what is significant?

If you haven't been here a while, this is the second blog in one day, and so if you are curious about "the coming thing" then scroll down to the previous blog.

When speaking/thinking within "christian" circles, what is important? I remember living with my great grandparents who I loved dearly, but I remember my mom having to explain to her grandpa why she didn't agree with Billy Graham. He was good when he was younger but not anymore. Where do we draw the line on ecumenicalism? Many in our cicles would want to stay as far away from it as possible, yet we all find reasons to come together for something. Those that won't even come together with us in these areas we label as hyper-somethings because even we who hate ecumenicalism will join together for something. But where is the line of that something? Are they right to avoid our gathering? Are we right to join the gathering, setting aside our differences for one common goal? Isn't that what Billy Graham did?

Yeah, yeah, you aren't going to be standing on the platform with Catholics. But...be careful. My advice, warning, and admonition, is to be careful.

One of my friends let me know there was a big bruu-haha at the FBFI (Fundamental Baptist Fellowship International. . .that "I" seems out of place imo) in April. So one of the speakers, Pastor Dan Sweatt preached about how Calvinism was the bane of fundamentalism. (I didn't actually take the time to listen to it, thought it is online if you want to. I read some reviews of it.) It was a poor, illogical, and slanderous message. There were more than a few people who wrote rebuttals. I read a couple of them. It was assumed that one of the reason it was preached such is because many of my generations fundamentalists are leaving. They see no reason to stay in a dying movement that emphasizes rules over Christ. Whether or not Fundamentalism does this we will save for another time. One of the men who is a non-fundamentalist calvinist is John Piper. Very big name in evangelical circles and has written some good stuff, though I cannot recommend him entirely knowling little about him.

This, seeming plainly obvious fact to many familiar with the situation makes me believe it to be true. And it probably is the reason for Piper's recommendation of Dr. Kevin Bauder's rebuttal of the message.

Dr. Bauder is the persident of a Central Seminary in MN and writes regularly. I am on the mailing list and when I take the time to read the emails I often find them informational and good. He took his regular email and turned it into a response to the message. It rebuked Pastor Sweatt and also challenged the board of the FBFI to make it clear that they are not heading this direction. Dr. Bauder is (from my limited knowledge) a strong voice in the "fundamental movement." He always tends to push towards standing on the fundamentals and not deviating from each other over the doctrines of grace etc. He wants the movement to be open to differing belief's in these areas so that as fundamentalists we stand together on the fundamentals.

I don't know where I stand. I mean, I have seen a good size group of guys my age leave fundamentalism. They grew up in fundamentalism, but apparently it was not the same fundamentalism I grew up in. Whether completely accurate or not, I have a sense of understanding that the old ways are generally better, and a reason should be found to abandon them rather than most of my generation which is looking to abandon all and wants a reason to keep them. Why throw out everything? It is rarely if ever good to reinvent the wheel. Sure, if a spoke needs to be replaced than prove it and replace it. Don't throw the wheel out and then say, "Well, that spoke is ok, and that substance is nice and solid." Bah!!

My generation has seen too many people preaching for doctrines the commandments of men. Too many! But we are running away from everything we have been taught thinking that there is nothing behind these commandments. Don't drink/smoke/dance/theater/etc. Ok, so you can't find these commands in the Bible. But there ARE principles in the Bible that DO require actions or abstinance, and you are throwing it all out.

Perhaps our parent's generation has gone too far. That does not give us excuse to swing the other way.

Back on track....is there a track? Bauder's argument was good. Piper's was short, but approved of Bauder. The next FBFI is the 16-18th in IL. Yes, I did consider going, but I have plans to be somewhere I don't want to be instead. Bauder is currently scheduled to speak, so I am waiting to hear what happens. More of a curiosity matter atm. I am not involved. I am a nobody.

At times I regret that. Writing this blog I wished that I had my MA, ThM, and PhD, and that this was not read by just a smattering of maybe 6-8 people. But God knows what He is doing. When I am unhappy with my situation as such I am complaining against God's plan and when viewed that way, things change fast.

Side note: Michael Phelps' life was Providentially directed by God for him to accomplish the things he did. I remember during the Olympics many times considering what would have happened had his parents not allowed him to swim. Many would not have even thought about it. Not all parents involve their kids in swimming. Even among those that do, it is for a time period and even if asked to compete, for one reason or another they are not permitted by their parents/circumstances. Then there are the other thousands of kids who do and who are not blessed with the physical capabilities God had given Phelps. When I look at my life, what do I see? Some wasted potential here. Some wasted time there. Where could I be were it not for those things? Right here where I am. God wants me in FL teaching at CCS. I don't know why. Its not my job to know why, but to know that that is where I am wanted. To understand that despite what I think my potential is/was, that God has a plan for me and that I need to be content in whatever situation I am in. At the same time, we know God gifts people and expects them to use those gifts. But someone with the gift of leadership who could be a CEO of a billion dollar corp, or the President of the US may utilize his gift by running a mission board, teaching teens, or being a pastor. Just because God gives the ability to run huge things doesn't mean that His plan is to run huge things. Exercise the ability where God places you. End Side note.

Together for the Gospel. The title eats at me. Bleah!!! Yes, it expresses what the goal is, but it sounds as ecumenical as you can get. (Shorter note: One of the reviews I read referenced Dr. Phelps message in the same vein as Pastor Sweatt's. So I listened to the message. He has a problem with the conference, and with Piper. A big Problem.)

The conference (in short summary or long commentary; not sure which yet): Four men of some differing theological stances met together for the purpose of furthering the central theme of the Christianity, "the Gospel of Jesus Christ." They admit they differ on baptism, and charismatic gifts. It is easier to copy and paste the paragraph of the names so I did that below.

"The four long-time friends, Mark Dever, Ligon Duncan, C. J. Mahaney, and Albert Mohler, also asked their friends Thabiti Anyabwile, John MacArthur, John Piper, and R. C. Sproul to join them for these conferences, since each of these men has been contributing so valuably to the church today."

The website turns me away. The wording bothers me. The pictures send hints of worry. Yet, their doctrinal statement is good. Its problem obviously would be the lack of detail. We do not find a strong Eschatological stand, a church polity/officer stand, an ordinance stand, etc. We do find the Lord's supper/church discipline required. We find the Trinity, the Authority of Scripture, the Incarnation (though not the virgin Birth...implied? or purposefully left out?), the Deity/humanity of Christ, the Gospel as we would define it, the necessity of the local church, the roles of men and women in the church, and Calvinistic theology (which is what bothers some...fundamentalism is falling apart, but people can lay aside all these other problems as Calvinists to work for the Gospel. I see their frustration, though I won't say they are right.)

So, in the end I wonder. Some of our close circle would probably come together with them for the Gospel. Btw, the website is www.t4g.org They meet biennially; the next conference is April 13-15 in Louisville, KY. (I didn't know KY was the abbreviation...hmm.)

If we almost abandoned the first "T" in our distinctives, I'm sure if we haggled over some things we could fall in line with this. The problems to me are obvious.

Any large gathering with men who lead is dangerous. So is any small gathering with men who lead, but you know what I mean. That I think is the more obvious thing. We don't want to idolize anyone.

Secondly, a person's views on truth will always influence their preaching. People will be attending these things with less than their normal guard and since people are stupid and gullible they will be expecting messages about the Gospel. I would not accuse any of the speakers of taking advantage of this, however with their views being different their messages cannot but hint of who the person is. What you believe inside is what comes out the mouth. People will not be on guard and as the differing views will not be blatant they may even go home and propagate them as something good: they hadn't heard that verse that way before. But in fact that verse interprets that way because the preacher thinks there is continuing revelation and that people are speaking with tongues.

I sense danger all around, yet I think warnings are more sufficient rather than denouncings. Am I getting soft? Am I wavering? Someone slap me if I am. Seriously, I need to know. Those 6-8 of you reading this are Biblically responsible in this matter.

Wow....Biblically responsible. The truth project which I discussed a month ago is nearing. I had a discussion with some family about it over the get-together weekend. I had thought of myself as getting careful and possibly wiser but maybe I'm getting scared and spineless. I think I am beginning to fatigue. I don't WANT to argue with someone who is obviously wrong, who will not change their mind, who will redefine Scripture, and twist Christ's words. I don't want that! It isn't just an uncomfortable feeling or a dislike, it is becoming a great distaste to me. As opposed to 6-9 years ago when I would have jumped in unprepared, now I would just as soon walk around those arguing and talk to someone else. What is happening to me?!

I was reminded however that I do not argue for me. Nor do I argue for the stubborn fool. (Fool? Is that ok? I think so...stubbornness is foolish, right? Ah, but foolishness does not make a fool. Fools are foolish, but not everyone who does something foolish is a fool. I should probably retract that fool up there.) Nor do I argue for the stubborn. (The wonders of the English language -- I remove a word and my adjective turns into a noun. Yeah, its not just English, but meh.) I argue for the people around who do not understand. I argue for the ignorant, and the naive. I argue for those who are too gullible. I argue for those who refuse to study for themselves; remaining babes when they should be eating strong meats.

Thus, if this attitude keeps up, the truth project will be fun. I do miss those days when it was fun.

Good to blog again...I may be back later...I am away from home without my wife. . .The first time since our weddiny day that we have been apart.

Darling, I miss you. Have fun and hurry back to me. <3

To the rest, goodday.