-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Compromisers Promoted At Bob Jones University
- Thread starter foxrev
- Start date
Greg says:
"the likelihood of BJ3, Stephen, or anyone else in the BJ administration being swayed by what you have posted (or even reading it, for that matter) on this board is truly remote.
WOW! So, is this a new form of sanctification? You are thinking of men, more highly than you ought to think Greg. Way too high. Compromise is beyond N
NE. Including myself.
This is the foundation for your thinking and others who refuse to accept the direction of bju/bj3. It is worship of man over that of God. It blinds men from seeing the truth. To defend an institution and say what you have is purely BLIND ALLEGIANCE to the flesh, not God.
Men like you once defended Princeton, Harvard, Yale and said, "It will never happen!"
Dr. Jones Jr. said it would happen to BJU! We often heard him warn us in Ministerial Class, (YOU were never there as a student and have no idea, again, what I am speaking about Greg), that "When the University starts to go DO NOT SEND YOUR YOUNG PEOPLE HERE!" BJU is without any question moderating its stand and makes no bones about it.
Frankly Greg, you are in the wrong discussion. You attempt to speak to a topic for which you do not know. I am sure Dr. Ashbrook brought an excellent message on Separation this past week at the ACCC meeting! He fully knows the compromise that has been taking place at BJU and its continued diversion into mainstream Christianity.
"the likelihood of BJ3, Stephen, or anyone else in the BJ administration being swayed by what you have posted (or even reading it, for that matter) on this board is truly remote.
WOW! So, is this a new form of sanctification? You are thinking of men, more highly than you ought to think Greg. Way too high. Compromise is beyond N
NE. Including myself.This is the foundation for your thinking and others who refuse to accept the direction of bju/bj3. It is worship of man over that of God. It blinds men from seeing the truth. To defend an institution and say what you have is purely BLIND ALLEGIANCE to the flesh, not God.
Men like you once defended Princeton, Harvard, Yale and said, "It will never happen!"
Dr. Jones Jr. said it would happen to BJU! We often heard him warn us in Ministerial Class, (YOU were never there as a student and have no idea, again, what I am speaking about Greg), that "When the University starts to go DO NOT SEND YOUR YOUNG PEOPLE HERE!" BJU is without any question moderating its stand and makes no bones about it.
Frankly Greg, you are in the wrong discussion. You attempt to speak to a topic for which you do not know. I am sure Dr. Ashbrook brought an excellent message on Separation this past week at the ACCC meeting! He fully knows the compromise that has been taking place at BJU and its continued diversion into mainstream Christianity.
Greg Linscott
<img src =/7963.jpg>
Last post for me on this topic.
foxrev, I don't assume your motives. I understand your concerns. I am a child of Fundamentalism, and have been directly exposed to many strains of it in my lifetime. My father was in the Navy, so we moved a lot, so I saw mostly the grassroots of our movement. I traveled with my family to hear Jack Hyles preach. I read my dad's copies of the Sword of the Lord, The Biblical Evangelist, Baptist Bible Tribune, Fundamentalist Journal, and even the Bible Believer's Bulletin. I experienced the Christian School movement firsthand. I've seen pastors fall. I've seen churches drift. I've seen my friends grow cold to the things of God. I've seen men I respected blast each other over petty things.
By God's infinite grace (and a lot of chastening), I'm still here.
Sadly, many I grew up with, both friends and family, are not.
I'm sure, in your mind, you feel you are standing for what is right. You're a "voice crying in the wilderness," so to speak.
The problem is, you are speaking to the wrong audience. This is not a closed, BJU alumni-only forum. This is public. This is being read by impressionable people. This conversation, to many who will read it, will be used to illustrate how petty and insignificant everyday Fundamentalists in the trenches have become.
I implore you, friend: don't make this about me and you, or you and Pastor Larry, or Paul33, or whoever. Take it up with your friends, contacts, and BJ3. If he won't listen- move on. To continue this in this format brings reproach to the name of Christ and disgrace to the movement you claim to be a part of.
I may be young, but speaking the truth in love is not arrogant. The Word of God tells me in 1 Corinthinas 2:14-16...
foxrev, I don't assume your motives. I understand your concerns. I am a child of Fundamentalism, and have been directly exposed to many strains of it in my lifetime. My father was in the Navy, so we moved a lot, so I saw mostly the grassroots of our movement. I traveled with my family to hear Jack Hyles preach. I read my dad's copies of the Sword of the Lord, The Biblical Evangelist, Baptist Bible Tribune, Fundamentalist Journal, and even the Bible Believer's Bulletin. I experienced the Christian School movement firsthand. I've seen pastors fall. I've seen churches drift. I've seen my friends grow cold to the things of God. I've seen men I respected blast each other over petty things.
By God's infinite grace (and a lot of chastening), I'm still here.
Sadly, many I grew up with, both friends and family, are not.
I'm sure, in your mind, you feel you are standing for what is right. You're a "voice crying in the wilderness," so to speak.
The problem is, you are speaking to the wrong audience. This is not a closed, BJU alumni-only forum. This is public. This is being read by impressionable people. This conversation, to many who will read it, will be used to illustrate how petty and insignificant everyday Fundamentalists in the trenches have become.
I implore you, friend: don't make this about me and you, or you and Pastor Larry, or Paul33, or whoever. Take it up with your friends, contacts, and BJ3. If he won't listen- move on. To continue this in this format brings reproach to the name of Christ and disgrace to the movement you claim to be a part of.
I may be young, but speaking the truth in love is not arrogant. The Word of God tells me in 1 Corinthinas 2:14-16...
I am doing my best to be spiritual, as I see it from the Word of God. Consider the harm that your words and the spirit in which you have presented them here may have on those who read them, intentional or not. It's not a matter of motive. We don't question New Evagelicalism's motives... we do question their methods. Please, foxrev- please don't let yourself be a stumblingblock for a weaker brother. You can even classify me there if it makes you feel better! But, I hope you can take this as one (admittedly) young, concerned brother to another.
As you know, Foxrev and I don't agree on the "benefits" of BJU moving toward the mainstream. He sees it as a negative, I welcome it.
What's not debatable is that BJU is moving towards the mainstream (Inviting Gregory, allowing son BJIV to go to Notre Dame with BJIII's blessing).
Foxrev's point, if I understand him correctly, is that BJU and BJIII should be challenged publicly, the same way BJU would challenge others that they perceive to be compromising.
The funny thing about BJU and fundamentalists in general is that they are always right. Their perceptions become the basis for challenging or not challenging perceived compromise.
Having been around this type of attitude, I don't want anything to do with it. This is why hundreds of graduates of BJU, NBBC, MBBC, PBBC, etc. have abandoned fundamentalism.
Some of you dear brothers in the Lord will/would have nothing to do with me if you met me face to face. You would refuse fellowship, even though we believe in the same Gospel!
You wouldn't like my taste in music, my hair length, my wife wearing pants, my fellowship with "new evangelicals," my choice of graduate schools, and on and on it goes.
But if I point out a "fault" that I see in fundamentalism, you would reject my concern and laugh me out of the room.
This is the deadly hubris of fundamentalism and what I think Foxrev is getting at.
What's not debatable is that BJU is moving towards the mainstream (Inviting Gregory, allowing son BJIV to go to Notre Dame with BJIII's blessing).
Foxrev's point, if I understand him correctly, is that BJU and BJIII should be challenged publicly, the same way BJU would challenge others that they perceive to be compromising.
The funny thing about BJU and fundamentalists in general is that they are always right. Their perceptions become the basis for challenging or not challenging perceived compromise.
Having been around this type of attitude, I don't want anything to do with it. This is why hundreds of graduates of BJU, NBBC, MBBC, PBBC, etc. have abandoned fundamentalism.
Some of you dear brothers in the Lord will/would have nothing to do with me if you met me face to face. You would refuse fellowship, even though we believe in the same Gospel!
You wouldn't like my taste in music, my hair length, my wife wearing pants, my fellowship with "new evangelicals," my choice of graduate schools, and on and on it goes.
But if I point out a "fault" that I see in fundamentalism, you would reject my concern and laugh me out of the room.
This is the deadly hubris of fundamentalism and what I think Foxrev is getting at.
I guess I've never understood the problem with this. Would people have had the same problem if BJIV had gone to Georgetown? He could have gone to a totally secular school and worked on his doctorate in History under a Catholic professor and no one would have said a thing. But he goes to Notre Dame, sits under a evangelical protestant professor (George Marsden, if I have my facts straight), and people go crazy? Where should he have gone?
Andy
That's the point! And the hypocrisy.
Because I went to evangelical schools, I'm rejected in fundamentalist circles. If I had gone to purely secular schools, that would have been ok.
And that IS the position of schools like BJU and NBBC.
That's why BJIII said Notre Dame is not a "catholic" university!
Because I went to evangelical schools, I'm rejected in fundamentalist circles. If I had gone to purely secular schools, that would have been ok.
And that IS the position of schools like BJU and NBBC.
That's why BJIII said Notre Dame is not a "catholic" university!
Paul 33 says:
"This is the deadly hubris of fundamentalism and what I think Foxrev is getting at."
You have hit the bullseye!
YES PAUL!!! And to boot, you made the bells ring! Exactly Paul, exactly. Hypocrisy. This is one of the many other problems at BJU.
See, for years, BJU has ardently, adamantly to the death opposed, despised Catholicism. NEVER would they ever associate with anything Catholic! Even when JFK was shot, the flags on campus were never lowered! And BJ JR preached on "Judgement" in chapel regardind JFK's shooting death!
Indeed they blast this guy and the other, yet, bobby iv goes to Notre Dame and all at once, Oh, Notre Dame isn't a Catholic School, oh no, no, no, no, no. WHY isn't it???? Because Bj3 says so! Oh, "'BOB THIRD' says it isn't a Catholic school. Well then, it must be so, he said it and, after all, HE would NEVER compromise, oh no, not at all." Of course bj3 isn't a pope! But he sure has the "powers" of one and he sure is followed like one! If it looks like a skunk and smells like a skunk . . . .
If Jerry Falwell's son had gone to Notre Dame, Falwell would have been burned in effigy at the stake in a remake of "Flame in the Wind!"
"This is the deadly hubris of fundamentalism and what I think Foxrev is getting at."
You have hit the bullseye!
See, for years, BJU has ardently, adamantly to the death opposed, despised Catholicism. NEVER would they ever associate with anything Catholic! Even when JFK was shot, the flags on campus were never lowered! And BJ JR preached on "Judgement" in chapel regardind JFK's shooting death!
Indeed they blast this guy and the other, yet, bobby iv goes to Notre Dame and all at once, Oh, Notre Dame isn't a Catholic School, oh no, no, no, no, no. WHY isn't it???? Because Bj3 says so! Oh, "'BOB THIRD' says it isn't a Catholic school. Well then, it must be so, he said it and, after all, HE would NEVER compromise, oh no, not at all." Of course bj3 isn't a pope! But he sure has the "powers" of one and he sure is followed like one! If it looks like a skunk and smells like a skunk . . . .
If Jerry Falwell's son had gone to Notre Dame, Falwell would have been burned in effigy at the stake in a remake of "Flame in the Wind!"
He did, I believe ... prior to going to Notre Dame. He has a master's degree in journalism from Georgetown, I think.
Notre Dame is catholic in much the same way that Harvard is Christian. Both started as religious schools, and have clearly abandoned that as their primary emphasis. Both have a divinity school, but neither pretends to be religious. As I understand it, BJIV went to Notre Dame to study church history under the mentorship of the leading scholar on church history in America (George Marsden).
While it may have been unwise to make that choice, it was completely overblown, much along the same lines as some idiots who tried to make a big deal about BJU having catholic art in the art gallery.
BJU has rightly stood against CAtholicism, though at times with a too abrasive spirit. It is unfortunate that many so-called evangelicals have not taken a firm stand against the apostasy and soul-damning doctrine of Catholicism. But to try to make hay out of someone going to what has become a secular school to study under a leading professor is simply ridiculous.
What? What? What?
B
Benfranklin403
Guest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The "prostitute" look is from the BJU Review of Spring/Summer 2003. The center fold pictured a young girl in skin tight jeans at the roller rink.<<<<<<
Foxrev, what sort of jeans would you approve of? Would you approve of "loose jeans"? Seems to me that this is just a matter of taste and I am NOT convinced that you should be the one who decides what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. Maybe I am getting old, but I am not especially excited by a good looking girl in tight jeans and I don't consider them to be prostitutes either. You should lighten up and let people live their lives without you dictating what they should wear.
Foxrev, what sort of jeans would you approve of? Would you approve of "loose jeans"? Seems to me that this is just a matter of taste and I am NOT convinced that you should be the one who decides what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. Maybe I am getting old, but I am not especially excited by a good looking girl in tight jeans and I don't consider them to be prostitutes either. You should lighten up and let people live their lives without you dictating what they should wear.
paidagogos
Active Member
History, huh? Dr. Bob, Jr. said that Bobby was going to Notre Dame because of their quality journalism program. He supposedly told Bobby that he should get the best journalistic education possible because this could be more influential than his preaching.
paidagogos
Active Member
Yeah, so where do you draw the line yourself? Is there such a thing as modesty? If so, where is the dividing line between modesty and immodesty? Are we to tolerate anything and everything? I know that people, whomever they may be, that try to draw the line at some point, whatever it may be, are criticized and ridiculed vehemently by the more tolerant sort. It will always be amazing to me how tolerant people can be so intolerant of those who disagree with them.
Yes, church history under George Marsden at Notre Dame. His journalism degree is from Georgetown, I believe.
paidagogos
Active Member
No.
I AM saying that, in this light, one may conclude that 1.) BJIII chooses to fellowship with men who share his fundamental, sepratist convictions, and 2.) BJIII must see a reason to fellowship with Dr. Gregory because A.) He believes Dr. Gregory shares his convictions or B.) He believes Dr. Gregory is close enough (perhaps even to be persuaded to make the transition).
Would you not consider it a good thing if, by some working of the Spirit, the IFCA did ultimately take the right stand? If Dr. Gregory is a second-generation man, does he not have the ability to make decisions independent of the past? Do we not have the obligation to judge him by his choices and actions apart from the actions of his predecessors?
Say what you will, but this Dr. Gregory, from what I've seen and heard (granted, via the interent since this post originated), is no Billy Graham. Say what you will about the IFCA (and I'm not defending it here), but it hasn't taken radical plunges such as joining the NAE or NCC.
I'm just not prepared to make BJIII the sacrificial lamb over this. Let it play out... </font>[/QUOTE]Greg,
I think you are missing the point here. It is not a matter of one agreeing or disagreeing with BJU's views on what constitutes Biblical separation. The question is whether BJU is consistent in the application of these views to their own actions as they have applied to others. The point is that BJU in the 70's and 80's would have castigated anyone for doing what they are now doing. Yet, they say that have not changed. What do you think?
paidagogos
Active Member
Yes, church history under George Marsden at Notre Dame. His journalism degree is from Georgetown, I believe. </font>[/QUOTE]Could be--my memory sometimes fails--getting old and have holes in my brain--HBP, diabetes, chloresterol, etc. However, I seem to remember (this may be a missed synaptic connection too) them cussing (figuratively, of course) Geo. Marsden for not understanding real Fundamentalism. Why would Bobby, IV want to study under him?
Of course, Bobby, IV is a Neo-evangelical in every sense of the word. Olasky, his publisher at World, said, "I've got a smart kid here who doesn't believe everything they [BJU] do but he doesn't want to hurt his mom and dad." World is as "neo" as "Christianity Today" was in the 60-70's.