Biblical Separation Defended - Far Eastern Bible College

ConclusionsThus it has been seen in this section that the fact that Christ duringHis ministry denounced the Pharisaical hypocrites continually, cannotbiblically, properly, or logically be used as the basis for an argumentwhich excuses any evangelist for not speaking against the unbelief ofliberalism and for not warning the little ones who come forward becauseof his preaching of the Gospel against the modernistic wolves whowould harm their souls. This has been observed to be true primarilybecause it has been seen that the Christ who denounced the hypocritesduring His earthly ministry, also joins the Holy Spirit, the ultimateauthor of all of Scriptures, in the unity of the Trinity, in condemningunbelieving religious teachers who are false prophets. Thiscondemnation of unbelief, which has been shown to be the need of thehour, has been seen to be not contrary to the condemnation of hypocrisyin Christ’s earthly sojourn, but in accord with it. Thus the seventh NewEvangelical argument advocates a false emphasis at the expense of thatwhich is truly needed in this hour, and therefore, it must be rejected.Endnotes1Ibid., 35.2Ibid.3Ibid.4Those who say that the fundamentalists of today are similar to thePharisees because they both judge, err by not seeing the vast chasm betweenthe sinful judging of the Pharisees on the basis of their own self-righteousnessand the righteous judging by fundamentalists against liberals and Jehoshaphatswho aid the liberals (2 Chron. 19:2) on the basis of biblical commands to rejectheretics (Titus 3:10) and to have no fellowship with the unbelieving deniers ofGod (2 Cor. 6:14-7:1).5Robert Young, Analytical Concordance of the Bible (21st American ed.,revised; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Co., n.d.), 506.71