Biblical Separation Defended - Far Eastern Bible College

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Writer’s CritiqueThen said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Sonof man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing ofmyself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone;for I do always those things that please him (John 8:28,29).The above words of Jesus indicate that His ultimate sponsor, the onewho brought Him to the earth and the one whom He represented, wasthe Father. This should be true for every preacher of the Good Tidings.As for earthly sponsors, who would bring Christ into their region, beresponsible for Him and His message, and stand with Him before thepublic in a common bond of fellowship, mutual approval, and unity,there do not appear to be any who did precisely this. Thus, Dr. Ferm’sassertion that, “Sponsorship caused little or no concern on the part ofJesus . . .,” seems to have some credibility in the limited sense that itdoes not appear that anyone or any group sponsored Jesus in the sameway that a modern evangelist is sponsored.However, before it can be concluded that Christ was not concernedwith sponsorship, it must be determined whether or not He wasconcerned with some or all of the elements of which the modernsponsorship relation is composed. Thus with regard to the elementsinvolved it is asked, “Was Christ unconcerned over the parties withwhom He cooperated, fellowshipped, and gave approval?” “Was Heunconcerned over the parties to whom He entrusted the care of part ofHis flock?” “Did He or would He ever make a tacit agreement not torebuke false teachers, which is the agreement made by a conservativewho accepts the invitation to hold meetings under liberal auspices?” Theanswers to all of these questions have already been studied in the nineprevious propositions which inquired into these very matters. Theyuniformly were seen to be negative! He was not unconcerned!The Savior’s continual open struggle against the religious leaders ofHis time with their pernicious rejection of Him and His redemption,which was noted earlier in Arguments III and IV, gives unanswerableevidence that Christ did not cooperate with just anyone! His continualpublic denunciations of the false prophets give ample evidence thatChrist abhorred their errors of doctrine and ethics so thoroughly that it86
was impossible for anyone to think for a moment that He wascooperating with the Pharisees, Sadducees, rabbinical schools, orHerodians. Christ’s complete isolation of His work and message fromthe errorists of His day is well brought out in Dr. Van Til’s words,. . . However much they [the false leaders of Christ’s time]disagreed among themselves on other matters they agreed on theidea of salvation by works or character. And they ruled in the oneorganization on earth raised up for the dissemination of the ideaof salvation by grace. So, as they did not invite Jesus tocooperate in preaching their gospel with them so Jesus did notinvite them to preach his gospel with him. Jesus made provisionfor their removal from their position of leadership among thepeople. The establishment of his kingdom was predicated on thedestruction of theirs. Their house would be left desolate to them.“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for yecompass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he ismade, ye make him twofold more the child of hell thanyourselves” (Matt. 23:15). 3Thus the Savior’s concern with the elements of sponsorship prove Hisconcern with the basic relationship itself.The basic error in the reasoning of Dr. Ferm lies in his affirmationthat the Lord does not care about a relationship which exists today solelyon the grounds that this same exact relationship is not preciselydiscernible in the New Testament. The New Testament pictures themissionary-evangelist constantly invading new territory with the truthby his own impetus, or with the added impetus of the church which senthim (Acts 13:3), rather than his being invited by parties alreadyresident—as is the case in the present day when a group invites anevangelist to come into their region under, their auspices; However,when this sponsorship relationship is analyzed, it is observed that theNew Testament contains strong views on the subject of what flag a manof God may trave1 under and gives the example of Christ who neverwas seen under a soiled banner.The following sentence of Dr. Ferm is also in need of comment.87
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 and 64: The impossibility and the unnecessa
Page 65 and 66: Ferm seems to have applied his alle
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: ARGUMENT X“The Lord Was Never Con
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?