Welcome to Summit Theological Seminary
"Teaching God's Word to God's World"
2766 Airport Road, Peru, Indiana 46970, (765) 472-4111
Baker's Folly
George
L. Faull
There
was an article printed in the Christian
Standard entitled, "Was Murch
Right?" A forum on the subject was written by William R. Baker. His
thesis was "Why Can't We Be
Comfortable With Evangelicals?"
It showed a picture of James Deforest Murch and stated Murch would feel at home
with Billy Graham, Bill Hybels and James Dobson. He then named them: Allen
Dunbar, Gene Appel, Russ Blowers, David Roadcup, and Gary Weedmen as men
following in Murch's footsteps. Actually, they are sliding down the same
slippery slope into the Evangelical camp of unbelievers, compromisers and
perpetuators of false doctrine. In a future article I will prove these
allegations by quoting these three Evangelicals and their heresies. Now I am
not just speaking of their views on baptism and the Lord's supper, though that
is important. The Editor of the Christian Standard said in 3/27/03 of the
critics of the North American Christian Convention, "They bluster and
babble, and some of them write." He indites all who would criticize to
"swallow their pride and support the N.A.C.C. anyway." I guess if we
disagree with the writers of The
Christian Standard, we are proud and not suppose to write about what we
consider wrong. However, we not only write, we read! We think! We call
attention to those who make us wonder if they ever "think and read!"
Baker
says, "Every study of evangelism puts the Stone-Campbell Movement in the
Evangelical group photo." What does that prove? Every study of
denominationalism puts us as a denomination. Are we therefore a denomination?
Why not mention that many evangelical books and magazines also list us as a
cult. Are we therefore a cult?
Baker
says, "For a Church in the Restoration Movement to deny it is evangelical
is like a German immigrant family denying they are American." Since when
does being a German immigrant make one an American?
Baker
also says, "Affirming unity over Biblical essentials and diversity over
other issues is evangelicalism strength." No, it is its weakness because
there is no unity on what is essential! This shows Baker's attitude about
baptism, the Lord's supper, and Church polity. He sees them as "the
distinctives of our historical expression" instead of the essentials to
Christian unity.
If
we are evangelical, we should surely want to attend the National Association of
Evangelicals. Who would we find speaking as their heroes? The President: Ted Haggard, a graduate of Oral Roberts
and Pastor of New Life Church, [the largest Charismatic Church in Colorado],
who therefore believes in extra Biblical revelation. Also, there is the Church
Growth guru from Fuller Theological Seminary, C. Peter Wagner, who has probably done more harm to our doctrinal
stance and Church polity than anyone else. Again, Martin Marty, a renowned liberal, denies the bodily resurrection of
Jesus Christ, the virgin birth, and supports abortion and homo-sexuality. Chuck Colson, who along with Billy Graham and James Dobson led the Evangelicals into Catholic fellowship in Evangelical and Catholics Together.
They recognize the pope as a great evangelist, orthodox, and a brother. Colson
calls Mary the mother of God, and says Mother
Teresa was his personal model of holiness. She says that Jesus is not the
only way to Heaven. Colson also opposes capital punishment, and over 80% of his
staff are Catholic.
The
following year you can listen to Robert
Schuller of the "Glass Cathedral." He is an apostate of the worst
dye! No renowned living preacher is any more apostate than Schuller. In a
future issue we will document their heresy by their own writings.
Baker's
thesis was unscholarly, slanted, and an insult to Campbell and the early
Restorationists. Is he ignorant of the fact that Campbell was kicked out of the
Presbyterian Fellowship for his views on communion, and from the Baptists for
his view on baptism? Baker quotes Campbell out of context. I am confident
others will call attention to his abuse of Campbell's writings. I am thankful
for Robert F. Hall, Jr.'s attempt to
correct the error in the same issue of The
Christian Standard. It is ironic and sad that a Professor from Emmanuel
would have to stand for right, while
a professor from Cincinnati Bible Seminary would advocate lunacy. We should
insist we are neither Catholic, Protestant nor Evangelical. It is ludicrous to
think that these statements of Baker's are relevant. "Evangelicalism was
and is a unity movement compatible with the unity emphasis of the Restoration
Movement." Oh sure! Do our slogans, "Book,
chapter and verse for all we believe and practice." "Where the Bible
speaks, we speak, and where the Bible is silent, we are silent," and
"No book but the Bible, no creed but Christ, no name but the Divine,"
fit the plea of the Evangelicals? Such a question is ludicrous!
Baker says, "There is not, nor has there ever been an effort by Evangelicalism to quash the distinctives of various historical expression of Christianity, including those of the Stone Campbell Movement." This is pathetic! When is Mark Taylor, Bob Russell, David Roadcup, Allen Dunbar, Russ Blowers or William Baker speaking at the Evangelical Con-vention or Promise Keepers? A Max Lucado, who mocks his Church of Christ heritage and renounces baptism for the forgiveness of sins can speak at the Promise Keepers. Gene Apple may now that he is on staff at Hybels Denominational Church at Willow Creek. But I know of no other Restor-ationists being asked to do so. Before you buy into Baker's theory, I suggest that you read the Word of God's warnings about "marking those who do not hold to pure teachings of Christ. " Romans 16:17.