New Youth Conference for fundamentalist!

[Pastor Larry]

Had they won, they would not have needed to separate. The organizations would have been pure. But they didn't win. And so far, the SBC conservatives have not won. They have succeeded in regaining some of the doctrinal losses. They have not been faithful in matters of separation. They still continue to tolerate error, false teaching, and disobedience. They are, by definition, not fundamentalists.

 

[Daniel David]

By your definition, not the historic one.

Secondary separation isn't the definition of fundamentalist Larry.

 

[ForHisGlory15]

Originally posted by Daniel David:
By your definition, not the historic one.

Secondary separation isn't the definition of fundamentalist Larry.

This is not PL's definition. Separation has always been a benchmark of fundamentalism, with the biblical mandate to stand strong against apostasy and to separate from the disobedient brother who does not do the same. The SBC continues to tolerate apostasy.

 

[Daniel David]

Please give me an example of 'tolerating' apostasy.

Btw, the SBC has separated from many organizations. That they practice separation isn't an issue. Larry wants it to be his kind of separation.

 

[Sponge Bob]

Your irrelevant "Leadership Conference" analogy demonstrates you responded to my post without giving any viable thought to what you had read.

O.K., since YOU say it's stupid, then YOU must be right. I appreciate the intelligence of your rebuttal.

I use the word "many" to decribe the conferences I have been to since my first excellent one was over 25 years ago at the Wilds with Frank Hamrick and Major Ron Brooks as the keynote speakers, who focused on the attributes of God and our need as youth leaders to know and love Him ourselves. Since then I have been to several other youth conferences at the Wilds that had a God-focus, with attention given to knowing and loving Him. Throughout the years, I have attended a myriad of church-sponsored conferences and several at smaller fundamental camps, some very poor and some excellent. I completely agree we need improvement in sharpening our focus, but there is a difference between promoting the improvement of a focus and suggesting the focus has never existed.

O.K. so you say you've been to FIT conference. I personally disagree with you on this one. I'm NOT saying it is a bad conference, but to say that the specific philosophy of that conference is how to train youth pastors to have a "God-focused" philosophy is a farse. I quote from their brochure:

This conference offers instruction on programs, recruitment, and training of youth staff, philosophy, counseling, and youth evangelism. It features more than 40 practical session in all!

I have been many times and out of 10 workshops, 9 of them are on "What the Youth Pastor's Wife Wished her Husband Knew." I too, have heard some great sessions at FIT, but the single purpose of FIT is different than what ProTeens is doing.

I especially like the fact that you gave props to Dr. Hamrick being one of the two speakers that blessed your heart.

I also like how you failed to respond to me more specifically relaying that this will be a conference with tracks. This alone makes this conference different from the other youth conferences.

You listed FIT, now list another one. Yeah, I know, there are mulitiplied hundreds of small broo-ha-ha's where everything is done right.

The point I'm attempting to make is that it would be sad, and prideful, for anyone involved in this conference to actually believe that they are spearheading the first youth conference that is God-focused with a singular goal of equipping leaders to give youth a passion for God.

You are stretching and bordering on castigating ProTeens. You sound like you have a chip on your shoulder towards ProTeens and it has nothing to do with their lineup of speakers.

 

[ForHisGlory15]

Sponge Bob, I truly hope you get to attend this conference. Your unjust sarcasm precludes any thoughtful discussion about the matter; but worse, it belies the very God-focused life that hopefully you desire to lead. I do not have a chip on my shoulder, and I happen to hold ProTeens in high regard.

 

[Pastor Larry]

By your definition, not the historic one.

Secondary separation isn't the definition of fundamentalist Larry.

I am not talking about secondary separation. I am talking about biblical separation from false teachers and disobedient brothers. For one example (among many), the SBC still tolerates a Billy Graham School of Evangelism. There may be some areas that we and the SBC could disagree on and overlook. This is not one of them. Graham has been the leading figure of the demise into disobedience by partnering with apostates. He is a prime example of hte kind of disobedient brothers that fundamentalists separate from. Yet the SBC has refused in this explicit case. And many many other examples could be cited. The truth is that they are not fundamentalists.

Part of your confusion perhaps stems from a lack of understanding of historic issues. In the early days, you were either Christian or liberal (to use Machen's title). The idea of cooperating with apostates was so foreign to followers of Christ that it wasn't an issue of discussion or action. As the years progressed, beginning in the 40s perhaps more than any other time, there was an increasing desire for acceptance and cooperation and that is where the new evangelicals left the evangelical or fundamentalist camp. And they are the ones who left. The fundamentalists did not change.

 

[Sponge Bob]

ForHisGlory15,

My sarcasm was directed towards your insult that I did not engage in thinking before I posted prior.

Beyond that, I asked you some questions and further clarified what I know to be some distinguishing aspects of this conference.

Let's move on. Can you go back and respond to my post beyond my sarcastic response to your insult?

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Lets indeed move on and leave the sarcasm and insults from all sides behind.

Roger
C4K
Moderator

 

[ForHisGlory15]

O.K. so you say you've been to FIT conference.

No, I have never had the opportunity to attend a FIT conference.

I especially like the fact that you gave props to Dr. Hamrick being one of the two speakers that blessed your heart.

I very much respect Dr. Hamrick's teaching and have been blessed by him on more occaisions than just this one.

I also like how you failed to respond to me more specifically relaying that this will be a conference with tracks. This alone makes this conference different from the other youth conferences.

I only responded to the difference that they are advertising, since that is the only difference with which I expressed concern.

You listed FIT, now list another one. Yeah, I know, there are mulitiplied hundreds of small broo-ha-ha's where everything is done right.

No, I've never been to multiplied hundreds of small broo-ha-ha's, and I have never been to one that has done everything right.

You are stretching and bordering on castigating ProTeens. You sound like you have a chip on your shoulder towards ProTeens and it has nothing to do with their lineup of speakers.

No, I appreciate ProTeens very much. Not only because of how the Lord used it in my life as a teen, but how God has and is using it in the life of my own kids. The questions I have about their direction and the concerns I have about their marketing do not pre-empt any of these things. I was merely expressing legitmate questions that I have as a fundamentalist, with no intention of castigation or condemnmation. I understand that a very ungracious and ungodly behavior within the ranks of fundamentalism has caused a spirit of reaction to be extended against much of what we say now. As sad as that makes me, the poor execution of fundamental doctrine and separation doesn't make fundamentalism an error. The people are in error, and indeed, a God-focus gives the cure. I hope you can understand, however, why I am concerned at even the slightest suggestion that this cure must be delivered from without. There are fundamentalists who are offering it within, and maybe they aren't as recognized or as articulate, but that's where I believe we need to put our efforts. Holland does not even proport to be a fundamentalist, and the influence he has and will have on young men, especially, is going to be significant. Am I thrilled for those young men to learn more about God and develop a passion for Him? You bet. But at what cost?...that is the concern that I have.

 

[Sponge Bob]

ForHisGlory,

I agree with much of your assessment of fundamentalism (our cirlces). It sounds like my disagreement would be in what defines a fundamentalist.

I'm not sure that a person has to be a self-defined fundamentalist to be one. Some I am close to have shed the title because they don't want the "baggage." My position is that self ascribed or other ascribed titles are irrelevent to a large degree. These guys who have shed the term are no less a fundamentalist than I am.

I see Rick Holland as just that. I don't have any knowledge of what he personally thinks of the term. But based on his theology and his separation from apostasy I would say he could easily cloak himself with the fundamentalist title.

Therefore, I don't think ProTeens is going outside the "ranks." I do think they are if you mean that our ranks cosist of just "our guys."

Let me simply say that Frank Hamrick has been faithfully serving for 50 years. He has been on the front lines of youth ministry for a LONG time. I have gotten to know him and he is a man of integrity with a supreme devotion to God.

Some possibilities:
1. Dr. Hamrick has abandoned fundamentalism
2. Less severe: His direction has shifted (ala B. Graham)
3. We have defined him without knowing his position all along.
4. He is "losing it" and is making unwise decisions.
5. He has thoughtfully considered this decision.

 

[aefting]

I see Rick Holland as just that. I don't have any knowledge of what he personally thinks of the term. But based on his theology and his separation from apostasy I would say he could easily cloak himself with the fundamentalist title.

Fundamentalism is not just separation from apostasy. It is also separation from worldliness and disobedient brethern. Rick Holland falls short in these last two categories, regardless of what he thinks of the term.

Andy

 

[HappyG]

Aefting,

So wouldn't the practical application of "separation from worldliness and disobedience" force you to separate from yourself?

Because if I knew everything about you and the criteria for who I fellowshiped with was someone who was not apostate or worldly or disobedient, I am pretty confident that I couldn't hang around you.

In fact, nobody could "fellowship" with anybody including themselves.

I'm just illustrating absurdity with absurdity.

Or is there a list somewhere of things the worldly things that are excused and not excused?

 

[Sponge Bob]

Andy, I don't even know respond to this. Rick Holland falls short in his separation from worldliness and disobedient bethren?

I am in total disagreement. There has been nothing offered in this entire thread to convince me or even sway me into believing what you've said.

Don't you wish that Rick could get onto this forum and serve up a defense on his own behalf? I wonder what he would say.

 

[HappyG]

Sponge Bob,

He would probably cancel his speaking engagement realizing he has better places to invest his time in order to impact the Kingdom.

But who am I to speak for Rick...

 

[Sponge Bob]

HappyG,

Good point. In fact, Rick is proving that he doesn't separate by not separating from us. It proves that he will associate with anybody!

 

[aefting]

So wouldn't the practical application of "separation from worldliness and disobedience" force you to separate from yourself?

Because if I knew everything about you and the criteria for who I fellowshiped with was someone who was not apostate or worldly or disobedient, I am pretty confident that I couldn't hang around you.

In fact, nobody could "fellowship" with anybody including themselves.

I'm just illustrating absurdity with absurdity.

Or is there a list somewhere of things the worldly things that are excused and not excused?

If I was stubbornly disobedient to Scripture or persistent in unrepentant worldliness, then you would have to separate from me. The issue is not, have I ever sinned or has Rick Holland ever sinned or have you ever sinned. This issue is unrepentant sin or persistent worldliness. Do we have to make these things so explicit every time we talk about them?

Andy

 

[aefting]

Andy, I don't even know respond to this. Rick Holland falls short in his separation from worldliness and disobedient bethren?

I am in total disagreement. There has been nothing offered in this entire thread to convince me or even sway me into believing what you've said.

Yes there has. Don't you remember getting upset at me for mentioning that GCC used rock music in their teen ministry? Don't you remember the issues Larry has brought up concerning JM?

I will give you that Rick Holland is a conservative evangelical but he is not a fundamentalist.

Andy

 

[Sponge Bob]

I don't wholesale separate from someone over their music. You can try all you want to define a right and wrong line in music, but it will not be biblically based. I'm NOT arguing that music is amoral. I'm simply saying I cannot define where the line is for music that is and music that is not worldly. Therefore, I don't separate over it.

The other arguments made by Larry about JMac's (even though ProTeens is having Rick) associations don't come close to convincing me.

 

[HappyG]

Sponge Bob,

Yes...the only thing I would change in your last post to me was when you used the word "us". I would swap it out with "them."