We don’t have to guess at how Jesus or Paul dealt with people teaching error, because we can read it in the Bible. They had plenty of opportunities and we are left with lots of examples. Paul wrote to the Thessalonians, “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21). “All things” is in fact all things. And then in the next sentence, he wrote, “Abstain from all appearance of evil.” All forms of evil—those things which would not pass the test, after having proven them—should be abandoned. He doesn’t say, “The essential things” or, “The violations of the fundamentals.”
I have conversations with evangelicals. They aren’t public. They aren’t in some joint meeting. They aren’t for the purpose of understanding each other better. There’s plenty to read of evangelicals. We know what they are thinking. We can learn from them by listening to them. When we do interact with them, we should be ready to show them from scripture where they are wrong, and how they can get right. That is the loving thing to do for them. It obeys the biblical example. Joining in fellowship with them, sharing in common ministry, says that the differences do not matter. It ignores the biblical doctrine and practice of separation.
John MacArthur talks about amillennialism. He talks about Charismaticism. He talks about how bad those are. He says they are really, really bad. He’ll write books against them. And the books he writes are very good. And then he fellowships with amillennialists and Charismatics. I guess I’m scolding him. That’s what someone who “converses” might say. Someone who calls himself a “competent fundamentalist” writes:
If you scold a child for everything, then she will pay no attention when you scold her for the thing that matters. Something like this has happened with the incessant fundamentalist scolding of conservative evangelicals.
I think there is some deniability here with the word “scold” and then “for everything.” What is scolding and what is “for everything”? Everything a child does wrong should be pointed out. What are the wrong things a child does that should be let go? I heard it: “But I’m not saying that!” This seems to be pure psychology, much like “conversation.” “It won’t work if you scold them for everything!” Pragmatism. It’s all over the place in fundamentalism.
The pragmatism of conversation is the following. Conservative evangelicals are fine with conversation. When you converse, they feel accepted. They don’t feel any painful shame of separation. If you confront and separate from conservative evangelicals, they won’t like you. Some conservative evangelicals are very popular. Those are the ones we talk about, the big guys: Al Mohler, Mark Dever, John MacArthur, Phil Johnson. They have a big audience. They sell books. If they separated, their audience would shrink. They would become what they call fundamentalists (because of even fundamentalist separation): irrelevant. To remain relevant, to be in the crowd, to fit in, you’ve got to converse. You’ll be considered smarter, more competent, if you do.
I had a conversation with Albert Mohler at the ETS meeting. During the question and answer time, I asked him if he could obey 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1 and still be a Southern Baptist. He did not answer the question and no opportunity was given for follow up. He filibustered me and excused himself. No one else asked that kind of question. The fundamentalist in the session had a long, long period of time to do this kind of work, and did not. He gave Mohler more in the nature of conversation. Confrontation, yes, kind confrontation was needed. Conversation is not a biblical method. It isn’t what Jesus or Paul would do.
The Bible says in 1 Pet. 3:15 that we should sanctify the Lord God in our hearts, and be ready always to give an answer to every man. Where was Mohler's ready answer? Why doesn't Bauder ask the tough questions or respond to tough questions? Why, Pastor B. didn't you just read the questions from a "cue card" somewhere? Why confront? Your questions generate more questions. But I am glad you asked. I would have liked to have seen that look on his face and hear the response…did he do a double take? See! More questions.