Biblical Separation Defended - Far Eastern Bible College

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ARGUMENT VII“The Lord Did Not Make an Issueout of Theological Error”The Argument Advanced by Dr. FermThe seventh anti-separatist proposition states that the Lord’s stressnegatively was against hypocrisy and bigotry and not against theologicalerror, and therefore, the evangelist’s negative stress ought also to beagainst hypocrisy and bigotry, and not against doctrinal unbelief. In linewith this Dr. Ferm asserts the following:The numerous occasions when the ministry of our Lordbrought him in contact with persons of unorthodox belief orimproper morals all reveal his supreme passion. . . . On nooccasion did he inquire concerning the theology or even theconduct of those to whom he went to minister. . . . one who readsthe record of the New Testament will discover that Jesus attackedhypocrisy and bigotry more than any other evil. 1An Examination of Dr. Ferm’s ConclusionsAs the conclusions of the author of Cooperative Evangelism areevaluated they must be considered in the light of his purpose ofjustifying an inclusive policy of conducting evangelistic crusades andChristian work in general. In this case Dr. Ferm has concluded thatChrist concerned Himself negatively with hypocrisy and not orthodoxyof doctrine, and therefore orthodoxy of doctrine should not be a matterof great concern for the conservative evangelist of today. However, withhis words, “On no occasion did he [the Lord] inquire concerning thetheology or even the conduct of those to whom he went to minister,” Dr.62
Ferm seems to have applied his alleged findings concerning Christ’sindifference to the orthodoxy of those “to whom” he went to minister, tothose “with whom” the conservative cooperative evangelist ministers. 2If this is denied then he would be arguing for an evangelist’s not havingto inquire as to the orthodoxy of those in the pews to whom the gospelmessage is being addressed; and he could not be arguing for this, for noone, be he a separatist or not, has ever maintained that one who does notyet believe must adhere to the fundamentals in order to be allowed to sitin the pews and be preached to as an unconverted sinner. Thus Dr. Fermseems to have concluded on the basis of Christ’s alleged conduct towardthe unconverted, that the evangelist need not ascertain the orthodoxy orheterodoxy of the ones “with whom” he cooperates, and therefore,cooperating with modernists is legal.It is evident that Dr. Ferm has also concluded that the Christianpreacher of today must not stress negatively any sin more than the Lordstressed that same sin, regardless of how the contemporary situationmight differ from that of the Lord’s day. This is the reasoning whichundergirds his concept that since our Lord did not stress the evil ofheterodoxy (which point has assuredly not been established by proof),the evangelist of today would be wrong to stress it.The Writer’s Critique“On no occasion did he [the Lord] inquire concerning the theologyor even the conduct of those to whom he went to minister,” is aremarkable statement for Dr. Ferm or anyone to utter.In John 4 Jesus is found ministering to the Samaritan woman, andHe here both inquires into her conduct and points out error in hertheology. His words to her, “Go, call thy husband, and come hither”(John 4:16), are the beginning of Christ’s inquiry into her immoralconduct of life, and they result in the Lord’s exposing her past sin andher present living with one who is not her husband, thus establishingwithin her conscience her sinfulness and need of forgiveness (John 4:16-18). After she displays her theological ignorance Christ exposes hererror clearly by saying, “Ye worship ye know not what: we know whatwe worship: for salvation is of the Jews” (John 4:22). This mirrors the63
Page 3 and 4:
BIBLICAL SEPARATIONDEFENDEDA Biblic
Page 5 and 6:
A Word from the FEBC PressThe doctr
Page 7 and 8:
GROUP THREEARGUMENTS ADVOCATING THA
Page 9 and 10:
makes in his widely circulated book
Page 11 and 12:
four of these areas are biblically
Page 13 and 14: then both good and evil are produce
Page 15 and 16: ARGUMENT I“Christ Instructed the
Page 17 and 18: that there was a profiteer in the t
Page 19 and 20: Matthew 10:11, the verse just quote
Page 21 and 22: liberals, and therefore, Dr. Ferm h
Page 23 and 24: ARGUMENT II“The Lord Accepted the
Page 25 and 26: not to forbid the man who had been
Page 27 and 28: acknowledge Him as an extremely goo
Page 29 and 30: particular sin! There are too many
Page 31 and 32: ARGUMENT III“The Lord Attended th
Page 33 and 34: c. Tenor : Christ at twelve discuss
Page 35 and 36: whether is greater, the gold, or th
Page 37 and 38: Dr. Ferm’s satirical remark, “H
Page 39 and 40: ARGUMENT IV“The Lord Attended the
Page 41 and 42: TABLE 2OUR LORD’S SYNAGOGUE VISIT
Page 43 and 44: Thus it is observed that Christ hab
Page 45 and 46: in turn rejected by the Church. Thu
Page 47 and 48: errorists was one of righteous indi
Page 49 and 50: An Examination of Dr. Ferm’s Conc
Page 51 and 52: there are grave differences in the
Page 53 and 54: GROUP THREEARGUMENTS ADVOCATING THA
Page 55 and 56: state positively upon what verse or
Page 57 and 58: himself a prophet, or a brother. Ti
Page 59 and 60: eing saved will not be in the area
Page 61 and 62: impossible to set up a local commit
Page 63: The impossibility and the unnecessa
Page 67 and 68: that the Lord in His humanity, that
Page 69 and 70: from the Holy Spirit working in the
Page 71 and 72: to despise others, and to hate Chri
Page 73 and 74: ConclusionsThus it has been seen in
Page 75 and 76: advocates are not delineated by a c
Page 77 and 78: of aid towards those who are hereti
Page 79 and 80: criterion of action, and in this ca
Page 81 and 82: ARGUMENT IX“The Lord’s Method W
Page 83 and 84: case readily be substantiated by a
Page 85 and 86: Another point which needs to be not
Page 87 and 88: ARGUMENT X“The Lord Was Never Con
Page 89 and 90: was impossible for anyone to think
Page 91 and 92: fundamentalists’ adherents; and (
Page 93 and 94: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONDr. Ferm’s
Page 95 and 96: and its alleged or implied applicat
Page 97 and 98: denunciation by Christ, and that th
show all

Biblical Separation Defended - Far Eastern Bible College

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?