The Ohio Bible Fellowship Visitor

On October 31, 1517, a young German monk named Martin Luther nailed ninety-five theses (public statements for debate) on the Catholic church door in Wittenberg, Germany.

His action, prompted by biblical conviction, ignited the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century. The Reformation was a biblically-driven movement among God’s people. Realizing the Church of Rome had forsaken the essential truths of Christianity, the Reformers separated from this corrupt church and returned to the Bible alone as their sole authority for doctrine. This return to the Bible led to the glorious rediscovery of justification: sinners can gain a righteous standing before God by faith alone in Christ alone.

Yet 490 years later, many professing Christians—even many Lutherans—believe that Martin Luther’s insistence on doctrinal purity over visible unity was a significant mistake. But was it?

Continue reading ‘Was the Protestant Reformation a Mistake?’

During recess in elementary school a favorite activity of ours was a good, vigorous game of soccer. What made it vigorous, of course, was the lack of referees! This also made for an interesting and regularly occurring phenomenon: players that would, during the course of the game, defect to the other side! This definitely made the game more interesting, as one team would soon outnumber the other.The defection of loved ones, friends, and church members to Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Lutheranism has seemed to increase in recent years. The most recent, high-profile defection from evangelical ranks to Catholicism is Francis Beckwith, former president of the Evangelical Theological Society, a professional society of Bible scholars, teachers, and pastors. Additionally, much of evangelicalism has come to view adherents of these religious “traditions” as brothers and sisters in Christ.

What motivates professing believers to leave for these religious groups? Why is this a growing trend? Should those who now identify with Catholic, Orthodox, or possibly even Lutheran churches still be viewed as Christians? Is there anything fundamental churches can do about it?

Continue reading ‘Forsaking the Faith’

Since the beginning of Christianity, believers have been warned of enemies from both outside and inside the church (Acts 20:29–30). Fundamental churches have long been aware of attacks in the form of apostate teaching and the social gospel. As well, fundamentalism has responded to brethren who have refused to separate from unbelieving and disobedient believers and ministries.

In recent years, new dangers to Christ’s Bride have arisen, oftentimes noticed but sometimes even promoted by men and ministries who should know better. Amazingly some of these threats originate from the most unlikely of sources—the Christian home!

Continue reading ‘Dangers from the Home?’

Most fundamentalists have promoted and defended “the Book, the Blood, and the Blessed Hope.” Why is this? If someone does not hold to a certain end-time system does that disqualify him from being a genuine fundamentalist? Does one’s belief about the end times really matter?

Continue reading ‘Fundamentalism and the Pre-Tribulational Rapture of the Church’

Continued from the Previous Issue

The New Testament Preacher is to Maintain a Blameless Character, which includes the Primary Qualification of Freedom from Covetousness (1 Tim 6:6–11; 1 Pet 5:1–3; 2 Pet 2:2–3, 14–17; Jude 11, 16).
One of the most important qualifications for the preacher of the gospel is a blameless testimony concerning money. American churches should realize that receiving foreign support, especially in the Two-Thirds World, often results in a covetous desire for money and power. These wrong desires lead to number of problems in the national church:

Continue reading ‘Stewardship In Foreign Missions, part 2′

Should Foreigners Support National Leaders?
Much of contemporary evangelicalism embraces the practice of supporting national pastors and evangelists on the foreign mission field. One mission director claims, “More than 140 organizations are now built on the premise of gathering and sending money, not people . . . One of the largest money-gathering agencies reports that it now supports 3,300 full-time workers in over 50 countries.” A popular Christian magazine advertises for donors to help support national pastors on foreign fields, reporting that “thousands of native missionaries in poorer countries take the gospel to un-reached people groups in remote areas that are extremely difficult for American missionaries to go . . . Your church can send 10 missionaries for $500 a month. That’s a mission budget that will amaze your missions committee and it’s good stewardship too.”

Are these examples really a good stewardship of missions money? There is increasing momentum in our fundamental churches towards financial partnerships with national pastors and evangelists. Fundamentalists need to think through this issue biblically, especially with regard to the doctrine of the local church. Care must be taken to avoid unbiblical pragmatism.

Continue reading ‘Stewardship In Foreign Missions, part 1′

For over a century Christians have wrangled over the issue of ecclesiastical separation, debating whether it is biblical, helpful, or even needed. We frequently hear “Why can’t we just get along? After all, we’re all really on the same team, right?” Questions like these have a ring of spirituality and can influence pastors, Christians, churches, and Christian organizations. Is ecclesiastical separation biblical? If so, why do so many reject it?

Continue reading ‘Ecclesiastical Separation’

A charge often leveled at separatists is that they are divisive. They split groups, leave churches, separate from organizations, and go off and form their own “splinter groups.” Aren’t Christians supposed to love one another? Shouldn’t they all be united? Didn’t Jesus pray that all those who believed in him would be as one?

Continue reading ‘Are Separatists Divisive?’

We typically think of the Pharisees as legalists. They are criticized for requiring strict adherence to fine details of obscure laws. They are dismissed as the “prudes” of their day. In fact, the term “Pharisee” has become a favorite smear people use to criticize anyone with a standard stricter than their own. However, a look at the biblical evidence indicates that describing the Pharisees as legalists is only half right.

There is no question that the Pharisees were legalists in that they promoted a works-based religion. However, though they were strict about some laws (particularly those of their own invention), they repeatedly “laid aside” and “rejected” the commands of God (Mark 7:8–9).

They were guilty of spiritual pride and ambition (Matt 23:5–7), thus stealing God’s glory while also neglecting the first and great commandment (Matt 22:37–38). They permitted their hearers to neglect their duties to parents (Mark 7:10–11), thus circumventing the fifth commandment. They arranged the murder of Christ (Matt 21:46; 26:3), thus breaking the sixth commandment. They were guilty of thievery (Matt 23:14, 25), thus circumventing the eighth commandment. They permitted their hearers to break their promises (Matt 23:16–22) and even sought false witnesses against Christ (Matt 26:59), thus circumventing and breaking the ninth commandment. They were guilty of lust, self-indulgence and impurity (Matt 23:25, 27), thus breaking the tenth commandment (and perhaps the seventh).

The Pharisees supplemented their legalism with a sort of license that allowed themselves and their hearers to break God’s law with impunity. They were ostensibly zealous for some aspects of the law, but they neatly explained away “the weightier matters of the law,” such as justice, mercy and faith (Matt 23:23). They were condemned by Christ not only for straining out moral gnats, but for swallowing immoral camels (Matt 23:24). In that sense, they may accurately be described as the spiritual forebears of today’s libertines who gain hearers by inventing loopholes for divine imperatives. But more importantly, they may accurately be described as the spiritual forebears of those who maximize some laws while excusing themselves from others, and we all do that! We would do well to study the Pharisees’ errors with a bit more precision—and a bit more introspection.

March 2007

Contextualizing the gospel is the only way the church can impact our culture. If we want our message to gain a hearing, we must contextualize it—we must communicate it in a way that our hearers can relate to and understand. For example, since postmodernists reject the concepts of authority and truth that previous generations assumed, our approach cannot remain the same. The world has changed, and if we refuse to change with it, the gospel will get left behind.

Or so we are told by the prophets of contextualization.

Continue reading ‘Shall We Contextualize the Gospel?’