The Neo-Orthodox Error - infiltration instead of separation

[The Biblicist]

In the late 1940's some leading semi-liberals invented the idea of evangelization by infiltrating liberal denominations instead of the previous Biblical based practice of fundamentalism which called for separation from liberal denominations. The most prominent leader of this movement became Billy Graham, who invited Mormon Bishops, Catholic Priests, Seventh Day Adventistist, Pentecostals, and you name it to work together with his team laying the foundation for every city crusade and then inviting them to sit on the podium behind him as a show of "Christian" unity. Later, Pentecostalism adopted that model and infiltrated mainline denominations until now the charismatic movement has infiltrated nearly every denomination including Billy Graham's own Southern Baptist Convention, proving that it is error that always wins by this model. Now its the fasting growing movement on earth and their consistent cry is we are God's means for uniting the body of Christ, stop opposing unity by the Spirit.

This same system of infiltration has always been the model Satan has adopted along with his harlot institutional church (Rev. 17:1-5) by infiltrating government and riding on her back to spread her heresies.It is the same system adopted by Rome that includes all world reglions within its loving bosom bringing them together for united prayer (although to different gods) and claiming they are God's children and many will be in heaven although they are unbeleivers in Christ.

However, the Biblical model has always been "come out from among them and be ye separate" with regard to paganized religion and with regard to those who call themselves brothers (1 Cor. 5:6-13; Rom. 16:17-18; 2 thes. 3:6) but who embrace either immorality or false doctrines contrary to "the faith once delivered.. The Biblical principle is "a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" therefore "purge out the leaven" that ye can be a "new" unleavened lump. Jesus prayer was to SET THEM APART by the truth (Jn. 17:17) apart from the world and apart from perverted froms of religion including predicted apostasy within Christendom (1 Tim. 4:1).

Ecumenicalists are now trying to redefine "the faith" so that it is restricted to some semiquasi form of gospel essentials void of justification by grace ALONE by faith ALONE in Christ ALONE without works. Void of the doctrine of eternal life (eternal security). Void of true repentance, Some UNDEFINED gospel belief in Christ dying for your sins. As long as they use those words then that is all that matters regardless of how they define those Biblical words. It is like the Evangelical and Catholic Together agreement based on Biblical words left undefined for the sake of unity. However, any definition of "the faith" that leaves out the essentials of the Great Commission is a false definition of "the faith once delivered." The faith includes more than mere salvation essentials but service essentials as well as the contents of the Great Commission proves.

Of course the biblical based practice is repudiated by ecumencialists and their denominations such as the Charismatic movment as "unchristian" and "unloving." Those who practice this strictly according to the scriptural principles are called all sort of names such as "legalists....better than thou...schismatics..unloving....etc." who are dividing the so-called "body of Christ." The cry of the ecumenticalists is "church fellowship" and "peace, peace" and "unity" that ultimately demands compromise for the sake of unity. Here is where the PRAGMATIC arguments come gushing in such as united we an do more, united we are better witness to the world, doctrine is divisive but love unites, etc., etc., However, the bottom line is such pragramaticism appeals to men but is rejected by God and His word. God is more concerned with pleasing Him and obeying His word then he is in pragmatic results.

 

[John of Japan]

I believe you mean the neo-evangelical strategy of infiltration, not the neo-orthodox strategy. The 1957 press release of Harold John Ockenga which announced the new evangelicalism had this statement: "The New Evangelicalism has changed its strategy from one of separation to one of infiltration."

And to be fair, there is no evidence that I've ever heard of that Graham cooperated with Mormons, though he did so with Catholics, liberals, etc.

And historically, the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements should be distinguished.

Otherwise, carry on.

 

[The Biblicist]

I believe you mean the neo-evangelical strategy of infiltration, not the neo-orthodox strategy. The 1957 press release of Harold John Ockenga which announced the new evangelicalism had this statement: "The New Evangelicalism has changed its strategy from one of separation to one of infiltration."

And to be fair, there is no evidence that I've ever heard of that Graham cooperated with Mormons, though he did so with Catholics, liberals, etc.

And historically, the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements should be distinguished.

Otherwise, carry on.

The Pentecost and Charistmatic movements are distingished by their origins, as the Charismatic movement originated among Cathlics while the Pentecostal movement originated from Protestant sources and then later flowed over into mainline Protestant denominations. However, the terms are now used interchangably. The tongue movement now perceives itself in "waves" as they see the early Pentecostal movement as the first wave, the overflow into the Catholic and mainline Protestant denominations as the "second wave" and the present movement as the "third wave."

Yes, I was writing from memory rather than looking back at my notes and mistakenly used "orthodoxy" in the plae of "evangelical." Thanks for the correction.

I have read articles where mormons are mentioned right along with Catholics and SDA with regard to his crusades. I went back to one of those articles and reread it and it was in the context of referrals back to the denominations of inquirers that came forward. My mistake. However, He endorsed Mitt Romney and removed all references from his websites that stated or inferred that Mormons were a cult. Franklin Graham expressed surprise that any of their websites condemned Mormons as a cult.

 

[Jerome]

And to be fair, there is no evidence that I've ever heard of that Graham cooperated with Mormons, though he did so with Catholics, liberals, etc.

One of Billy Graham's longtime backers was Mormon hotel magnate J.W. Marriott.

A Baptist Press article from late 1967 regarding planning for what became the Key'73 ecumenical campaign; the meeting, hosted by Marriott's '[Francis Scott] Key Bridge' Washington D.C. hotel, was organized by Carl F.H. Henry of Capitol Hill Baptist Church and Billy Graham:

http://media.sbhla.org.s3.amazonaws.com/2473,04-Oct-1967.pdf

Attending were key figures of the Churches of Christ, the American Baptist Convention, Southern Baptist Convention, American Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod Lutherans, the Mormon Church in America, the World Evangelical Fellowship, the National Association of Evangelicals, Methodist, Presbyterian, Episcopal, Christian Reform, Disciples of Christ (Christian Churches); Conservative Baptist, Orthodox Presbyterian, Free Will Baptist, and Evangelical Free Church.

As a result of the meeting, a ten-member committee was established to study the possibility of a nation-wide evangelistic drive across denominational lines during 1973. An overall plan for the drive was presented to the group here by Jess Moody, pastor of the First Baptist Church of West Palm Beach, Fla., and was approved by the group (in Moody's words) "lock, stock and barrel."

 

[John of Japan]

The Pentecost and Charistmatic movements are distingished by their origins, as the Charismatic movement originated among Cathlics while the Pentecostal movement originated from Protestant sources and then later flowed over into mainline Protestant denominations. However, the terms are now used interchangably. The tongue movement now perceives itself in "waves" as they see the early Pentecostal movement as the first wave, the overflow into the Catholic and mainline Protestant denominations as the "second wave" and the present movement as the "third wave."

Actually, the movement began with Episcopalian pastor Dennis Bennett, but that's a minor point. My books on Charismatic history are on loan to a student right now, so I can't give the details.

As for distinguishing the terms, as a sometime historian (I teach two courses) I think that to distinguish the two movements is quite important. As you say, many use the terms interchangeably nowadays, and Charismatics refer to the three waves, but there are very important differences between the two movements: the original Pentecostals were orthodox, while the Charismatics have heresies such as Latter Rain doctrines, the "health and wealth gospel," false revivals such as the "Toronto blessing," an ecumenical approach (as opposed to Pentecostal separatism), etc.

Yes, I was writing from memory rather than looking back at my notes and mistakenly used "orthodoxy" in the plae of "evangelical." Thanks for the correction.

You're welcome.

I have read articles where mormons are mentioned right along with Catholics and SDA with regard to his crusades. I went back to one of those articles and reread it and it was in the context of referrals back to the denominations of inquirers that came forward. My mistake. However, He endorsed Mitt Romney and removed all references from his websites that stated or inferred that Mormons were a cult. Franklin Graham expressed surprise that any of their websites condemned Mormons as a cult.

Thanks for the details. My memory is somewhat hazy, but I do remember something about this now that you mention it. As you know, when you get into the weird details of Mormon teaching it is bizarre that any evangelical could consider it anything other than a cult!

 

[John of Japan]

One of Billy Graham's longtime backers was Mormon hotel magnate J.W. Marriott.

A Baptist Press article from late 1967 regarding planning for what became the Key'73 ecumenical campaign; the meeting, hosted by Marriott's '[Francis Scott] Key Bridge' Washington D.C. hotel, was organized by Carl F.H. Henry of Capitol Hill Baptist Church and Billy Graham:

http://media.sbhla.org.s3.amazonaws.com/2473,04-Oct-1967.pdf

Thanks for the information. That's like saying, "Yes, let's invite the wolf to be a sheep dog."

 

[The Biblicist]

Actually, the movement began with Episcopalian pastor Dennis Bennett, but that's a minor point. My books on Charismatic history are on loan to a student right now, so I can't give the details.

You may be correct that the term 'charismatic" may have been coined for crossing over to mainline protestant denomination beginning with Bennett, however, I know the Roman Catholics use the term "Charismatic" to distinguish themselves from Protestants.

 

[John of Japan]

You may be correct that the term 'charismatic" may have been coined for crossing over to mainline protestant denomination beginning with Bennett, however, I know the Roman Catholics use the term "Charismatic" to distinguish themselves from Protestants.

That's really odd, since there is a huge Charismatic movement among Protestants. Benny Hinn, John Wimber, Kenneth Copeland, T. D. Jakes and many others are Protestant leaders. Plus, Africa and Asia are chock full of Protestant Charismatics. (Been there, talked to people.) For a Catholic to distance himself from Protestants with the term Charismatic would be kind of like a poodle distancing himself from a Chow by saying, "I'm a real dog, he's not."

Then there are the huge Charismatic denominations (of Charismatic origins) such as The Vineyard, and the old-line Pentecostals mostly turned Charismatic.

Also, would a Catholic use the term "Pentecostal" to describe himself as a way to distance himself from Protestants? Wouldn't work.

 

[TCassidy]

Three excellent books on Pentecostalism and Charismatism are:

The New Testament and New Pentecostalism by Dr. George W. Dollar, who I believe is the preeminent church historian of the 20th century.

(John, just an aside, I mentioned to Dr. Robinson while we were in San Antonio for the ETS meetings that Dr. Dollar had been Dean of Central when I was there. He remarked to me it is a small world. He and Dr. Dollar used to ride back and forth to work together when they were both teaching at the Seminary in Sarasota, Florida.)

Charismatism: Awakening or Apostasy and Pentecostalism: Purity or Peril by O. Talmadge Spence. Dr. Spence was born into a main-stream, 1st generation Pentecostal home, his father being a Pentecostal pastor. But he had no personal relationship with Christ until, as an adult in the US Navy during WWII, God saved him. In his books he points out the fact (as John mentioned above) that Pentecostalism, in the beginning, was orthodox, but began to drift after the advent of the 2nd generation.

 

[John of Japan]

Three excellent books on Pentecostalism and Charismatism are:

The New Testament and New Pentecostalism by Dr. George W. Dollar, who I believe is the preeminent church historian of the 20th century.

Definately our premier historian. Didn't know he'd written this.

(John, just an aside, I mentioned to Dr. Robinson while we were in San Antonio for the ETS meetings that Dr. Dollar had been Dean of Central when I was there. He remarked to me it is a small world. He and Dr. Dollar used to ride back and forth to work together when they were both teaching at the Seminary in Sarasota, Florida.)

He told me you guys had a great time. Wish I could have been there.

Charismatism: Awakening or Apostasy and Pentecostalism: Purity or Peril by O. Talmadge Spence. Dr. Spence was born into a main-stream, 1st generation Pentecostal home, his father being a Pentecostal pastor. But he had no personal relationship with Christ until, as an adult in the US Navy during WWII, God saved him. In his books he points out the fact (as John mentioned above) that Pentecostalism, in the beginning, was orthodox, but began to drift after the advent of the 2nd generation.

I have this one and it's good. Kind of out-of-date though, copyright 1978.

Good ones I have (out on loan) about the history include:

Vinson Synan (a Charismatic), ed. Aspects of Pentecostal-Charismatic Origins.
L. Grant, McClung, ed. Azusa Street and Beyond. (about the Pentecostal/Charismatic missions movement)

 

[Yeshua1]

Actually, the movement began with Episcopalian pastor Dennis Bennett, but that's a minor point. My books on Charismatic history are on loan to a student right now, so I can't give the details.

As for distinguishing the terms, as a sometime historian (I teach two courses) I think that to distinguish the two movements is quite important. As you say, many use the terms interchangeably nowadays, and Charismatics refer to the three waves, but there are very important differences between the two movements: the original Pentecostals were orthodox, while the Charismatics have heresies such as Latter Rain doctrines, the "health and wealth gospel," false revivals such as the "Toronto blessing," an ecumenical approach (as opposed to Pentecostal separatism), etc.
You're welcome.
Thanks for the details. My memory is somewhat hazy, but I do remember something about this now that you mention it. As you know, when you get into the weird details of Mormon teaching it is bizarre that any evangelical could consider it anything other than a cult!

You r correct in that the two groups are not the same, as entacostalists were and are like AOG, who hold to biblical Christinity save for tere wrong understanding of the second act of Grace, nd spirtual gifts in operation, while Charsamatics would holdto things like Latter day rain/WOF/etc!

 

[Yeshua1]

In the late 1940's some leading semi-liberals invented the idea of evangelization by infiltrating liberal denominations instead of the previous Biblical based practice of fundamentalism which called for separation from liberal denominations. The most prominent leader of this movement became Billy Graham, who invited Mormon Bishops, Catholic Priests, Seventh Day Adventistist, Pentecostals, and you name it to work together with his team laying the foundation for every city crusade and then inviting them to sit on the podium behind him as a show of "Christian" unity. Later, Pentecostalism adopted that model and infiltrated mainline denominations until now the charismatic movement has infiltrated nearly every denomination including Billy Graham's own Southern Baptist Convention, proving that it is error that always wins by this model. Now its the fasting growing movement on earth and their consistent cry is we are God's means for uniting the body of Christ, stop opposing unity by the Spirit.

This same system of infiltration has always been the model Satan has adopted along with his harlot institutional church (Rev. 17:1-5) by infiltrating government and riding on her back to spread her heresies.It is the same system adopted by Rome that includes all world reglions within its loving bosom bringing them together for united prayer (although to different gods) and claiming they are God's children and many will be in heaven although they are unbeleivers in Christ.

However, the Biblical model has always been "come out from among them and be ye separate" with regard to paganized religion and with regard to those who call themselves brothers (1 Cor. 5:6-13; Rom. 16:17-18; 2 thes. 3:6) but who embrace either immorality or false doctrines contrary to "the faith once delivered.. The Biblical principle is "a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" therefore "purge out the leaven" that ye can be a "new" unleavened lump. Jesus prayer was to SET THEM APART by the truth (Jn. 17:17) apart from the world and apart from perverted froms of religion including predicted apostasy within Christendom (1 Tim. 4:1).

Ecumenicalists are now trying to redefine "the faith" so that it is restricted to some semiquasi form of gospel essentials void of justification by grace ALONE by faith ALONE in Christ ALONE without works. Void of the doctrine of eternal life (eternal security). Void of true repentance, Some UNDEFINED gospel belief in Christ dying for your sins. As long as they use those words then that is all that matters regardless of how they define those Biblical words. It is like the Evangelical and Catholic Together agreement based on Biblical words left undefined for the sake of unity. However, any definition of "the faith" that leaves out the essentials of the Great Commission is a false definition of "the faith once delivered." The faith includes more than mere salvation essentials but service essentials as well as the contents of the Great Commission proves.

Of course the biblical based practice is repudiated by ecumencialists and their denominations such as the Charismatic movment as "unchristian" and "unloving." Those who practice this strictly according to the scriptural principles are called all sort of names such as "legalists....better than thou...schismatics..unloving....etc." who are dividing the so-called "body of Christ." The cry of the ecumenticalists is "church fellowship" and "peace, peace" and "unity" that ultimately demands compromise for the sake of unity. Here is where the PRAGMATIC arguments come gushing in such as united we an do more, united we are better witness to the world, doctrine is divisive but love unites, etc., etc., However, the bottom line is such pragramaticism appeals to men but is rejected by God and His word. God is more concerned with pleasing Him and obeying His word then he is in pragmatic results.

Thin the terms would be Fundamental/Evangelical, as those in Fundamental churches tended to seperate andexclude intraction with all others not "like minded", while Evangelicals saw more that we are still one in Christ, and were willingto work with those who didnot agreeon all poits of doctrine.

Iwouldbe more like the second group, but would NOT include Mormons/Catholics/Charasmatic leadership as being in the group, as the hold to dofferent Gospel!