the world has made its world view so scintillatingly attractive.

Movie after movie after movie has come out and most young reformed people are, I would say, indiscriminate. “Let’s go to a movie tonight.” OK, and then we just choose the best. None of the movies in that theater at that night are any good, probably. But you are just going to do it, because that is what you do. You go to the movies on Friday night, or whatever. And then of course you think, we’ve got to Christianize this thing somehow.

I just think we need to test our hearts big time. Big time. Why are we able to enjoy hell bound, God ignoring, Christ dishonoring, false world views because we can give it a little twist at the end that it taught us this or that about the world? So, I think the main thing I’m saying there is, test your heart as to whether entertainment is defaulting to the world, or to something more wholesome. We live in an age where we tend to default to the world for entertainment. [Quoted from Desiring God’s post, emphasis added]

[HT: Sharper Iron’s Filings]

Quotes to Note 18: C.J. Mahaney on Legalism

~ Bob Hayton ~ 9 Comments

The other day, I picked up C.J. Mahaney’s excellent little book Living the Cross Centered Life: Keeping the Gospel the Main Thing. I came across his excellent description of legalism once again and thought I’d share it here for my readers.

When I first read through an earlier version of this book, back in 2005, His thoughts helped me realize the legalistic tendencies I had in my own life. Legalism properly refers to earning God’s grace for justification, but the term can also be used for earning God’s favor in sanctification. And for many in conservative or fundamentalist circles, legalism is a danger to watch out for.

In the book, Mahaney uses an illustration which captures the essence of a performance-based ethic which amounts to Christian legalism. To set the stage for the quote, Mahaney describes a variety show that used to be popular where a man would set various plates spinning on a series of long flexible rods. He’d keep each plate spinning as it would slow down until there were 8 or 10 spinning plates spread precariously all over the stage. Here is the quote now from Mahaney about legalism:

That’s a helpful picture of how legalism can hijack a Christian. The life of a legalist can become just as frenetic as the plate spinner’s performance.

The plates we spin are various spiritual activities–such as bible reading, prayer, or sharing the gospel–that are good and vital in themselves when pursued for the right reasons.

But often without realizing it, we allow a dangerous shift to take place in our mind and heart. We change what God intends as a means of experiencing grace into a means of earning grace. Instead of being a further expression of our confidence in God’s saving work in our life, these spiritual activities become simply more spinning plates to maintain.

When Sunday morning comes, we’ll sing and praise god in church with evident sincerity and zeal when we’ve had a really good week–with not a single plate wobbling.

But on another Sunday, following a week in which several plates crashed, we’re hesitant to approach God and find it difficult to worship freely. We can’t escape the feeling that God disapproves of us. Our confidence is no longer in the gospel; it’s based instead on our own performance, and when that performance slides, so does our peace and joy.

Do you see such signs of legalism in your own life? Do you often find that you’re more aware of your sin than of what Jesus accomplished at the cross? Do you think of God as disappointed with you rather than delighting over you?

Do you lack holy joy? Do you look to your spinning plates for the confidence–indeed, even the right–to approach God?

If you answer yes to any of those questions, you’ve probably begun to live under the tyranny of legalism.

But don’t let this discourage you. God wants to rescue you from the joyless futility of plate spinning through a right understanding of the gospel. (pg. 115-116, bolded emphasis added)

This performance-based, do-it-yourself-Christianity is deadly. It stifles joy, promotes pride, and can cripple spiritually sensitive believers. Be on guard for legalism in your life and in your church.

I know I experienced this (and still tend toward this “practical legalism” even today). What’s your story? Do you think Mahaney says it right here? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments below.

“Opening John’s Gospel and Epistles” by Philip W. Comfort & Wendell C. Hawley

~ Bob Hayton

Teaching and preaching the New Testament text with vitality and faithfulness is a high calling. The tools for the faithful student of the New Testament are many and varied. A teacher’s needs will be different than those being taught however, and many times a commentary is designed more for the end audience than for the one teaching them. Some resources delve too deeply into biblical languages and critical analysis — much deeper than the average teacher needs. Others package up the application so nicely that there is no effort expected or required of the reader.

Philip W. Comfort and Wendell C. Hawley have given us a unique blend of particularly helpful scholarly material and pastoral insight. In Opening John’s Gospel and Epistles one finds detailed textual and interpretive notes, sprinkled throughout a warm exultation of the main points being taught in the text. The result is a manual or guide for the active teacher, rather than an application book or a detailed exegetical analysis.

The book is laid out in a helpful format, with 6-12 page introductions to the books (2 & 3 John are treated together), followed by separate discussions of each unit of text. The discussions include an exposition and notes on pretty much each verse. The section on John also includes a key words and phrases section.

The expositions set the stage and serve to provide a big picture and background for one’s study and preparation. This is the place helpful application points and themes are raised. The notes explain the text and cover critical or textual matters in some detail (but those discussions stay brief and accessible).

Given Comfort’s expertise in textual critical matters, the work abounds with detailed textual notes explaining alternate readings and the manuscript evidence behind various readings. This can be a strong point, as when the publication and canonicity of the Gospel and epistles are explained, and when the leading papyrii witnesses to John’s writings are described. It can also be distracting to those less familiar or concerned about such matters. I think Comfort aims to make the wider church more aware of such discussions, and this work will make such points more accessible for sure. Of particular note, is the decision to set off the story of the woman caught in adultery (7:53-8:11) as an appendix to the section on John. The manuscript evidence argues against the inclusion of the story in the text of John’s Gospel, and Comfort and Hawley correspondingly treat the passage as less than fully inspired.

The commentary reflects a conservative evangelical approach to Scripture. Detailed theological points of controversy are generally avoided, however, in favor of the explication of the text. In John 6, for instance, the transubstantiation debate and the unconditional election question (6:44), are only referenced obliquely. In John 3:5 the various interpretations for “born of water and of the Spirit” are offered, and the preferred choice defended briefly. That discussion was quite helpful, and the discussion stayed very irenic.

I found the claim that John’s version of the Last Supper was not a Passover meal to be somewhat confusing. The introduction and also the discussion in chapter 19 assert that John asserted the Last Supper to be prior to the Passover meal. But the discussion in chapter 13 was referenced for more information, and there the commentary explained the Last Supper likely was a Passover meal.

The combination of two separate works into one presented some problems. Opening the Gospel of John was the original title. The work on the epistles was published as a separate work later in the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary series. Bringing the two works together is great, but I would have liked to see a greater attempt at standardizing the work as a whole. The Cornerstone Biblical Commentary Greek numbering system was used in the epistles of John for instance. Each Greek word is transliterated (as in the Gospel section), but it is a Strong’s number, as well as another number as well. This convention is not followed in the Gospel of John. What makes this even more confusing, is there is no mention of what the numbering system is or means in this book at all. I had to pick up a Cornerstone commentary to find that the numbers with a prefix “TG” refer to a Tyndale’s modified Strong’s Greek number, and “ZG” refers to a similar numbering system popularized by Zondervan. “TH” and “ZH” refer to the numbers for the Hebrew words in such a system. A similar matter is the absence of end notes in the epistles of John entirely, whereas every section of the book of John had several end notes. Also the NLT is emphasized in the work covering the epistles whereas the section on John (produced before the publication of the NLT Bible) ignores it.

Along these lines, I encountered a few editing errors. Following the appendix to the Gospel of John, a list of three papyrii is found with no explanation as to why it is there. At the very end of the book a list is given of all the papyrii and major manuscripts and there are a few obvious typos in that list as well. Furthermore in at least two places (pg. 335 and 351) a single Greek word is followed by a reference to a Greek and a Hebrew number (TG & ZH).

These minor quibbles aside, the notes and commentary provided in this work seem especially clear, straightforward and eminently helpful. It will be a volume that I’ll be keeping in arm’s reach, whenever I teach from John’s Gospel or his epistles. I recommend this book highly.

Pick up a copy of this book at Amazon.com or direct from Tyndale House.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by Tyndale House Publishers for review. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

Facing Temptation — Hebrews 12

~ Bob Hayton ~ 4 Comments

Here are some notes from a lesson I shared with some teens and young adults at my church this Sunday.

I. The Cycle of Temptation (Prov. 24:16)

  • Weak Flesh + Wicked World + Satan’s Work = Continual Temptation
  • We try to resist ~ we fail and fall into sin ~ we get up & resolve to do better ~ but we fail again….
  • This can lead us to lose heart, to give up and give ourselves to sin, or to be discouraged and even lose our faith

II. Resources for Temptation

  • Memorizing and learning God’s Word — Ps. 119:9,11
  • Watchfulness and Prayer — Matt. 26:41
  • Faith — 1 John 5:4, 1 Pet. 5:9
  • Godly Friends — Heb. 3:12-14
  • God does provide a “way of escape” — 1 Cor. 10:13
  • God uses temptation to work good in our lives — James 1:2-17

III. The Proper Perspective for Facing Temptation (Heb. 12:1-17)
1. The Christian Life is like a Long, Grueling Marathon — vs. 1

  • Not a quick sprint, the battle with sin is long and hard
  • Sin trips us up, and some non-sinful things can slow us down
  • We need endurance, to be in it for the long haul
  • It can be done, others have finished before us they testify to God’s grace, and they watch us finish our race

2. Our Focus needs to be on Christ, our Captain — vs. 2-3

  • Focusing on our failures and problems doesn’t solve anything, look away from ourselves to what Christ has done
  • Christ initiated our faith and will bring it to completion
  • When we fall, we must cling to the Gospel not self-effort
  • Jesus resisted sin “for the joy that was set before Him” we can also live now in light of Heaven’s joys (Phil. 3:13-14, 2 Pet. 3:11-14, Heb. 11:10, 13-16, 26)
  • Live in light of what is supremely true — that is faith

3. Battling sin is a struggle — like a boxing match — vs. 4

  • We haven’t even lost any blood in our match (others have)
  • There isn’t a magic “lose interest in sin” pill
  • Everyone struggles not just you (1 Cor. 10:13)
  • But with time, you can mortify sins and the battle gets easier (Rom. 8:13)
  • “Be killing sin or sin will be killing you.” — John Owen

4. Fighting sin is part of God’s discipline of his children — vs. 5-11

  • The trials of the Hebrew Christians primarily are in view when the author speaks of God’s “discipline”
  • But discipline is training or teaching as much as punishment
  • Vs. 4 “struggle against sin” , vs. 10 “share his holiness” , vs. 14 “strive for… holiness” as well as the weakness in vs. 12-13 argue for the battle against sin as being part of this “discipline”
  • So, this means the fight against sin (which isn’t easy), is part of what God ordains for us to make us holy
  • The struggle isn’t fun now, but it results in fruit (vs. 11)
  • And if you don’t experience this struggle, you just might not be a true son of God because every son experiences the struggles against sin
  • Be encouraged if you are struggling — that’s actually a good sign. Non-believers don’t struggle with sin
  • Take heart that God is behind our trials and temptations, and He wants them to mature us (James 1:2-4, 12-17)

5. Having this perspective on temptation, take heart! — vs. 12-13

  • We are tempted to give up and the race makes us weary — but take heart
  • Is. 35:3-4 is quoted: “Strengthen the weak hands, and make firm the feeble knees. Say to those who have an anxious heart, ‘Be strong; fear not! Behold, your God will come… He will come and save you.'”

6. Fighting sin is a team-sport — vs. 14-15

  • It’s like Tour-de-France, many members working toward the one goal of the victory — we look out for each other
  • Some can fall short, and miss out on God’s sustaining grace.
  • So we need to encourage each other (Heb. 3:12-14, 10:22-25)

7. The fight against sin does have real casualties — vs. 15-17

  • Holiness is required to see God — vs. 14 (and Matt. 5:8)
  • Some do fall away “bitter roots” (Deut. 29:18) & Esau — he sold his birthright for a bowl of stew (we are as foolish!)
  • Ultimately, the grace of God keeps us. Trust Him when you fail and sin. But take heart God’s not done with you!