Did anyone here attend...

Nathan is one of four fundamental church planters in the Atlanta area that I am aware of. I attend one of the other four. We have been here for about 4 years. Our growth has been somewhat hampered by our facilities, too, but probably not as dramatically as what Nathan has had to endure. I have not seen him much lately, but I understand that he always has a positive faith attitute, even though things are going slow.

One humorous antedote -- when he came down to scout out the area, he visited our church and took lots of pictures of our church planting efforts. One Wednesday night, while I was teaching the teens, I was mentioning something about how Satan sometimes tries to distract us from what we ought to be doing when Nathan burst into the room to take pictures of our class, unintentionally interrupting the message. The teens got a great laugh out of that!

Andy

 

Dr. Bob, you don't regard Open Theism as heresy?

Andy

 

It may very well be a heresy in that sense of the word. I don't understand why you react so strongly against KJVOism but glibly pass off Open Theism as just a different interpretation. John Piper certainly doesn't see this as a minor issue. Here he is quoting Thomas Odem with approval:

But his message is confusing because while he condemns Open Theism in print, he fellowships with it in his conference. As you said, the BGC is Piper's home. I don't know about you, but I would not let Open Theism in my home.

Romans 16:17-18 (ESV)
I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.


Andy

 

Piper's deal with open theism is an interesting one. He has refuted it very ably, but it seems that Paul always separated from false doctrine such as the Judaizers. I cannot imagine Paul "agreeing to disagree" about it and remaining in the same conference. (Of course, that is part of the issue. We recently left our "conference" over some issues. It wasn't earth shattering but I didn't go to the meetings anyway. It was a waste of time for me. I would rather have been cutting the grass.) It is troubling to be sure. But the problems with Piper go further than this issue. He regularly goes to places such as Wheaton and One Day. He is supposed to speak for Mark Driscoll at Mars Hill Bible Church in Seattle (a pomo church). These are definitely indications of new evangelicalism, whether right or wrong. I have received a great blessing from Piper and enjoy listening to him and reading his books. But he cannot be considered a fundamentalist.

With respect to this conference, I know all the guys who were involved in planning it and when I heard who the speakers were, I knew exactly what it was going to be ... a pep rally, a preachign to the choir, without any substantive dealing with the issues that modern young fundamentalists are facing. I think the description at the top of this page is very apt ... and unfortunately so because the fundamentalists of old were not like that. We need more substantive dealing with issues. I am a young fundamentalist, and think every true believer ought to be one. But I am concerned for the future of it (no matter what it is called) because I don't think we have enough substantive issues, and talking with some younger guys in seminary who are in my church, they don't get it either. One of them grew up in a NE church and one in a fundamentalist church and we have some great discussions about it. I hope to steer them towards a true fundamentalism over the time I have with them.

We need to be firm where the Bible is firm and separate from those who are not. We need to allow grace and liberty where the Bible is not clear.

 

So what are the issues that you think need to be addressed and how would you do it in a substantive way? Who would deal with these issues in a substative way that young fundamentalists on the fence would respect?

Andy

 

Follow the below link to download an article called "Unanimity vs. Unity or Why Young Fundamentalists Defect." It was posted on the blog that was referenced earlier as containing the text of Dan Davey's transcript.

wordcentered blog

The author alludes to some of the issues to "young fundamentalists" that Larry has articulated above. Personally, although I have great appreciation for Davey and many of the points he makes, I believe the author of this blog article provides a salient criticism.

 

I agree, Davey's paper was very good, but the concerns voiced in the Unity article were much more in line with my own experience and evaluation of the current state of American Fundamentalism. Here is a sample for those who may not want to read the whole article.

Talk about a militant fundamentalist, wow, that is some dangerous stuff. Here is some more

That is a sample, there are a few other concerns that I have heard elswhere from "young" fundamentalists, even from those who are not so young any more.

BTW Pastor Larry, we could probably get a "Young Fundamentalists" conference going, Detroit is as good a place as any. I happen to know a few young fundamentalists right here in the metro area. It could be the next big thing. Maybe we could get John and John to come (Mac and Piper) Maybe the Mother Ship (Inter City and DBTS) would be interested.

 

What is a pomo church?

Andy

 

postmodern ... very deconstructive, experiential, involves the use of "mood creating things" like lighting, sets, incense, etc. It is an attempt to return to medieval type stuff in a lot of ways. It is the newest thing in churches ... There are a lot of them around, such as Westwinds Community Church in Jackson, MI, Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, MI, Mosaic in California, Mars Hill Church in Seattle.

Interesting stuff ... wierd in a lot of ways.

Driscoll is an interesting speaker. I usually listen to him on my MP3 player while I am playing golf. I find myself laughing a lot. He can be pretty crass at times (even profanity), but he hits people right in the gut, right where they live, and doesn't do a bad job with the text. He is a little light on exegesis, very heavy on application. He doesn't mess around ... he just speaks straightforwardly. He preaches straighthrough books of the Bible, in contrast to many seeker type churches. But it is a totally different style of preaching ... more of a runnign commentary with a lot of application and humorous stuff, not gut busting humorous, but chuckle humorous. The good thing is it is humor that makes a point usually.

 

I think we need more discussion of what issues are "separational." The traditional five fundamentals are so reductionistic, especially after one hundred years, with all the advent of false teaching and new twists on doctrine. They were way too reductionistic to begin with, IMO.

I think we need more discussion of "relevancy" vs. "tradition." I hate to coin it in such a way, but for the sake of time (since I am writing off the top of my head) I don't have a better way to put it. Usually, fundamentalism is heavily tied to traditions, and breaking those traditions is thought to be slaying the sacred cow. There is much I could say here, but I won't ... So I will probably be misunderstood

I think we need more discussion about philosophy of ministry and how to minister in the 21st century. Typical fundamental churches are still in the 60s in some ways, IMO. (I know I am painting with a broad brush here). I don't think we interact seriously with church growth models. We are either way too critical or way too accepting. Most fundamentalists don't know anything about postmodernism and what role that plays in reaching postmoderns, milleniums, etc.

I think we need more discussion about social involvement and what role that should play. The evangelicals are way too far, IMO, and the fundamentalists are way too short.

I think we need to make a better case for separatism. I think a lot of the young guys have separatism beat into their heads but dont' really understand the philosophy and biblical truth behind it.

I think there are a lot of issues. I haven't really sat down to think through it in depth. I think a lot about it. To be honest, there aren't any fundamentalist conferences I want to go to. I don't think we are breaking any new ground and I think we need to be thinking more outside the box. I think we suffer from a tremendous lack of real leadership.

Honestly, I have no idea. I have very little contact with the college scene today. We don't have a college ministry here and aren't sending people off to college. My life is so tied up in a completely different world. The people here at my church don't even know these discussions go on. They would be shocked to find out what kind of things people have issues over.

I am not sure when we stop being young fundamentalists, though. I think I am still one. Who knows ... Does anyone have a Scripture for that??

 

I probably know all the "young fundamentalists" in this area. To me, a "conference" needs to be a round table of guys that sit down and start talking. We don't need to be talked to any more. We have heard so much already. We need guidance and mentors. But it needs to be about the questions we have.

I have started an article entitled "Four." It is about answers to questions nobody is asking. I think that much of our fundamental conferences are about questions no one is asking. I think the relationship between fundamentalism and young fundamentalism is too much like the relationship between fundamental churches and the world. We are saying good stuff; it just doesn't have anything to do with the world we live in, or at least we are not showing how it has anything to do with teh world we are living in and the people we are trying to reach.

I and some others think that fundamentalism isn't a movement anymore. It is an ideal. I think it is more of a local thing than a national movement. I don't think it will ever be what it used to be. There are too many fragmentations. I think the younger generation would benefit more from serious mentoring by men willing to invest in them personally.

But anything that John and John are a part of won't be welcomed by IC, I am pretty sure.

 

Pastor Larry, why do you need to sit in a round table and discuss with other leaders what you think you ought to do to have a vibrant, relevant ministry that reaches your community and impacts the world?

Do you want approval? And I don't mean that in a "smart aleck" way. I'm just asking.

Because the people that you are talking about sitting down with are probably not going to give their approval or at the least they won't agree with "all" that you might want to do.

Why not just go out and do it?

As well, if you read the books of the real thought leaders on ministry it is better than sitting down at a table with a bunch of people who haven't really done it or haven't really thought out some of these things.

Just a thought....

 

That sounds post-modern to me. The problem with just talking around a table is that well-thought-out-answers to difficult questions don't always come out in "sound-bites" or off the top of one's head. I think getting around a table and hashing things out can be valuable, but I also think we need detailed exposition from key passages and then careful application to those questions. Maybe we need the table talk to bring issues to the forefront and then time for respected men (like Minnick, Doran, Davey, etc.) to address these issues Biblically. And then time for rebuttels and questions, and more table talk. One meeting or one conference is not going to do it.

Just my thoughts.

Andy

 

I will try to answer all at once ... To me, a round table is benefical because I don't have all the good ideas. In fact, I don't have any. I like to know what others are doing and how effective it is for them. In terms of learning, I learn best from discussion, from interaction. It is a sounding board to be sure, but consdirably different than the BB for reasons I won't go into here. I don't need approval. If people don't like the way I do it, then don't come. They aren't inviting me to speak anyway ... I would like friends to caution me if they think I am headed down a wrong path (and I have friends that will).

As for detailed exposition, I agree. I am not opposed to that, but we need more. We have a bunch of people with all kinds of knowledge and answers, but it isn't to questions people are asking and we don't know how to communicate it in the 21st century world without compromising our fundamentalism, or at least feeling like we are.

I would not for one moment relegate the older generation to irrelevance, though I doubt that Davey, Doran, and Minnick would like to think of themselves in that category. I just think we need more interaction with the questions people are actually asking.

And it is an ongoing process. One meeting won't do it. But for me to go to a conference, it is going to have a be a really good one, or have some good friends going to it that I can't see anywhere else. By and large, there aren't too many of those. The conferences I want to go to are not "approved" so I have to disguise myself

 

Pastor Larry consider what you just said.

There are conferences out there that are talking about things that you want to talk about and hear about.And it is material and information that you are very interested in.

BUT...

Somebody has not "approved" them for you and you'd have to disguise yourself to go to them.

I will guess that the "somebody who has not approved" it for you is not your boss who can fire you if you go. I think you are a Senior Pastor. The people who don't approve are probably not the people in your church because hopefully they are mostly concerned with reaching their friends and neighbors and their community.

The people that don't approve are probably an "unknown entity with no real structure" that goes by a name of a movement which has many different definitions and multiple proclaimed leaders. And that keeps you from exploring and going to places that I promise you will meet the need you are expressing?

Am I wrong...maybe I missed something? Once again, I'm not being a "smart aleck" just trying to figure out a mindset.