How far do you take SEPARATION doctrine?

[evangelist6589]

Some are so big on SEPARATION they even will separate from non Baptist churches over minor issues like the King James Version, alcohol, and or music. Personally I can't find this approach in scripture so why people still teach it is beyond me. I mean why do these separatists not learn how to read the bible for all its worth? Where does the bible say to separate from a brother who used the ESV and believes having a beverage here and there is okay? Do the separatists ever read the arguments for alcohol? The bible says a elder is to be above reproach and not given to TOO MUCH WINE indicating that he can have a drink sometimes.

This greatly puzzles me. I am open to debate with those holding this extreme view of 2nd or 3rd degree separation.

 

[InTheLight]

Some are so big on SEPARATION they even will separate from non Baptist churches over minor issues like the King James Version, alcohol, and or music. Personally I can't find this approach in scripture so why people still teach it is beyond me. I mean why do these separatists not learn how to read the bible for all its worth? Where does the bible say to separate from a brother who used the ESV and believes having a beverage here and there is okay? Do the separatists ever read the arguments for alcohol? The bible says a elder is to be above reproach and not given to TOO MUCH WINE indicating that he can have a drink sometimes.

This greatly puzzles me. I am open to debate with those holding this extreme view of 2nd or 3rd degree separation.

Where is this separation doctrine found? Is it the much taken out of context 2 Cor. 6:14-18? Or are there other verses?

 

[gigabyte71]

Maybe it is in the Old Testament, have you looked there yet?

 

[Salty]

I found this link

 

[InTheLight]

I found this link

Link details the idea of not joining in ministries with churches and organizations that do not follow same doctrine, nothing about separating from professing Christians that might use a different translation or have an alcoholic drink now and again.

 

[blessedwife318]

Considering the School (BJU) you went to I would think you would be well versed in the fundamentalist arguments for Separation. I think you are once again frustrated with the church you go to since you will not step up and be the Spiritual leader in your home.

 

[evangelist6589]

Link details the idea of not joining in ministries with churches and organizations that do not follow same doctrine, nothing about separating from professing Christians that might use a different translation or have an alcoholic drink now and again.

But that is what is practiced regardless. But every church defines it differently. The brethren are probably the biggest advocator of it.

 

[preachinjesus]

There are two forms of separation:

- Primary: this usually is the position that Christians should not cooperate with distinctively non-Christian groups or organizations in accomplishing Gospel ministry. For example, Christians should not partner with Muslims in social justice initiatives.

- Secondary: this usually is the position that a specific kind of Christian group shouldn't partner with Christians outside that group, usually ones that are theologically opposed to certain doctrines or have a different theology. For example: independent Baptists should not partner with Episcopalians for hosting a soup kitchen.

I'm usually in line with primary separation but reject secondary separation.

 

[InTheLight]

But that is what is practiced regardless. But every church defines it differently. The brethren are probably the biggest advocator of it.

I guess we'll have to wait for someone that practices this sort of separation to give their justification for it.

 

[evangelist6589]

I guess we'll have to wait for someone that practices this sort of separation to give their justification for it.

Probably not on this board. But there are others.

 

[evangelist6589]

There are two forms of separation:

- Primary: this usually is the position that Christians should not cooperate with distinctively non-Christian groups or organizations in accomplishing Gospel ministry. For example, Christians should not partner with Muslims in social justice initiatives.

- Secondary: this usually is the position that a specific kind of Christian group shouldn't partner with Christians outside that group, usually ones that are theologically opposed to certain doctrines or have a different theology. For example: independent Baptists should not partner with Episcopalians for hosting a soup kitchen.

I'm usually in line with primary separation but reject secondary separation.

Excellent summary of second degree separation.

 

[Salty]

There are two forms of separation:

- Primary: this usually is the position that Christians should not cooperate with distinctively non-Christian groups or organizations in accomplishing Gospel ministry. For example, Christians should not partner with Muslims in social justice initiatives.

- Secondary: this usually is the position that a specific kind of Christian group shouldn't partner with Christians outside that group, usually ones that are theologically opposed to certain doctrines or have a different theology. For example: independent Baptists should not partner with Episcopalians for hosting a soup kitchen.

I'm usually in line with primary separation but reject secondary separation.

I wouldn't agree with your examples.
I would have no problem working with anyone - take abortion for example - does not make any difference what their religious affiliation is. In fact, I would work with AAA to further the pro-life issue!

Now, if our church had a soup kitchen - I would welcome the support of anyone to assist - but when it came to spiritual assistance - I would ensure that only evangelicals would be invited. In other words, I would not have a Roman Catholic provide spiritual assistance.

IMHO, secondary separation is when the Third Baptist church will not fellowship or work with me (at First Baptist) because they disagree with a practice or doctrine of the Second Baptist Church, of whom we do fellowship with.

Example - the Third Baptist church like First Baptist is KJO - but Second Baptist is NKJ.

 

[InTheLight]

There are two forms of separation:

- Primary: this usually is the position that Christians should not cooperate with distinctively non-Christian groups or organizations in accomplishing Gospel ministry. For example, Christians should not partner with Muslims in social justice initiatives.

- Secondary: this usually is the position that a specific kind of Christian group shouldn't partner with Christians outside that group, usually ones that are theologically opposed to certain doctrines or have a different theology. For example: independent Baptists should not partner with Episcopalians for hosting a soup kitchen.

I'm usually in line with primary separation but reject secondary separation.

I guess the question of participating in a pro-life rally with Catholics would be a question of secondary separation. I don't see a problem with this sort of cooperation.

The soup kitchen with Episcopalians might present a problem if discussion of the gospel was part of the reason the soup kitchen existed. How could one cooperate with them and not cause confusion among patrons that might ask each denomination about salvation issues?

 

[preachinjesus]

I wouldn't agree with your examples.

Lol...whatever, I just gave you a textbook example of how it's understood. I honestly don't care to argue particulars just wanted clear up what is and isn't in consideration. You'll notice I said Gospel activity and not political.

 

[DHK]

Perhaps you should ask more relevant questions:
1. If you sponsor an evangelical crusade, campaign, tent-meeting, etc. (whatever the occasion might be), who would you allow to speak? Who would you share your pulpit with? Charismatics? Brethren, KJVO, etc.
How ecumenical are you in allowing your congregation to be taught doctrine by others?

2. If you are invited by another church and speak, are you willing to go, if that church is a Pentecostal church, or if the meeting is inter-denominational and there may be many speakers of all kinds, even SDA and Catholic? How far are you willing to go in your ecumenism?
Are you ecumenical? That is the question.
Or are you separated and will only allow people of like faith and order to teach your people?

 

[evangelist6589]

Perhaps you should ask more relevant questions:
1. If you sponsor an evangelical crusade, campaign, tent-meeting, etc. (whatever the occasion might be), who would you allow to speak? Who would you share your pulpit with? Charismatics? Brethren, KJVO, etc.
How ecumenical are you in allowing your congregation to be taught doctrine by others?

I could share the pulpit with those groups as long as they are Biblical and affirm the essentials of the faith.

2. If you are invited by another church and speak, are you willing to go, if that church is a Pentecostal church, or if the meeting is inter-denominational and there may be many speakers of all kinds, even SDA and Catholic? How far are you willing to go in your ecumenism?
Are you ecumenical? That is the question.
Or are you separated and will only allow people of like faith and order to teach your people?

Perhaps not as I won't fellowship with the SDA and Catholics. I am not a pastor nor a church leader, but a street evangelist been trained from the Way of the Master philosophy.

 

[DHK]

I could share the pulpit with those groups as long as they are Biblical and affirm the essentials of the faith.

But therein is the issue. You just admitted that you are not the pastor. You are not the one who has "the care of the sheep." Your pastor does. So the question is: What would your pastor do? He is the one responsible for the sheep of the church. Would he subject them to the teaching of Charismatics, and others that do not share the same doctrine that the church you belong to teaches.

Perhaps not as I won't fellowship with the SDA and Catholics. I am not a pastor nor a church leader, but a street evangelist been trained from the Way of the Master philosophy.

Billy Graham put his arm around a Roman Catholic Bishop and said this man believes just like I do. He has had plenty of Catholics on the same platform from where he speaks. But that doesn't make it right. Keep walking the straight and narrow path.

 

[evangelist6589]

But therein is the issue. You just admitted that you are not the pastor. You are not the one who has "the care of the sheep." Your pastor does. So the question is: What would your pastor do? He is the one responsible for the sheep of the church. Would he subject them to the teaching of Charismatics, and others that do not share the same doctrine that the church you belong to teaches.

Billy Graham put his arm around a Roman Catholic Bishop and said this man believes just like I do. He has had plenty of Catholics on the same platform from where he speaks. But that doesn't make it right. Keep walking the straight and narrow path.

The pastor would separate from anyone that is not IFB which is a problem. You know why? Calvinist/Reformed and other evangelical churches that are very very far from Catholics or heretical are bunched into the group. Not interested in horror stories as plenty of solid evangelical that are not IFB and have sound theology are separated from all because of their Bible translation or music. Is that right? This approach is very very far from being Biblical.

For example the church down the road is Calvinist Dispensational and they have solid doctrine and promote discernment. My church has nothing to do with them and all probably because they are not IFB and have a different view on music, alcohol, and bible translations.

 

[InTheLight]

For example the church down the road is Calvinist Dispensational and they have solid doctrine and promote discernment. My church has nothing to do with them and all probably because they are not IFB and have a different view on music, alcohol, and bible translations.

What sorts of areas or events would you have your church cooperate with the Calvinist church?

 

[blessedwife318]

The pastor would separate from anyone that is not IFB which is a problem. You know why? Calvinist/Reformed and other evangelical churches that are very very far from Catholics or heretical are bunched into the group. Not interested in horror stories as plenty of solid evangelical that are not IFB and have sound theology are separated from all because of their Bible translation or music. Is that right? This approach is very very far from being Biblical.

For example the church down the road is Calvinist Dispensational and they have solid doctrine and promote discernment. My church has nothing to do with them and all probably because they are not IFB and have a different view on music, alcohol, and bible translations.

Well you obviously supported separation at one time since you went to BJU. I would think that would help you understand that position as well as what would help one change their mind on Separation. Although I think if you want to go to the reformed dispensational church you should go there. Be the leader