Separation or Isolation?

Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by swaimj, Sep 4, 2002.

  1. swaimj

    swaimj
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Have fundamentalists become isolationists? Historically, fundamentalists were a part of the mainline denominations. Some left quickly when liberalism began to make inroads. Others stayed in the denominations, fought the liberals and left later with reluctance or when forced out. Kindof bothers me that fundamentalists want a separate board here on the BB where we do not have to compete with liberals. Are we so isolated that we never engage liberals in an argument or a discussion? Seems to me that our fundamental forefathers would be disappointed that we have given up the fight. Now we fight one another over pseudo-issues like KJVOnly, music, dress-codes, etc. Comments?
     
  2. C.S. Murphy

    C.S. Murphy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2002
    Messages:
    2,302
    Likes Received:
    0
    Swaim
    I feel you have mistakenly took this effort as one of turning our back on a fight, I personally enjoy debating with the liberals but refuse to do so until they agree to accept the Bible as God's Word. Without that I feel we have no basis for discussion. On a secondary note I have always respected your posts and I feel you hold God's Word sacred, so as a brother I ask that you withold complaints until we have atleast had time
    to get this going.
    Murph
     
  3. Wisdom Seeker

    Wisdom Seeker
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Messages:
    5,702
    Likes Received:
    0
    Seperatism is a destinctive of being Independent Fundamental Baptists. The main line distinction is the adherance to the Word of God.

    As far as turning our back on the fight... Although many people like to fight as a form of communication... It really shouldn't be a destinctive of being a Christian. That's just my opinion. I think that you can disagree and remain kind.

    I personally talk to all kinds of people, of all kinds of faiths and lack thereof. I share the gospel whenever I feel the Lords leading and whenever the opportunity arrises. And sometimes I just have conversation. [​IMG]
     
  4. Pioneer

    Pioneer
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Ecclesiastical and personal separation are what distinguishes a fundamentalist from the ever so popular new evangelical crowd.
     
  5. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    9,633
    Likes Received:
    310
    Isolation occurs when someone elevates his/her personal opinion and/or preferences to the level of Biblical Truth. I'll write more on this topic in another thread. [​IMG]
     
  6. Son of Coffee Man

    Son of Coffee Man
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't exactly know but here is an opinion.

    It is pleasing to the flesh to be right and to know it. I think in this area fundamentalism has gone overboard and taken pride in being right. The next step was very natural: making those "not right" appear to be more vile than they actually are. Plz don't get me wrong, I think separation is a vital issue that is Way under-addressed. However, we, as fundamentalists have taken separation a bit too far.

    Time to quit this all the way or none at all junk. We need to be able to stand on the scriptures and not have to move away from something just cuz others do it. Example: there are churches which do not promote "amening" because they don't want to be like charismatics. I'm sorry, exactly at what point did the false teachers get the monopoly on praising?

    like I said, just an opinion

    SoCM
     
  7. Pioneer

    Pioneer
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    "Come out from among them and be ye separate saith the Lord and touch not the unclean thing."

    "Can two walk together except they be agreed?"

    [ September 05, 2002, 08:50 PM: Message edited by: Pioneer ]
     
  8. swaimj

    swaimj
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just a quick reply to some of the comments:

    It's hard to see how you debate them if that is your criteria, no offense intended, just my reaction to the statement. Would Paul have been able to preach on Mars Hill if he had said "I have no ground to speak to them because they do not accept the scriptures". It seems he found something in common with them aside from that so that he could address them.

    I sincerely appreciate the compliment. Perhaps there is a place for fundamentalists to gather and discuss in-house issues. That's OK with me. Just kindof bothers me when fundamentalists voice a desire to avoid any contact with liberals. Hope you understand what I'm saying.

    I agree that our comportment should not be that of fighters, but the NT is full of straitforward and provacative language when matters of truth are at stake. Love is the main distinction of the Christian and speaking the truth in love is a primary activity.

    I agree.
     
  9. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,503
    Likes Received:
    40
    Paul was evangelizing! This forum is for the already "EVANGELIZED" I think! At least that is my take. (Murph, if I'm wrong please correct me!)

    The last sentence quoted above is descriptive of my interpretation of the purpose of the forum.

    Seems too many people want to make this forum a thorn in their own side for some reason. I keep seeing posts re: other forums/threads that in essence say " If you don't like the subject/tone/head-on-clashes etc., just don't post!" Most of these are the same ones that want to keep the pot stirred up here. Just take your own advice, & if not interested, don't read or post. Easy enough, as that is exactly what I do re: some of the other threads!

    Not all the above directed at you, swaimj; your post just triggered it!

    Totally agree swaimj!!! [​IMG] [​IMG]
    My feeling is that, if this were practiced, in all likelihood there would never have been the request for this forum!! :confused: (Again, Murph, please correct me if I'm off base!)
     
  10. Maverick

    Maverick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    960
    Likes Received:
    0
    Holiness is holiness and indeed that is what separation is all about. Mennonites became isolationists when they stopped trying to evangelize and just live their life. They have have reversed that and you have not seen a wilder thing than a biker dude listening to a Mennonite in his broad rim hat share the Gospel.

    You do not understand the problem if you think KJV is a pseudo-issue. Actually, it is a very very important textual issue. I am a KJV man because it is the only reliable translation from the TR. The texts and precepts used in the making of all the other versions are bogus and downright damnable heresies. It is a means of trying to destroy the foundations. I have addressed this on several other threads.

    Music - not sure if all that I have heard is accurate since I have not studied music. I am more of a lyrics person. Heavy metal and grunge are trash whether it is secular or sacred. I do think some music is designed by the devil to do things to body and soul. However, traditional hymns are not the only way to sing. You just have to be discerning. Each song evaluated at a time. One group may only have one song that is worthwhile whereas others turn out great songs all the time.

    If dress codes were not important they would not have been addressed in Scripture. One of the ten common threads in every revival has been a change in dress of the saints after they are revived. One sign of depression and rebellion is how a person dresses. Spiritual decline results in immodesty and in the far side of the scale nudity.
    It is important.

    When we quit reaching out to the world we are isolationists, but not because we reject worldliness.
     
  11. Headcoveredlady

    Headcoveredlady
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,388
    Likes Received:
    0
    When we apply the Bible there will be those who stay away from us. They do not like "our" brand of Christianity.

    HCL
     
  12. C.S. Murphy

    C.S. Murphy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2002
    Messages:
    2,302
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  13. Maverick

    Maverick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    960
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amen, Murph!
     
  14. swaimj

    swaimj
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hmmm. Is this really a valid distinction? It seems to be at first, but two things make me wonder. First, in regard to liberals, the answer sidesteps the issue of whether fundamentalists are practicing isolationism. If you refuse to debate or converse with liberals because they reject God's Word, you are practicing isolationism. I understand that we fundamentalists do not link up with liberals for worship or ministry; that is proper and biblical. However, refusing to converse with them over biblical issues and over their infidelity to scripture is an incorrect practice. Jesus conversed with and confronted the liberals of his day (the Sadducees who rejected the supernatural). Secondly, I would like to know how fundamentalists are following Paul's model of evangelism that he set forth on Mar's Hill in regard to speaking to unbelievers. I often hear fundamentalists say that, in witnessing, if a person rejects the Bible it is useless to try to talk to them. Do you disagree with that advice? If you disagree, how do you approach unbelievers who are not sympathetic to the Christian faith? If you agree, are you not also an isolationist in the area of evangelism, witnessing only to people who have a somewhat Christian-sympathetic outlook on life?
     
  15. C.S. Murphy

    C.S. Murphy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2002
    Messages:
    2,302
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hmmm. Is this really a valid distinction? It seems to be at first, but two things make me wonder. First, in regard to liberals, the answer sidesteps the issue of whether fundamentalists are practicing isolationism. If you refuse to debate or converse with liberals because they reject God's Word, you are practicing isolationism.
    That is your opinion Swaimj but I do dissagree I feel that John 4 tells us to try the spirits, and I feel that some doctrines should be tried and rejected.

    (sorry I wiped out a few words)
    do not link up with liberals for worship or ministry; that is proper and biblical. However, refusing to converse with them over biblical issues and over their infidelity to scripture is an incorrect practice.
    If we are not to Worship why should we have Bible study with them, and if we can and should have Bible study why can't we worship together.

    Jesus conversed with and confronted the liberals of his day (the Sadducees who rejected the supernatural).
    Yes he did but he chose a time in which he remained silent at their insults and false doctrine, as I have said before I am not equating myself with Christ but the bible says to have his mind so as for me I have decided to not debate their false doctrine, I have not rejected or isolated myself from them personally but I have attempted to do so from their doctrine.

    Secondly, I would like to know how fundamentalists are following Paul's model of evangelism that he set forth on Mar's Hill in regard to speaking to unbelievers. I often hear fundamentalists say that, in witnessing, if a person rejects the Bible it is useless to try to talk to them. Do you disagree with that advice? If you disagree, how do you approach unbelievers who are not sympathetic to the Christian faith? If you agree, are you not also an isolationist in the area of evangelism, witnessing only to people who have a somewhat Christian-sympathetic outlook on life?
    </font>[/QUOTE]Swaim Why not start a new thread about this topic of Evangelization isolation. The only reason Paul on Mar's Hill was used here was to say that Paul discoursed with those of a different faith.
    Murph
     
  16. Maverick

    Maverick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    960
    Likes Received:
    0
    Swaimj, obedience is not isolationist.

    Titus 3:9-10
    9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
    10 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; (KJV)

    1 Tim 1:6-7
    6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
    7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm. (KJV)

    2 Tim 2:14-18
    14 Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.
    15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
    16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
    17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
    18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. (KJV)

    I am not even sure Paul would approve of boards like this.

    We are not to waste our time with folks who do not want to hear,which is why Paul was called to Macedonia not to where he assayed to go. The Left will not change. They want to change you and if you pin them in a corner on one issue they will just jump to another. Some lost folks are like that as well, which is why I was always taught to stick to the Cross. Everytime they jump subjects bring them back to the Cross. The Left claim they are saved so it is hard to bring them back to the Cross and most everything becomes dealing with their vain jangling striving over words to no profit. Hence it is a waste of time when there are souls to be won and saints to be edified. They think we are ignorant, narrow minded and unenlightened, but when we hang out by ourselves they get paranoid partly I think because they won't get to interject their stuff. You would think they would be glad to be rid of us so that they can not be bothered by our inane comments and naivete.

    Even if you do not want to take the word heretic and say that they are lost or even that they are teaching false doctrine you can look at divisiveness. One fellow here said he was a historic Baptist. Right on. We hold to the historic Baptist beliefs,if you please. They are the ones interjecting "new" and divisive doctrine not us. Baptists have been historically against homosexuality, women pastors and deacons, non-KJV versions, worldliness including attire and many other things they now see as progressive change. Hence, we are archaic, against progress, unable to deal with the real world and need to change. They are the stronger brothers and we are the weaker and we better wise up and get strong like them. Fine, since we are the historic ones let them go out from us for they are not of us. Let them go about their business and we ours and if never the twain meet then so be it. If we cannot be of one accord,mind and all say the same thing then we cannot walk together for we are certainly not agreed. Heck,why should they want to walk with us? Why leaving us alone should be a breath of fresh air to them. Why hang with us old blue nosed, bible thumpers?

    I live in the "capital" of TX SBCers. If the BGCT wants to be Liberal than be honest and cut your ties and run. Start your own Convention and do it your way like Sinatra. Why stay and waste time fighting when you can go off and bring in the Millennium without those stuff shirt Neanderthal SBTCers? There has to be an ulterior motive. The CBF only has the B in common with the SBC, so why do either mess with each other? It is a waste of energy and time.

    Paul says reject the heretic or in other words have nothing to do with him. So fine, if the Left and Right see each other as heretics then have nothing to with each other and when we stand before God we shall see for sure then who was closer to the perfect path.

    Note that Paul named names, which we are so fearful of doing. That is because we have bought into a part of the political correct nonsense. I am on a Baptist board and if there is a Baptist that t'ain't let the Baptists say so. Yes, speak truth in love,but remember that to the untoward Christ and Paul had no problem calling folks vipers and dogs.

    Striving to maintain doctrinal purity and avoiding vain jangling is biblical not isolationist. Win the lost, try to correct an erring brother, but if both start snorting at you don't continue to cast pearls where they are not appreciated. Go on to the next person that will aprreciate the simple truth of God's Word. Redeem the time for the days are most certainly evil and a man's enemies can be of his own house even the Baptist house.

    2 Pet 2:1-3
    1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
    2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
    3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
    (KJV)

    It is up to you through the Spirit and the Word to find out who these folks are and defend the flock of God against them. We often only look to the cults and such and forget to look out among us. Even my military oath said that I was to defend the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. If Paul had problems with false brethren,we must take care as well.

    Be a Berean, not necessarily a seminarian. Love the brethren, but scatter the wolves.
    Shalom!
     
  17. swaimj

    swaimj
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let's see, I started this topic and when I pointed out that one of the main responses to my objection did not address the topic but avoided it, I was told I was that I was changing the subject and needed to start another thread. Whatever! :rolleyes: [​IMG]
     
  18. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Excellent post, Maverick! [​IMG]

    I must say, I sure got enlightened about people calling themselves Baptist when I joined this Board. I never knew there was a critter called a Baptist who didn't accept the whole Bible as inerrant and thought abortion and homosexuality were okay. Not till I joined up here. Boy, what a rude awakening for me! :rolleyes: I told other Baptists I know about what was going on and their take was "those aren't real Baptists." So, guess I'm not the only person who was appalled. :eek:

    And that is also the reason I haven't referred anyone to this board. They would be not only appalled, but probably upset, too. :(

    I find it hard to believe that I've only attended Fundamental Baptist churches my whole life when proportedly according to some on this board, Fundamental Baptists are in the minority. Was I just "lucky" to find churches in several different states who weren't "progressive" or "liberal" Baptists? :eek: These churches included SBC, GARBC, American Baptists and Independent Baptists, by the way, both large and small. [​IMG]

    I was one of those who complained and wanted a separate forum. I don't feel bad or guilty about it either. If you can't use the foundation for your discussions as the Bible, what's the point? You can go to ANY message board and NOT use the Bible as the foundation for debates and discussions. I just always believed Baptist was synonymous with Fundamental Conservative belief and doctrine, that's all. And, I still do, in spite of what I've seen on here. [​IMG]

    Not trying to cause trouble, just stating my lowly opinion. [​IMG]
     
  19. Maverick

    Maverick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    960
    Likes Received:
    0
    OK, Swaimj I are cornfused about your last statement. I thought I was responding to the initial premise. I think we have engaged them too much and have left the real fight and the real purpose.

    Hosea 4:17 Ephraim is joined to idols: let him alone. (KJV)

    After a second admonition, leave him alone. Many have joined themselves to the idols of culture, "education" and other things so we leave them alone. I put education in quotes only because they thrive on a few thoughts of sorry "theologians" and a handful of fraudulent manuscripts and hail themselves as the new priests to whom we must bow as they kiss the ring of the pope thus making themselves "separated" bishops.

    Sheeagle. I was saved in a GARBC church while in the USAF, graduated from an Independent college and have hung out with the SBC for awhile only to find most of them to be very Liberal and their congregations fairly ignorant of anything but salvation and for the most part their churches are dying. I still have some friends in there and have heard that many Independents are hooking up with the Conservtaive side, but they will find that thought they are more Conservative than the BGCT and its other counterparts they are still a tad further left than we are. Then we have the CBF, which could find its picture beside the word Liberal in the dictionary and seem to cooperate with anything and anyone but the Book or "historic baptist doctrine." Then to the other extreme we have the Ruckmanites and even some 7th Day and charismatic Baptists. The name Baptist is often loosely used and you have to have a scorecard.
     
  20. C.S. Murphy

    C.S. Murphy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2002
    Messages:
    2,302
    Likes Received:
    0
    I may be misunderstanding this but I looked back to see that you are the one who mentioned Paul on Mars Hill and someone noted that he was not setting a precedent for crossing interpretation lines but that he was evangelizing lost people. Then after reading that you switched and said that we were practicing isolation evangelism to which I recommended you start a new thread on that topic since the current one deals with isolation from other baptists. Please correct me if I am in error.
    Murph
     

Share This Page

Loading...