Home » Posts tagged 'cultural issues'

Tag Archives: cultural issues

Dipping Now Into Application Of American Fundamentalism And British Evangelicalism

Part One

PART TWO

The Quality of Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism

What Justifies Separation?

The recent Alistair Begg story provides a teaching moment for comparison between American Fundamentalism and British Evangelicalism.  It also gives pause for judging the credibility or quality of these movements.  Were the participants believing and practicing scripture?

Many evangelicals consequently gave their take on attending a same-sex or transgender wedding ceremony.  The circumstance gave rise to some right teaching on the scriptural and true nature of marriage.  Some usually weaker men offered strong reasons for not attending the wedding, grandma or not.  They exposed Begg with their words.

Begg justified his bad counsel with the context of British evangelicalism.  British evangelicalism does “nuance.”  Actually, American evangelicalism and fundamentalism also both do and have done nuance in the same spirit.  However, something is happening or changing in American evangelicalism for these evangelical men to turn against Begg in the manner they are.  Perhaps they foresee the demise of evangelicalism without their putting a stake in the ground on more of these issues.  I don’t see the dust as having settled yet either on further strong stands on cultural issues.

Fundamentals of the Faith

Earliest fundamentalism, what some call paleo-fundamentalism, did not separate over cultural issues.  It did separate over gospel-oriented ones, especially what became the five fundamentals of the faith:

(1) the literal inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible, (2) the virgin birth and full deity of Christ, (3) the physical Resurrection of Christ, (4) the atoning sacrifice of His death for the sins of the world, and (5) His second coming in bodily form to preside at the Last Judgment.

The fundamentals really are an arbitrary list of beliefs.  Nothing in scripture says these are fundamental.  Yet, fundamentalists believed they should not fellowship, that is, separate from institutions that deny one of the fundamentals.

On the other hand, evangelicals might believe the five fundamentals, but they would not separate over them.  Fundamentalists separated over five more issues than evangelicals would.  With greater degradation of doctrine and practice across the United States, a greater gap grew between evangelicalism and fundamentalism.  Even though fundamentalism started with separation over just the fundamentals, the list of reasons for separation grew.  Fundamentalists chose to grow that list and also began to separate over cultural issues.  They didn’t separate over everything, but they separated over much more than five fundamentals.

New Separation

Not Biblical

Evangelicals who never practiced separation now will do that.  They do not teach biblical separation.  However, they now separate.  You can see that with the cancellation of Alistair Begg from the 2024 Shepherds Conference in Southern California.  This separation does not follow the various formulas of separation of the New Testament.  Scripture explains why and how to separate (2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1, ! Corinthians 5, 2 Thessalonians 3, 2 Timothy 2, Titus 3).

Scripture explains that a church can keep or preserve biblical doctrine and practice through separation.  Without separation, false teaching and practice will profane or corrupt the true.  True doctrine and practice goes by the wayside.  The false teaching and practice destroys institutions.  This is a strong reason why God says not to allow false doctrine into your house nor to bid it Godspeed (2 John).  Those who will not separate are not standing with God.

No Mention of Doctrine of Separation

Right now conservative evangelicals will separate, but they will not mention the doctrine of separation.  Begg preached at the Shepherd’s Conference in 2015 and 2023.  He was slated again this year, 2024.  Christian Headlines reports the following:

A spokesperson for Grace To You, the ministry led by Pastor John MacArthur of Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, California, told Religion News Service that Begg has been dropped from this year’s Shepherds Conference, which is slated to take place in March.

“After Begg’s comments became public, he and MacArthur talked and decided the controversy would be “an unnecessary distraction,” the spokesman said.

“Pastor MacArthur’s counsel on that issue would be completely different from the counsel Alistair Begg said he gave an inquiring grandmother,” Phil Johnson, executive director of Grace to You, told Religion News Service in an email. “So both agreed that it was necessary for Pastor Begg to withdraw.”

This is not the biblical method of separation.  Separation is right, but adherents should practice it according to scripture.  Grace Community Church does not treat it as separation.  It’s a “distraction.”  That’s it.  This continues to show a reticence for evangelicals to separate.  It actually fits more with a model of what people today call, the cancel culture.  Shepherd’s Conference cancelled Begg.

Separation and Cultural Issues

Same sex marriage rises to the level of a fundamental, worthy of separation.  Furthermore, it’s not just participation in a same sex marriage, but attending the wedding and even encouraging someone else to go to one.  As a kind of thought experiment, what about a cultural issue like nudity?  Is it permissible for Christians to get naked in public?  At what point is someone practicing nudity?

As another example of a cultural issue, for a long time, evangelical churches accept nudity to some degree.  They would deny it   They show little to no inclination to define the boundaries of nudity.  They will not separate over it.  It’s a non-essential.  You can lay in public on the sand wearing something less than underwear without any repercussions. Evangelicals won’t cancel pastors of churches that allow for nudity.

The determining factor for an evangelical church on cultural issues is not scripture.  Evangelicals now latch on to the definition of marriage and practice a crude, non-biblical form of separation over it.  They cherry pick this one issue.  Many others they give almost complete liberty to practice however people want.

Confusion Over Separation

In the last few years, John MacArthur did a Q and A with seminary students of his seminary.  Someone asked about this very subject, trying to figure out when and when not to cooperate with someone else in ministry for God.  MacArthur was very ambiguous in that he pointed to one qualification of true faith in Christ, yet also someone shouldn’t accept woman preachers.  On the other hand, baby baptism is not a deal breaker.  Someone, like R. C. Sproul, can sprinkle infants — no line drawn there.

God is not a God of confusion (1 Cor 14:33).  No.  Does scripture give the guidelines necessary for biblical separation?  It does.  American evangelicals and even fundamentalists offer confusion.  Begg defers to British evangelicalism, which brings even greater confusion.  He references John Stott and Martyn Lloyd-Jones, who separated from each other.

Stott continued in the Church of England his whole life.  The Church of England helps explain the difference between American and British evangelicalism.  Stott saw leaving the Church of England as an institutional loss.  Separation meant losing all of the infrastructure and resources to the large majority liberal faction.  It is sheer, unscriptural pragmatism, also explained as compassion.

More to Come

The Required Specific Application of Non-Specific Biblical Commands

There are over 1,000 commands in the New Testament alone.  Some of them are specific.  Some of them, I’m calling, non-specific.  You can easily find a list of all the commandments of the New Testament. I said “some” for the specific and “some” for the non-specific, but those two are far from equal.

Scripture uses commandments a lot.  This has stopped being normal in our culture.  Very few people tell people what to do anymore, and especially as it relates to the Bible, what God says.
When I took English, the command was a verb with an implied subject, “you.”  A command is not an option.  You are required to follow a command.  It’s called “obeying a command.”  A command demands obedience.
The Bible is authoritative.  It is an authority.  It is the highest authority.  It is God’s Word.  God makes commands because He is the highest authority.  He is on top of the command chain.  He is called “the Highest” in scripture.  He is above everything and everyone.
Sometimes God’s commands are specific.  Here are some examples.
Ephesians 4:28, “Let him that stole steal no more.”
Ephesians 5:6, “Let no man deceive you with vain words.”
1 Corinthians 7:10, “Let not the wife depart from her husband.”
1 Corinthians 7:11, “Let not the husband put away his wife.”
1 Thessalonians 4:2, “Abstain from fornication.”
I’ve got some news for you.  Most of the commands in scripture are non-specific.  If you kept all of the specifics, I haven’t counted how many that is, it’s at the most twenty percent.  That leaves 80% of the commands as non-specific.  It may be more than that.  Those are commands too though.  They also require obedience.
To obey non-specific commands also requires specific applications of those non-specific commands.  If someone wants to, he could ignore these commands, and someone could easily go without notice.  God will see it, but these commands, and there are hundreds of them, I contend, are ignored.  They’ve got to be applied and they can be applied in a specific way.  God isn’t commanding us to do something or not do something (a prohibition) that can’t be understood.  Let me give you some examples of these.
Romans 13:14, “Make not provision for the flesh.”
1 Peter 2:11, “Abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul.”
Romans 12:2, “Be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind.”
Luke 12:15, “Beware of covetousness.”
2 Timothy 2:22, “Flee youthful lusts.”
We’re all still accountable to God to obey all of these non-specific commands.  They do relate to music, to dress, to what we call “cultural issues.”  We can’t play dumb.  God knows.

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives