Christian Churches Are Opening The Door to Antichrist with Outcome Based Religion

"But relative to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to meet Him, we beg you brethren let no one deceive or beguile you in any way, for that day will not come except the apostasy comes first (unless the predicted great falling away of those who have professed to be Christians has come) and the man of lawlessness (sin) is revealed, who is the son of doom (of perdition)." [2 Thessalonians 2:1-3; Parallel Bible, KJV/Amplified Bible Commentary]

"when the Son of Man comes, will He find [persistence in] faith on the earth?" [Luke 18:8; Ibid.]

One of THE major signs that the End of the Age is truly approaching is when you see the great majority of Christian churches falling away from the Fundamentals of the Faith. A pastor or church leader that knowingly moves away from teaching the "full counsel" of God, and begins incorporating unbiblical and human elements in his services and his teaching, is literally -- and Biblically -- opening the door to Antichrist. How many well-meaning pastors have ever thought of this sober fact as they lead their churches into areas that are not Biblical?

For one pastor, this moving away from the Fundamentals of the Faith might be as simple as beginning to eliminate teachings on the inherent sinfulness of man, and allowing his sermons to be variations of the theme, "Jesus is Love", and the "You're all right; I'm all right" psychological syndrom. Or, this moving away might occur when the pastor allows unbiblical teaching into the church because such teaching has proven to be popular enough with people as to build church attendance.

What do you do if you see some of these signs in your church fellowship? These questions, and others, we cover in this new section, "Opening The Door To Antichrist".

The stakes are huge: you may be saved, but are suddenly attending a church that has -- or is in the process of -- moving away from the Fundamentals of the Christian Faith. Remember that Jesus promised the Rapture only to the Church of Philadelphia, the only one of the seven churches who had steadfastly remained true to the Fundamental Word of His! Listen:

"Because you have guarded and kept My word … I also will keep you safe from the hour of trial which is coming on the whole world .. to try those living upon the earth." [Revelation 3:10]

How much of His Word did Jesus expect His true Church to keep? All of it! "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." [Matthew 5:18]

Liberal pastor -- or increasingly Liberal pastor -- you are opening the door to Antichrist, and you will face this reality on the Day of the Judgment Seat of Christ!

Watch for new chapters in this book coming soon.

Preface: If each of us could travel back in time to the late 1960s, we would find a time of great upheaval and turmoil among mainline Protestant denominations. The Ecumenical Movement was in full swing, and the Church of Rome had visions of bringing the "wandering sheep" back into the fold of the Mother Church. Concurrently, the Six Day War featured the Israeli recapture and occupation of Jerusalem for the first time since Titus destroyed the city in 70 AD. Many in Fundamentalist circles had begun to propagate the notion that the apostasy of the "End Time" which initiated its arrival in the 19th Century was approaching fruition. Some Fundamentalists went so far as to predict that the Rapture of the Church would occur before the US celebrated its Bicentennial in 1976.

These factors combined to culminate in the explosive growth of Independent Baptist Churches, nondenominational Bible Churches, and other groups such as those affiliated with the American Council of Christian Churches (ACCC) led by Dr. Carl McIntire. In the minds of those on the front lines of the "War Against the Great End-Time Apostasy", God was gathering the final members of the True Church to prepare the Bride of Christ for the Marriage Supper of the Lamb. Though some realized the threat posed by groups such as the National Association of Evangelicals, none could have imagined a future deception of creeping apostasy that would corrupt the very fiber of the churches that were founded or grew from the apostasy of the 1960s. For those of us who lived through these experiences, it is very difficult to grasp the fact that these events transpired more than 30 years ago.

The Independent Baptist Movement began to falter as early as the mid 1970s, and the decade witnessed the rise of the Assemblies of God on the surging second wave of the Charismatic Movement. The local church was gradually being transformed from a place of hearing God's man expound God's Word to God's people, to a venue of religious entertainment. The situation has now deteriorated to the point that the church now must be professionally marketed to reach out into the world for more and more growth. Church growth has become the order of the day, and programs and schemes must be put in place to meet the established goals for growth.

This is the basis for OUTCOME-BASED RELIGION. Many who read this are familiar with Outcome-based Education: "Outcome-based Education is a philosophy that promulgates the end justifies the means. Content is not specifically defined but chosen on teacher perceptions. Education under this philosophy is a continuous, life-long experience, not a preparation for life. It is a process for government telling our children how to live, what to say, what to think, what to know, and what not to know." (1) Outcome-based religion is based on essentially the same principles. It also promulgates the philosophy that the end justifies the means. "The end" for the most part is church growth, and the standards of the Scripture are subordinated or ignored when perceived as a deterrent to such growth.

The methods for church growth are also not specifically defined and hinge primarily on the marketing demographics of a particular community. Using a specific "black and white" guideline such as Scripture is a hindrance to these marketing efforts, and therefore the perceptions of the pastor and the consulting agency must be utilized to achieve the proper outcome. Dogmatic teaching of doctrine and theology could also be a hindrance to church growth simply because "doctrine divides". Therefore, the approach should be more of a practical guide of addressing everyday issues such as personal finance, relationships, parenting, and other social needs of those who respond to outreach programs. All programs, music, and drama productions should be choreographed with the notion of entertaining with a positive religious message so as to entice more people to church services while alienating none.

Under these auspices, the church has evolved from a fortress where those of like faith were convicted of sin, reproved, nurtured, edified, instructed, and sent out into the world to reach the lost-- to an open stage for all comers to "experience God". To insure this is a positive experience for all, negative exposes of any group or individual perceived as nominally "Christian" cannot be tolerated; and an attitude of "religious-correctness" must prevail. The church also must be staffed with "Christian Counselors" schooled in "Christian Psychology" to meet the needs of people who have become frustrated in searching for answers to today's "complex problems" within the pages of that ancient, simplistic document we call the Word of God. Basically, everyone involved in the ministry must retain sight of the OUTCOME-EVERYTHING ELSE IS SUBORDINATE TO THE OUTCOME.

Endnotes:

 

1) Marks, Debbie. "OBE: What is it? Why Should We Be Concerned?", Pamphlet by Citizens for Quality Education, Columbia, SC, 3/5/94. Intoduction to this section - CHRISTIAN CHURCHES ARE OPENING THE DOOR TO ANTICHRIST CHRISTIAN CHURCHES ARE OPENING THE DOOR TO ANTICHRIST WITH OUTCOME BASED RELIGION ! "But relative to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to meet Him, we beg you brethren let no one deceive or beguile you in any way, for that day will not come except the apostasy comes first (unless the predicted great falling away of those who have professed to be Christians has come) and the man of lawlessness (sin) is revealed, who is the son of doom (of perdition)." [2 Thessalonians 2:1-3; Parallel Bible, KJV/Amplified Bible Commentary] "when the Son of Man comes, will He find [persistence in] faith on the earth?" [Luke 18:8; Ibid.]

 

One of THE major signs that the End of the Age is truly approaching is when you see the great majority of Christian churches falling away from the Fundamentals of the Faith. A pastor or church leader that knowingly moves away from teaching the "full counsel" of God, and begins incorporating unbiblical and human elements in his services and his teaching, is literally -- and Biblically -- opening the door to Antichrist. How many well-meaning pastors have ever thought of this sober fact as they lead their churches into areas that are not Biblical? For one pastor, this moving away from the Fundamentals of the Faith might be as simple as beginning to eliminate teachings on the inherent sinfulness of man, and allowing his sermons to be variations of the theme, "Jesus is Love", and the "You're all right; I'm all right" psychological syndrom.

 

Or, this moving away might occur when the pastor allows unbiblical teaching into the church because such teaching has proven to be popular enough with people as to build church attendance. What do you do if you see some of these signs in your church fellowship? These questions, and others, we cover in this new section, "Opening The Door To Antichrist". The stakes are huge: you may be saved, but are suddenly attending a church that has -- or is in the process of -- moving away from the Fundamentals of the Christian Faith. Remember that Jesus promised the Rapture only to the Church of Philadelphia, the only one of the seven churches who had steadfastly remained true to the Fundamental Word of His! Listen: "Because you have guarded and kept My word … I also will keep you safe from the hour of trial which is coming on the whole world .. to try those living upon the earth." [Revelation 3:10] How much of His Word did Jesus expect His true Church to keep? All of it! "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." [Matthew 5:18] Liberal pastor -- or increasingly Liberal pastor -- you are opening the door to Antichrist, and you will face this reality on the Day of the Judgment Seat of Christ!

 

OUTCOME-BASED RELIGION: PURPOSE-DRIVEN APOSTASY

By Mac Dominick

Chapter 1

THE TRUE CHURCH

 

In his book Biblical Separation, Dr. Ernest Pickering asks the question: "What is a true church?" Proposition: A true church is an assembly of those who share the common experience of faith in Jesus Christ. Who is Jesus Christ? Do you mean the human Jesus Christ of the modernist or Jesus Christ the Theanthropic Second Person of the Godhead? Do you mean the Jesus Christ of the Muslim, Gnostic, New Ager, or the Neo-orthodox? Do you mean this Christ or some other Christ? What do you mean by a shared experience? Is this experience contingent upon the partaking of sacraments, baptism, or some other religious ordinance? Is this experience contingent upon performing an act of charity, philanthropy, or self-abrogation? You profess to have the experience of becoming "born again". What do you mean by "born-again"?

 

To what extent is sound doctrine necessary for a true church? Upon departure from the afore-mentioned doctrine, at what point does a church cease to be a true church? (1) The very essence of this line of questioning is based in the fact that Lucifer has declared a war of deception on the church. No sooner had the early church been formed than it was viciously assaulted with Cabalistic, Gnostic, and Pagan infusions. False teachers segmented and corrupted the critical doctrines of the church, which led to the various heretical philosophies espoused even by many of those who were numbered among the so-called "Church Fathers". As a result of this satanic conspiracy, warnings of false teachers appear throughout the epistles of the New Testament. One such warning was succinctly communicated in II Peter 2: "...even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction..."(2)

 

The strategy of Lucifer since the days of Peter has not changed. The terms were Christian, but the definitions and practices were Gnostic or pagan. This syncretism of pure Christianity with occult religions culminated with the advent of many pseudo-Christian groups, cults, and sects. The most notable, of course, was evidenced in the rise of the Roman Catholic Church and the Papacy. Contrary to misguided popular belief, the Popes are not the successors to the Apostle Peter (there is no true historical evidence that Peter ever went to Rome). The Popes are, however, the successors to the Roman Emperor, Constantine. It was Constantine who first legalized Christianity with the hope of uniting a fragmented and decaying Roman Empire. He then moved the capitol of the Empire to Constantinople in 330, leaving the Bishop of Rome in charge in the west. (3)

 

He himself, however, continued to worship Sol, the sun god. While Constantine remained pagan for the rest of his life, he maintained influence over the business of what had become the "state" church in the Empire. (This influence was evidenced by his personal convening of the Council of Nicea.) Two emperors later, Theodosius the Great made Christianity the official religion of the Empire, and church attendance became compulsory by law. (One can but imagine the effect this had upon the spiritual character of the church). (4) At this point, the pagan temples were converted to churches, statues of Jupiter became statues of Peter, images of Isis and Venus became the images of the "blessed virgin", and the blending of paganism with Christianity resulted in the multitude of unbiblical doctrines and traditions of the Church of Rome. Justinian I (527-565), greatest of all the rulers of the Eastern Roman Empire, regulated all theological matters by seating the Bishop of Rome as the "Head of all the Holy Churches", thus laying the legal foundation for papal supremacy. (5)

 

The papacy became involved in international political intrigues as early as 678 with the assassination of the Merovingian king, Dagobert II. The Church orchestrated the end of the Merovingian Dynasty in a failed attempt to secure the title of "King of Jerusalem" for the Pope. (6) Papal authority was then greatly enhanced in 750 with the so-called "discovery" of a document known as the "Donation of Constantine" (this document was proven to be a forgery by Lorenzo Valla in 1440). (7) This alleged 312 AD document officially gave the Bishop of Rome the Emperor's imperial symbols and regalia, which became the Church's property. It declared the Bishop of Rome to be the "Vicar of Christ," and offered him the status of Emperor. The regalia was purportedly returned to Constantine who wore them with ecclesiastical permission more or less as a loan. (8) With this document in hand, the Church claimed the right to make and depose monarchs, and the Pope became the supreme mediator between God and kings. (9)

 

The influence of the Emperors into the affairs of the Church in order to support a collapsing imperial machine resulted in a rapidly deepening apostasy. In a few short centuries, "Christianity had developed into something totally different from its beginnings as Jesus Christ and His apostles taught. It became a sophisticated pagan philosophy tinged with the teachings about a transcendent, all-powerful God." (10) With this spiritual infidelity came a downward spiral in the morality of the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. Absolute power began to corrupt absolutely, and those who opposed the teachings of the Church soon became the targets of its wrath. Persecution of dissidents became the order of the day, and the Church began to incarcerate "heretics" and confiscate their property. In 1203, Pope Innocent III published a decree of Inquisition to stamp out heresy in southern France and Italy. (11) Innocent III, in what he called the "crowning achievement of his papacy", ordered the massacre of 60,000 Albegensians in an afternoon. (12)

 

Other documented events include the "St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre" with 70,000 French Huguenots murdered in a single day, (13) and Pope Martin V (1417-31) commanded the king of Poland to exterminate the Hussites. (14) The Inquisition lasted until 1870, spanning the reign of 80 Popes who never once repented, recanted, or otherwise acknowledged any error on the part of the Church in the torture and/or murder of millions of innocent victims. The Church of Rome had, in fact, from its very inception, ceased to be a true church. The State became the controlling entity of this organization, and sound doctrine was negated for a synthesis of pagan and Christian beliefs. The result was an entity to which the truly redeemed child of God could pledge no allegiance. As a matter of fact, many Christians and individual churches refused to become a part of the church/state system.

 

These were those who were to become known as the Ana-baptists (rebaptizers) who held to the Biblical teaching of baptism after salvation, rejected infant baptism, marriage to the state, centralized religious government, and any ecclesiastical hierarchy above the local church. These who stood and died for the fundamental doctrines of the Word of God were the true Christians, and their churches were the true churches. The Church of Rome is just one of many examples of organizations which bear the name "church" while exhibiting little or no resemblance to the biblical definition of the term. However, one must understand that any religious organization that claims to be a church must meet certain criteria:

 

1) A true church has only Jesus Christ as its Head and Law Giver.

2) A true church must accept into its membership only those who profess saving faith in Jesus Christ. The moment an organization accepts a single individual who denies faith in Jesus Christ into its membership, this organization ceases to be a church.

3) A true church, through its statement of faith, must adhere to the fundamental doctrines as taught by the Word of God. These doctrines include the Inerrancy of Scripture, the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, the Deity of Christ, the Vicarious Atonement of Jesus Christ, the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ, Justification by Faith, and the Promise of Eternal Life for those of the Faith. (The Statement of Faith of a true church should be more detailed and concise than this list, but should ALWAYS at least contain these principles).

4) A true church must be governed by the methods laid out in the Scriptures, with leaders, officers, and government as specified in the New Testament. Yes, a true church is an assembly of those who share a common experience of faith in Jesus Christ. However, one must further elaborate that this experience is the result of God's sovereign work of grace exercised by an individual's repentance through faith in the shed blood of Jesus Christ for complete forgiveness of all sins.

 

In addition, particular note must be added that this working of God is in no way contingent upon church membership, partaking of religious sacraments, participating in religious activities, contributing money to religious causes, general morality, or other good works of the recipient.

 

These "born-again" individuals are furthermore commanded by Scripture to adhere to the doctrinal teachings found in the Word of God (including those of the person of Jesus Christ), and accept no individual into the fellowship of the body of believers whose profession omits these doctrinal teachings. However, Lucifer is a subtle deceiver, and false teachers who deceptively profess genuine Christianity will infiltrate and corrupt the true church. This often leads to the ultimate apostasy of local churches and church organizations. The word "apostasy" (a turning away from the truth by those who once held to the truth) is not found in the Bible.

 

However, a description of apostasy is outlined in detail in I Timothy 4:11: "...in the latter times some shall depart from the faith giving heed to seducing spirits and the doctrines of devils..." Christians certainly cannot say that they have not been warned. Yet the question then arises: What should Christians do when confronted by the deceptive infiltration of false teachers? In addition, what should Christians do when false teachers have misled or deceived their leaders or other members of the church body?

 

The attack on the true church by Lucifer from the earliest times has been countered by two distinct strategies. The first is the idea that those who stand for the truth should remain in the ecclesiastical body and attempt to reform the body by exposing the error within the church. This is exactly what the leaders of the Protestant Reformation attempted to accomplish. Their desire was to reform the Catholic Church. They did not choose to separate from Rome, the Church of Rome excommunicated them. The second strategy is based on the Scriptural Doctrine of Separation. When an ecclesiastical body departs from biblical teaching, those who stand for the truth choose to obey Scripture and separate from the body, rather than to attempt to reform the organization. This pattern can be seen throughout the history of the organized church. There have been those who attempted to reform, and there have been those who separated.

 

The Bible is very clear that those who err from the faith are to be approached and confronted concerning their error, but it is also very clear that there comes a point at which those who would stand for the truth must separate: ROMANS 16:17 "...mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned and avoid them." II CORINTHIANS 6:14-17 "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness, and what communion hath light with darkness. What part hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?...Wherefore, come out from among them and be ye separate saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you."

 

II THESSALONIANS 3:6 "Now we command you brethren in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us." Charles Spurgeon said: "Complicity with error will take from the best of men the power to enter any successful protest against it. It is our solemn conviction that there can be no real spiritual communion there should be no pretense of fellowship. Fellowship with known and vital error is participation in sin. As soon as I saw, or thought I saw, that error had become firmly established, I did not deliberate, but quitted the body at once. Since then my counsel has been, 'Come out from among them'. I have felt that no protest could be equal to that of distinct separation from known evil.

 

That I might not stultify my testimony I have cut myself clear from those who err from the faith, and even from those who associate with them. Cost what it may to separate ourselves from those who separate themselves from the truth of God is not alone our liberty, but our duty." (15) The struggle to maintain a true church has been and will remain a critical issue for all true Christians until the Rapture. As the issue of Outcome-based Religion is addressed, the theme of Biblical Separation must be echoed throughout the entire analysis, for once the apostasy of Outcome-based Religion is recognized within an ecclesiastical body, the only course of action for those who would remain faithful to the Word of God is separation from such a body.

 

This process of separation may be more difficult than many instances in years past simply because many of the churches involved in Outcome-based Religion still preach the Gospel, and have many biblically-based qualities. However, modern Christians must stand with Spurgeon when he stated, "...I have cut myself clear of those who err from the faith, and even from those who associate with them".

 

Endnotes

1. Pickering, Ernest. Biblical Separation, the Struggle for a Pure Church, Regular Baptist Press, Schaumburg, IL, 1979, pg. 11.

2. II Peter 2:1

3. Hunt, David. A Woman Rides the Beast, Harvest House Publishers, Eugene, OR, 1994, pg. 38.

4. Missler, Chuck. "Betrayal of the Chosen", Audio Tape, Koinonia House, 1997.

5. Bennett, Richard. "The Pattern of Papal Persecutions, Then and Now", www.jesus-is- lord.com, pg.7.

6. Hayes, Kathleen. "Prieure Aim: Produce the Grand Monarch Soon", NRI Trumpet, 5/91, pg.9

7. Bagient, Lincoln, and Leigh. Holy Blood, Holy Grail, Dell Publishing, New York, 1982, pgs. 283-284.

8. Hunt. pg.73.

9. Ibid.

10. Hayes. pg.1.

11. Bennett. pg.9.

12. Hunt, Dave. Jerusalem, a Cup of Trembling, Harvest House Publishers, Eugene OR, 1997, pg.117.

13. Ibid. pg.157.

14. Ibid.

15. Charles Haddon Spurgeon, "The Sword and the Trowel", 1880's Intoduction to this section -

THE ORIGINS OF MODERN APOSTASY

Chapter 2

 

 

The "end justifies the means" philosophy of Outcome-based Education in and of itself does not necessarily condemn OBE as a flawed pedagogy. The primary source of contention over OBE stems from questionable, "politically correct" outcomes that teach affective rather than cognitive learning skills. While outcomes such citizenship, integrity, and group work ethic may seem admirable on the surface, can these skills replace proficiency in language, math, and science? In other words, when characterizing OBE, not even the end is justified-much less the means. In contrast, the "end justifies the means" philosophy is precisely that which condemns Outcome-based Religion from the outset.

 

When engaging in God's work, THE END NEVER JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. Put simply, God's work is to be performed God's way. Even overtly spiritual outcomes such as mass evangelization and exponential church growth must be approached within the boundaries of methodology as outlined in Scripture. As seen by the passages illustrated in Chapter 1; cooperation, collaboration, and/or commensuration with the ungodly in religious efforts is specifically forbidden in Scripture, and to use the outcome of such efforts as justification of the method is a serious departure from the teaching of the Word of God. Furthermore, the "end justifies the means" mindset is the certain path to a deepening apostasy.

 

Once Scripture is ignored in one area, another departure will soon follow. The "snowball effect" evidenced by history then leads one religious body after another from small compromises into a complete departure from the truth. This creeping apostasy is very subtle, and one must look at history and understand the battle for a pure, true church in order to combat apostasy's deceptive nature. The strangle hold of the Church of Rome on Western Civilization during the Dark Ages could not be simply termed as brutal. Any teaching or evidence contrary to Rome's doctrine was either destroyed or suppressed, and those individuals who stood to oppose the Church were either forced underground or exterminated.

 

As a result, the Church of Rome stifled the widespread acquisition of academic knowledge and succeeded in maintaining complete control of an intimidated society. Those members of the true church (Waldenses, Anabaptists, and others) were not only forced underground but also virtually erased from the pages of secular history (or appear as a mere footnote). Even the doctrines of these early Fundamentalists were suppressed to the point that only recently were their doctrinal beliefs such as the Premillennial Rapture of the Church evidenced by actual manuscript discoveries.

 

Furthermore, the atrocities of Catholicism made "Christianity" a perceived plague on the face of the earth to secular historians as well as those involved in other religions. For the population at large, the vicious control of the papacy led to the oppressive shadow of ignorance, poverty, and misery cast by the Dark Ages. However, the lust for papal power would ultimately lead to the dilution of the death-lock the Roman Church bore upon society. This dilution began when Pope Urban II incited the desire to reclaim the Holy Land for the Church. The Crusades were launched in 1099 to rid the Holy Land (and particularly Jerusalem) of the "infidels" who occupied the region. Thus the Church's desire for Jerusalem led to the creation of a competing entity for the wealth and political power of the world in the Knights Templar.

 

Not only did the Knights Templar emerge from the Crusades as the world's bankers, but they also brought back to the aristocracy of Europe the occult religious practices long suppressed by the Church. The decline of the Church of Rome's political power opened the door to a rebirth of the philosophies of Ancient Greece, and culminated with the Renaissance. While most will recall from historical studies the explosion of art, inventions, and cultural advancement of the years 1300 to 1500, few realize that the newfound release from the intellectual oppression of the Church of Rome also produced a groundswell of growth in the occult, magic, and astrology. The Protestant Reformation ended the Renaissance, but the infusion of the occult sciences had taken its toll on the minds and souls of Western population.

 

The religious faith of many was so damaged that they abandoned their faith and embraced the Scientific Method of Aristotle. This initiated the rise of the Age of Reason and the corruption of the Protestant Reformation by the late 18th Century. The Age of Reason, led by men such as John Locke of England and the Frenchman, Voltaire, was a direct frontal attack on all religion-Christianity included. In the shadow of the Protestant Reformation were those known as Baptists: "The Baptists first appeared in Switzerland about 1523 where they were persecuted by Zwingle (the noted reformer -ed.) and the Romanists. They are found in the following years,1525-1530, with large churches fully organized, in Southern Germany, Tyrol, and in middle Germany."(1)

 

These Baptists were not Protestant, for they had very large churches prior to the Reformation. Even so, during the entire 17th Century, persecutions of the Baptists continued at a fever pitch. By this time, Germany was predominately Lutheran, Scotland was Presbyterian, England was Anglican, and the balance of Europe was Catholic. The Reformers had failed in learning the pitfalls of a state church, and there was certainly great risk of life for those who opposed the official religion of the state-whatever that religion may have been. Doctrinal apostasy among Protestants openly reared its ugly head in Germany as early as the 1780s.

 

Frederich Schleiermacher, a young German minister, though he denied the deity and vicarious atonement of Christ, became known as "The Father of Modern Theology" (so much for Modern Theology): "…As minister and metaphysician, Schleiermacher enthroned, instead of doctrine, 'the power of Jesus self-consciousness' which was diffused through the believing community and taught that conversion is an arousal of the universal God-consciousness. Since the unity of the original church was the 'influence' of the Savior, in Schleiermacher's view, 'the essence of the church is fellowship'." (2) (At this juncture, prudence would dictate a developing principle in the study of "apostasy". This principle was Lucifer's primary weapon against the early church, and it is still strategically exercised today in the case of Outcome-based Religion.

 

This principle is simply the forsaking of the superiority of doctrine as the essence of the true church in favor of unity. This is exactly what was behind Schleiermacher's "essence of fellowship", and the mantra that "doctrine divides" (thus hindering fellowship) is precisely one of the governing motivations behind the New Evangelical movement today. Those who would embrace Outcome-based Religion must therefore diminish an emphasis of doctrine and theology in order to prevent the alienation of those on the church prospect list. At the heart of the issue is simply this: DOCTRINE DIVIDES BECAUSE TRUTH DIVIDES.

 

The apostasy seen in Germany in the 1780s is exactly the same as seen today. Granted, Schleiermacher's Lucerferic Gnosticism gained him fame, but his emphasis on fellowship over doctrine reveals his methods were in principle the same as today's "Evangelicals" engaged in Outcome-based Religion.) As the 18th Century neared an end, Schleiermacher's principles of "higher criticism" which rejected the authenticity of the Gospels, the inerrancy of the Scriptures and the cardinal doctrines of the Faith were matched on the political front by the French Revolution. "The nation of France had overthrown the rulership of God…by deposing of their divinely appointed king. In his place the revolutionaries elected a committee of godless men to govern by human reason...In 1793, the Legislative Assembly…renounced unanimously the belief of a deity.

 

Afterwards a great procession was staged…mounted on an open wagon was the Goddess of Reason…paraded to the Cathedral of Notre Dame. There she took her place as deity… elevated onto the high altar… this was followed shortly afterwards by the public burning of the Bible…" (3) Strangely enough, the spiritual implications of the French Revolution seem to be ignored by many historians. However, when this revolution is coupled with the rise of German apostasy, the higher criticism of the Scientific Method, and occult infusions into mainstream thought dating back to the Renaissance, the stage was set for major spiritual upheaval in the 19th Century. History reveals that the 19th Century was a major turning point in societal evolution.

 

Born from the Renaissance and the Age of Reason, the Scientific Method ultimately spawned the birth of a new world order led by the likes of Marx, Engles, Hegel and Darwin. In addition, the Industrial Revolution planted the seeds of materialism that would consummate in 20th Century Secular Humanism. Politically, the 19th Century was the height of the United Kingdom and the British Empire. Queen Victoria ruled as the Grand Madam of the entire earth, and though there was that minor setback of the American Revolution of the 18th Century, the "sun never set on the British Empire".

 

As the 19th Century dawned, the great 18th Century revivals of the "Great Awakening" in the United States and the Methodist revivals of John and Charles Wesley were bearing fruit with dramatic results in the United States and England. The Wesleys were advocates of Evangelical Armenianism that insisted Christ died for all men, in opposition to the Puritan and Presbyterian doctrine of Calvin's Limited Atonement. Furthermore, most Christians viewed the British Empire and the "righteous reign of Queen Victoria" as the advent of the Kingdom of God on Earth. Thus Postmillennialism became accepted eschatology, and forced a symbolic interpretation of many Old Testament prophecies or viewed God's promises to Israel as fulfilled in the British Empire.

 

Even though British Israel theories cannot be supported by Scripture or history, the power of the Holy Spirit was certainly evidenced in Great Britain. When Henry VIII thumbed his nose at the Pope, the stage was set for England to be set apart from the rest of Catholic Europe, and the Pope wielded no power on the British Isles (with the exceptions of the short reign of Bloody Mary and Catholic Ireland). The key to this manifest power of God on England was without doubt the translation of the Word of God into the English language, and its availability to the common man. Copies of the first printed New Testament translated by Tyndale were smuggled into England in shipments of grain and cloth.

 

Authorities in Brussels later executed Tyndale, but his work became the basis for every English version of Scripture since that time. Coverdale then took up the task, and the first printed English Bible was completed in 1535. (4) It was this accessibility of the Word of God and its profound affect on the hearts of men that led to the rise of Puritanism in England. The Puritan Movement was based on 3 principles: "the supremacy of the Scriptures over human authority; the freedom of the church from the state; and the proper nature of church government." (5). By 1850 a new generation had come on the scene in Britain. This generation's grandparents and parents were those that witnessed the revolutions and the revivals of the late 18th Century and the first half of the 19th Century.

 

This new generation, however was a generation of skepticism: "The German scholar, Schleiermacher, was by this time molding the theology of Oxford and Cambridge in the Gnostic tradition…poets of pantheism, William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge, were assiduously read and highly revered among the university intelligentsia… Skepticism based on science flowed into and reinforced the older stream of doubt stemming from historical and ethical considerations…. the outstanding Cambridge men of the 1840's -- B. F. Westcott, C. B. Scott, J. Llewellyn Davies, J.E.B. Mayer, Lord Alwyne Compton, E.H, Bickersteth, C. F. Mackenzie, Charles Evans, J.B. Lightfoot, E. W. Benson and F.J.A. Hort …The intellectuals of the 1870's …Henry Sidgwick and Henry Jackson and including Frederic Myers, G. W. and B.J. Balfour, Walter Leaf, Edmund Gurney, Arthur Verrall, F. W. Maitland, Henry Butcher and George Prothero tended towards agnosticism or hesitant Deism." (6)

Lucifer is very intelligent. He finds a strategy that works, and he continues to repeat the same strategy over and over again. On the other hand, mankind in general is very unintelligent. Man contends that he learns from history and learns from his mistakes, but continues to fall into the same traps time after time. That being said, the above description of mid-19th Century England seems very familiar. As a matter of fact, this period exhibits a repeat of the same scenario displayed at the inception of the Church. In review, false teachers infiltrating with doctrines of Gnosticism, the occult sciences of paganism, pagan polytheism, and pagan pantheism immediately assaulted the early Church.

 

This is exactly what happened again in 19th Century England. The nation that distributed the Word of God and experienced first hand the working of the Holy Spirit in great revivals, began a downward slide with the blending of the church with the state when Puritanism became a political movement (the Anglican Church-Church of England-had long been the state church. However, the political movement of the Puritans then married those with Fundamentalist beliefs to the state). When the philosophies of Schleiermacher, Wordsworth, Coleridge, and Darwin were infused into the intellectual aristocracy at Oxford and Cambridge, the stage was set for the critical events that would lead to the rise of modern religious unbelief. All Christians should realize the very essence of our faith is found in the Word of God.

 

Without an inerrant Scripture, no basis for faith would exist. Therefore, it stands to reason that Lucifer would assault true Christianity at its very foundation, and moved to implement that strategy in 1853. A secret committee was formed to introduce a new English translation of the Bible. This committee relied on B.F. Wescott and F.J.A. Hort to furnish a Greek New Testament for the new Revised Version of the Bible. Wescott and Hort began in 1853 and worked in secret for 20 years to produce the Greek New Testament. The interesting aspect of this work was the fact that they were not revising the text used by Tyndale or Coverdale in the earlier English translations, but they gave precedence to two completely different manuscripts from the Alexandrian texts corrupted with Arian and Gnostic philosophies.

 

Their goal seemed only to discredit the Byzantine Text (textus receptus) that represented 98% of the manuscript evidence of the New Testament manuscripts in favor of the 1% in the Alexandrian documents. Textual scholar Dean John William Burgon refuted the claims of the Westcott-Hort Theory as: "the latest outcome of that violent recoil from the Traditional Greek Text, -- that strange impatience of its authority, or rather denial that it possesses any authority at all, (emphasis added -ed.)-- which began with Lachmann just 50 years ago (viz. in 1831), and has prevailed ever since; its most conspicuous promoters being Tregelles (1857-72) and Tischendorf (1865-72) . . . Drs. Westcott and Hort have in fact outstripped their predecessors in this singular race.

 

Their absolute contempt for the Traditional Text, -- their superstitious veneration for a few ancient documents; (which documents however they freely confess are not more ancient than the 'Traditional Text' which they despise;) -- knows no bounds." (7) The Greek New Testament of Wescott and Hort was a malicious attempt to destroy the integrity and infallibility of the Word of God, and particularly the deity of Jesus Christ. Though the Revised Version of 1881 was soundly rejected, Wescott and Hort's Greek New Testament has been used for every subsequent translation of the English Bible with the exception of the New King James Version. This attack on the infallible Word of God was an overt attempt by Lucifer to destroy the true Church. Those who have turned from the faith have discarded the King James Version of the Scriptures, and many in even Fundamentalist circles refuse to take a stand for the truth in this matter.

 

However, the King James Version has survived the attacks of its enemies, and remains as the infallible proof of the promise of preservation by Jesus Christ that God's Word will not pass away. Though some would not categorize the Wescott and Hort Greek New Testament as a contributing factor to the origins of modern apostasy, the principles and methods of Wescott and Hort were specifically aimed at the destruction of the Byzantine Text. Furthermore, when this is factored into the other events leading up to and through the 19th Century, the plan of Lucifer becomes quite discernable.

 

In the way of a review, the following sequence of events should be carefully considered:

1) The Renaissance appropriated a public accessibility to the occult sciences.

2) The Protestant Reformation, though godly in many respects, fell short of complete complicity to the commands of Scripture.

3) Those who truly followed the teachings of the Word of God were abdicated even from the pages of history, and persecuted by Protestants and Catholics alike.

4) The coming of the Age of Reason, the French Revolution, and the embracing of Aristotle's scientific method left a great vacuum in the souls of men who have an innate need of spirituality.

5) This vacuum was filled by many in the Wesley Revivals and the Great Awakening, but many others filled this spiritual need by embracing the occult practices such as Spiritualism and Theosophy.

6) The conflict of Christianity, the occult, and Reason led to great religious skepticism by the mid 19th Century.

7) The results of this skepticism were 3-fold: a. The overt atheism of Darwinism b. The attack on the infallible Word of God by Cambridge intellectuals c. The apostasy of many who formerly professed the Fundamental Doctrines of the Faith.

 

With the general demise of the truth among intellectuals, many Protestant churches and organizations in the United States began to see defections within their ranks. On the other side of the Atlantic, the spiritual battle for England was looking very bleak by the end of the 19th Century. The nation that had become the bastion of Christianity, was quickly succumbing to apostasy. The battle in the 20th Century would shift primarily to the United States, but the origins of wholesale apostasy that began in the 18th Century, claimed most of Europe as its victims by 1900.

 

ENDNOTES

1. Carroll, J.M. Trail of Blood, Ashland Ave. Baptist Church, 1931. pp.39-40

2. Aho, Barbara. "Nineteenth Century Occult Revival", The Christian Conscience Magazine, July-August, 1997. p.16.

3. Taylor,Ian. In the Minds of Men, TFE Publishing, Minneapolis, MN, 1984. p.34.

4. American Bible Society. "Notes for the Notebook", Publication # PH-L-3489-100M, July,1972, p.G-533.

5. Pickering, Ernest. Biblical Separation, the Struggle for a Pure Church, Regular Baptist Press, Schaumburg,IL, . 1979. p.57.

6. Aho.p.36. 7. Ibid. p.77.

The men of the 19th Century who shaped the philosophies destined to permeate the future of mainstream society had little in common: Charles Darwin had a degree in theology, Charles Lyall was a lawyer, Thomas Huxley had a dubious degree in medicine, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and Herbert Spencer had no formal education, and Hegel and Marx had degrees in philosophy. There was, however, one thing that each of these men shared-a hatred of God and biblical Christianity. Even Wescott and Hort denied the inerrancy of Scripture, and were determined to remove the translation of the Textus Receptus from the public realm. These were the men who laid the foundation for the spiritual battles to be fought throughout the 20th Century-a century that would see religious organizations turn from the truth, the rise of the nation of Israel, end-time prophecies come into play, and the deception of Outcome-based Religion.

The world of the 20th Century was vastly changed from that of the dawn of the 19th Century. The inventions and mass production of the Industrial revolution sparked a rapid transition in the western world from an agrarian society to a consumer society; and with the outbreak of World War I, the advanced mechanization of the world was exhibited in the technology of modern warfare. This "brave new world" recoiled from the horrors of world war with the philosophical reaction exhibited in an attempt by the elite to establish a world government via the League of Nations. Without the support of United States this organization failed, but the seeds of globalism had been successfully planted into the modern psyche. In addition, the idea of the Kingdom of God on Earth was expanded beyond the borders of the British Empire to a righteous league of all nations:

"'The League of Nations', said the Archbishop of Canterbury, at Geneva, 'may go far to make the Kingdom of God a reality in our lifetime'... 'The League of Nations', says Dr. Jowett, has for its aim 'the transformation of the kingdom of this world into the Kingdom of God…'" (1)

At the heart of this new "group-think" mentality were well-funded occult and illuminist organizations such as the Theosophical Society, Lucis Trust, and the Fabian Society, who ultimately promoted the concepts of Socialism into mainstream thought. In 1925, the Scopes Trial added the element of Darwinism into public consciousness, and the concept of "species survival" augmented the 19th Century notion of "Social Darwinism". These philosophies, when blended into the attitudes and values of the masses of humanity, diminish the importance of the individual and elevate the virtues of the group. Biblically, this flies in the face of the doctrinal teachings of the New Testament, God's love and concern for the individual, and ultimately individual salvation. At the same time, a group-think mentality promotes the false concepts of the "brotherhood of man", ecclesiastical unity, political globalism, and the sacrifice of individuals in order to insure "species survival" -even to the extent of mass genocide to eliminate the "feeble-minded" and other undesirable elements of society that may ultimately prove to be a threat to the species as a whole.

When these philosophies began to infiltrate mainstream Christianity, the modernism born in Germany almost 2 centuries earlier began to infect mainstream denominations in the United States like an incurable cancer. Heresies spawned in the 19th Century that scorned the fundamental doctrines of the Word of God culminated in the dogma of Twentieth Century Modernism:

The Bible is the result of a human evolutionary process
Dismissal of miracles
No validity to Biblical historical accounts (i.e.-no Adam or Eve, no Flood)
Many Old Testament events are merely myth
No Virgin Birth, Deny Deity of Christ, No Bodily Resurrection
Gospel narratives are not factual
No accurate idea of what Jesus was really like
Historical-critical approach to Bible interpretation (2)

One need not have a degree in theology to see the correlation between these corruptions of the truth of God with the philosophical blasphemy instigated in the 19th Century. The hand of Hegel, Darwin, Marx, Wescott, and Hort are readily apparent in this blatant approbation against Almighty God. By the 1900s, the philosophies of these men were spreading like a raging wildfire through churches in the United States, igniting fierce controversies within denominational bodies. While most Fundamentalists chose to fight these battles within their respective denominations until about 1930, separatist groups from every denomination later emerged as the hierarchies of each denomination fell like meticulously placed dominoes into the hands of liberal infidels. The situation deteriorated to the point that some denominations refused to even produce official doctrinal statements that would indict the heretics within their ranks.

It was in this climate that the term "Fundamentalist" was coined. Though the term was coined in 1920, it was explicitly defined by the World Congress of Fundamentalists in 1976:

"A Fundamentalist is a born-again believer in the Lord Jesus Christ who

1) Maintains an immovable allegiance to the inerrant, infallible, and verbally Inspired Bible;
2) Believes whatever the Bible says is so;
3) Judges all things by the Bible, and is judged only by the Bible;
4) Affirms the foundational truths of the historic Christian Faith:

a. The doctrine of the Trinity
b. The incarnation, virgin birth, substitutionary atonement, bodily resurrection, ascension into Heaven, and Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ
c. The new birth through regeneration of the Holy Spirit
d. The resurrection of saints to life eternal
e. The resurrection of the ungodly to final judgment and eternal death
f. The fellowship of the saints, who are the body of Christ;
5) Practices fidelity to that faith, and endeavors to preach it to every creature;
6) Exposes and separates from all ecclesiastical denial of that Faith, compromise with error, and apostasy from the Truth; and
7) Earnestly contends for the Faith once delivered.
Therefore, Fundamentalism is a militant orthodoxy with a soulwinning zeal. While Fundamentalists may differ on certain interpretations of Scripture, we join in unity of heart and common purpose for the defense of the Faith and the preaching of the Gospel, without compromise or division.

Unless a man holds and defends the Faith of Scripture, and is concerned
for the salvation of the lost, he is not a true Fundamentalist." (3)

At the same Congress, Dr. Bob Jones, Jr. so eloquently added:

"The very word carries with it the clash of arms and the sound of the battle shout." (It) "speaks of the waves beating against a rock rising above the waters of the sea-a rock that stands firm in the midst of the storm. A Fundamentalist is a man who takes up arms from the armory of grace and goes forth strong in the Lord and in the power of His might to contend for the Faith." (4)

Men of God such as this stood against the raging storm of modernism within their respective denominations until about 1930. This was due to the fact that mainline Protestant denominations were all originally based on the essential cardinal doctrines held by all Fundamentalists, and their official creeds and statements of faith confirmed the basic theological foundation of these organizations. Even with the growing number of liberals within these organizations, most who defended the truth fervently believed that God would give them the victory; and the denomination would be rescued from the modernist onslaught. More realistically, "conservative denominational pastors and laymen simply failed to realize the extent to which modernism had permeated their seminaries and agencies". (5)

In the 1920s, well-funded liberals such as Harry Emerson Fodsdick went on the offensive against Fundamentalism. Fodsdick, who was financed by John D. Rockefeller, fired a volley across the bow on May 21, 1922 with his sermon, "Shall the Fundamentalists Win?". The sermon asserted that doctrines such as "The Virgin Birth", "The Inerrancy of Scripture", and "The Second Coming" were nonessentials that he rejected. (6) This sermon also served notice that the liberal's tolerance of those who stood for orthodoxy was wearing thin, and the creeds and doctrinal statements that denominational liberals had simply ignored for decades now became the objects of open criticism. The primary focal point of these attacks began exactly where Lucifer attacked in the 19th Century---the inerrancy of Scripture. In 1924, a group of 149 Presbyterian ministers in Auburn, NY penned the "Auburn Affirmation".

Under the guise of "peacemakers" who simply wished to end divisiveness within the denomination, this group explicitly repudiated the doctrine of the inerrancy of Scripture. (7) The "Doctrine of Inerrancy" which had been the theological beachhead of the 19th Century attack by intellectuals and the seminaries, became the target of new vicious attacks in the public realm of all denominations. The truth was that Lucifer and his liberal accomplices understood perfectly that if a group denied the inerrancy of the Word of God, other essential doctrines would be easy marks. For once the inerrancy of Scripture was questioned, the downward spiral to complete apostasy would become a runaway freight train that could not be derailed. The liberal Christian Century magazine summed up the climate of the 1920s very well when it stated:

"Two worlds have crashed…There is a clash here as profound and as grim as between Christianity and Confucianism…The God of the Fundamentalist is one God; and the God of the Modernist another (emphasis added -ed.)…The inherent incompatibility of the two worlds has passed the stage of mutual tolerance." (8)

Finally realizing there was no revival from apostasy, Fundamentalists followed the example of Spurgeon in separating not only from those who denied the Fundamentals of the Faith, but also from those who associated with them. A.W. Tozer exemplified this principle when he declared, "I have preached myself out of nearly every pulpit in North America." (9)

One should take note at this point that Spurgeon and Tozer (not to mention Schofield, Gordon, Ironside, Jones, McIntire, Machen, et al) would not be very popular in many evangelical churches today. Not only would they be deemed as too divisive, they did not preach nearly enough messages on relationships, personal finances, parenting techniques, etc. to attract a modern crowd large enough to make the payment on the building. Furthermore, just as the new radical center "third way" political views have made those who are deemed "politically incorrect" the object of prolific scorn, the "greater evangelical community" has in essence branded today's Fundamentalists as "religiously incorrect" (though they may not use that exact term, they have coined other derogatory terms such as "Fundies"). While some who disgracefully wear the Fundamentalist badge deserve to be branded due to their nasty attitudes and demagoguery, the "religiously incorrect" label is reserved for those who, in defense of the Faith (and in a Scriptural manner), propagate such things as a "critical spirit" against other high-profile Christians like Max Lucado, Paul Crouch, Chuck Colson, Pat Robertson, Bill McCartney, Jack Van Impe, Billy Graham, or Pope John Paul II. In defense of the biblical Fundamentalist, his position should be as ordained by the Word of God:

"…mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned and avoid them. For they are such which serve our Lord Jesus Christ…and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple." Rom.16: 17-18

The decade of the 1930s brought more sweeping changes to the lives of those in the Western World. The Great Depression caused many to reject the Modernist fable that man was in control of his own destiny, and forced individuals from a self-sufficient, in-control posture to that of simple survival. This sudden nosedive into survival mode made families closer and forced individuals to reassess their priorities. Also, the outbreak of war in Europe dealt a blow to the idea that World War I was the war to end all wars; virtually extinguishing the theory that the League of Nations was a step towards making the "Kingdom of God" a reality.

World War II also caused many to re-evaluate the eschatology of Postmillennialism that taught mankind was indeed steadily progressing to the point that the Kingdom of God would be revealed on earth. All of these factors added fuel to the fires of Premillennial, Separatist Fundamentalism. As a result of these and other factors, separatists in the Fundamentalist camp made great strides in the decades of the 1930s and 1940s through the organization of Bible conferences, establishing Bible Colleges, Radio Ministries, and the founding of broad-based Fundamentalist organizations such as the American Council of Christian Churches and the National Association of Evangelicals. Fundamentalist leaders such as Charles Woodbridge, Carl McIntire, John R.Rice, Bob Jones, Charles Fuller, M.R. DeHaan, Harry Ironside, R.G. Lee, and many others carried the torch for the suddenly vibrant separatist movement.

Just when Fundamentalism seemed to be gaining the most ground, a new movement from within its ranks sowed the seeds that would lead to its eventual decline. This group of individuals called themselves "New Evangelicals". Harold J. Ockenga, the first president of Fuller Theological Seminary, coined the term "New Evangelical" in 1947. He insisted the key word in furthering the Gospel is no longer Biblical separation from, but infiltration into apostate churches. He took it upon himself to detail the differences between Fundamentalism and New Evangelicalism:

1. New Evangelicals would address the social issues that Fundamentalists avoided. New Evangelicals would include with salvation a "social philosophy".
2. New Evangelicals would not "delve into personalities that embrace error".
3. The Christian should not be "obscurantist in scientific questions as to creation, the age of man, the universality of the Flood, and other
debatable Biblical questions".
4. Intellectual questions should be answered within the framework of
modern learning and there should be liberty in minor areas. (10)

In addition, Ockenga specifically designated and promoted 4 Agencies for the advancement of New Evangelicalism:

National Association of Evangelicals
Fuller Theological Seminary
Christianity Today
Ecumenical Evangelism led by Billy Graham Ministries (11)

While the role of Fuller Seminary will become even more crucial in the in the later discussion of Outcome-based Religion, Fuller became not only the training ground of New Evangelicals, but also the primary source for instilling the principles of Outcome-based Religion from its very inception. This early direction of Fuller Seminary was very explicit:

"Fuller's early leaders were consciously rejecting the negative aspects of old-line Fundamentalism…Fundamentalism was characterized by militancy…a willingness to deal with the negatives, and by separation, and it was this that brought about the New Evangelical Movement." (12)

As President of Fuller Seminary, Ockenga also made their goals very clear:

"We want our young men to be so trained, that when they come from a denomination they will go back into their denomination adequately prepared to preach the gospel and defend the faith and to go forward in the work of God." (13)

In one fell swoop, this statement delivered the essence of evangelical ecumenism, succinctly stated the strategy of infiltration in lieu of separation, and revealed the position that adherence to doctrine is subordinate to evangelism. All of these points are in direct conflict with the Word of God.

1) The Bible demands separation-not infiltration.
2) The Bible also is clear that Christians are to have no tolerance for false teachers or false doctrine.
3) In contrast to Outcome-based Religion, the Bible does not teach that the end justifies the means

In opposition to the Fuller methodology, Francis Schaeffer stated, "Evangelism which does not lead to…purity of doctrine is just as faulty and incomplete as orthodoxy that which does not lead to a concern for, and communication with, the lost." (14)

Evangelism is not mutually exclusive of doctrine. How can the message of the Gospel coexist with those who deny the Deity of Christ, the Virgin Birth, the Bodily Resurrection, Justification by Faith, or the Inerrancy of Scripture? The reality is that in an environment of false doctrine (as is the case of a religious organization whose hierarchy professes to the teachings of Modernism or Catholicism) the infiltrator must compromise his position to avoid embarrassment, exposure and/or ultimate expulsion. When the infiltrator plays this script to its logical conclusion, one compromise leads to another until overt apostasy once again rules the situation, and the infiltrator himself embraces false doctrine. This was evidenced even at Fuller, as by the early 1960s, the "Fuller faculty was split as to whether inerrancy applied to all Scripture, or just those passages that dealt with redemption". (15) As the situation at Fuller deteriorated, by 1982 only 15% of Fuller's School of Theology's students "held the conviction of the seminary's founders on inerrancy". (16) Dr. Charles Woodbridge accurately summed up the situation when he stated:

"The New Evangelicalism advocates toleration of error. It is following the downward path of accommodation to error, cooperation with error, contamination by error, and ultimate capitulation to error. (17)

The New Evangelical realized the error of the Modernist, but was offended by the militancy of the Fundamentalist. These individuals were concerned that the separatist attitude of the Fundamentalists was too harsh and unloving. This can probably best be exemplified in the methods of Billy Graham's ecumenical evangelism. None will argue that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is accurately and clearly presented in the Billy Graham Crusades. However, instead of working with Fundamentalists who preached the Gospel, from the mid-1950s forward, Billy Graham Ministries aligned with Roman Catholics and Modernists who denied or perverted the very doctrine of justification by faith espoused by Dr. Graham from the crusade platform.

While this may on the surface appear to be a contradiction, this methodology is the perfect application of Ockenga's strategy of infiltration of rather than separation from apostate organizations. In addition, the converts from these crusades were then sent to infiltrate the very apostate organizations that sponsored the crusade. Rather than the infiltration of born-again individuals into apostate organizations reversing infidelity, the tragic results of this strategy produced an entire generation of born-again individuals whose impact for the cause of Christ was virtually nullified due to the lack of Christian growth and maturity that comes only from of sound biblical teaching, true Christian fellowship, and the expository preaching of the Word of God. Even more tragically, the children of that generation who grew up in an environment deprived of a pure gospel witness and biblical principles are at risk of becoming an entirely lost generation.

Yes, the motive was indeed, from a human perspective, noble. The stated outcome-mass evangelization-was praiseworthy. However, the methodology that contradicted or completely ignored the instructions of the Word of God was seriously flawed. In the final analysis, evangelism in the absence sound doctrine fails to perpetuate itself. The utilization of this methodology of the New Evangelicalism stifles the passing of the "Gospel Torch" to future generations-a prime example of the tragic failure of the early implementation of the basic principles of Outcome-based Religion.

Ecumenical Movement began within the major Protestant denominations as an impetus for worldwide unity and cooperation among Christian churches. Though the event historically perceived as the founding of the Ecumenical Movement was the World Missionary Conference in Edinburgh in 1910, such attempts had been made as early as the mid-Nineteenth Century. (18) Unity among believers is absolutely biblical and is to be encouraged. However, the modern Ecumenical Movement is patently unbiblical. This movement began as an effort to first unite denominations, expanded to bring the wandering sheep in the Protestant denominations back into the fold of the Church of Rome, and has now evolved to the point that common ground is being sought among all of the world's religions.

The spirit of early ecumenism was illustrated with the founding of the Federal Council of Churches on December 2, 1908. Its original membership consisted of 31 major American denominations, and by 1950 it had grown to 144,000 local congregations with a total membership of 32,000,000. (19) At first glance one may assume that this organization was based on the principle of the biblical unity. However, when the founders of the organization are examined, such names appear as Harry F. Ward. Dr. Ward was a professor at Union Theological Seminary, and was identified under oath by ex-Communist Manning Johnson as the "chief architect for Communist infiltration and subversion in the religious field." (20) Another founder of the FCC was Walter Rauschenbusch. Dr. Rauschenbusch was a Baptist professor at Rochester Theological Seminary. He also was a member of the socialist Fabian Society, and "called upon Christians to build a just social order based on moral law…He thought that Christians had failed to carry out Christ's command to build a kingdom of God on earth…" (21)

In 1942, the Federal Council of Churches issued a platform calling for a "world government, international control of all armies and navies, a universal system of money, and a democratically controlled international bank." (22) It certainly then comes as no surprise that in 1927, Congressman Arthur Free introduced a resolution in the U.S. House of Representatives naming the Federal Council of Churches as "a Communist organization aimed at the establishment of a state church…" (23) On November 29, 1950 the Federal Council of Churches merged with several other interdenominational organizations to form the National Council of Churches. The National Council of Churches then gained membership in the World Council of Churches.

History once again repeated itself after World War II. Just as the move toward a world government under the League of Nations was attempted after World War I, the illuminist elite once again organized a world assembly in the United Nations. This One-worldism was also simultaneously duplicated in the theological realm with the founding of the World Council of Christian Churches. The WCCC was formed in 1948 with 147 denominations of Protestant and Orthodox origin. (It has presently grown to 293 member denominations representing 400,000,000 people.) This organization became the new bastion of Protestant Liberalism and Modernism. Founded on the unscriptural principal of " 'unity of the churches', the new vision is for the unity of all religions-and, in fact, all of mankind." (24) The inaugural meeting of the WCCC (August 1948) extended an invitation of membership to "churches which accept our Lord Jesus Christ as God and Savior", but did not bother to quantify the interpretation of that statement. (25) At this same meeting, the organization's goal was clearly stated by General Secretary of the WCCC, W.A. Visser't Hooft:

"…there can be and there is finally only one church of Christ on earth…we are aware of the situation, that we do not accept it passively, that we move forward towards the manifestation of the ONE HOLY CHURCH." (26)

Lest any misunderstand, the Universal Church certainly does exist. This is the "Body of Christ", consisting of all those who have been vicariously redeemed by the blood of Jesus Christ. However, this Universal Church DOES NOT include every member of every church and/or religion. This "Body" also DOES NOT include those who merely claim Christianity but have never experienced the new birth. Furthermore, this particular statement paralleled the sentiment for a One-World Government with a One World Religion. The opposite view of the WCCC has been correctly conveyed by Dr. David Cloud:

"We could describe the error of the WCC under a number of categories.
We could speak of its Doctrinal Heresy, its Modernism…. Universalism. The simple fact is that the WCC fails every Biblical test which could be applied. It is patently and grossly unscriptural." (27)

In reference to the Statement of Faith of the WCCC, even E.J. Carnell, President of Fuller Theological Seminary, had these less-than-flattering words (in spite of his criticism, he still sent Fuller's graduates to infiltrate WCCC member churches):

(The World Council of Churches Statement of Faith) "is not praiseworthy enough to suit orthodoxy, for the only heresy it catches is Unitarianism. The holes in the mesh are so wide that a sea of theological error can safely swim through. This proves that the ecumenical movement is more concerned with unity than it is with the truth." (28)

The basic premise of the WCCC is the establishment of this mystical "Kingdom of God" on Earth. This is the same old song sung to the same old tune. The idea of establishing the "Kingdom of God" is as old as the formation of the Church of Rome. This stream of thought flows through the pages of history from the Roman Church, through the British Empire, and into the Twentieth Century under the auspices of the League of Nations. However, God will not enlist the help of man to establish His Kingdom on the earth, and the Kingdom of God on earth is not and will not be revealed in the Church. The Kingdom of God will be established only at the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. He alone-without the aid of man-will establish His Kingdom, and He then will rule the entire earth from Jerusalem for 1000 years-the Millennium. Therefore, the socialistic kingdom envisioned by the World Council of Churches is nothing more than a Luciferic fabrication. Philip Potter, WCCC General Secretary, 1969, stated:

"We call upon the churches to move …to relevant and sacrificial action leading to new relationships of dignity and justice among all men and to become the agents for the radical reconstruction of society…a radical change of economic, social, and political structures are needed and not the mere prudential transfer of resources and technologies." (29)

Under the dubious leadership of the World and National Council of Churches, the Ecumenical Movement became an easy target for militant Fundamentalism. In addition to the continued denial of the fundamental doctrines of the Christian Faith, the long list of Communist front organizations and affiliations within NCC and the WCCC added new fervor to Fundamentalist organizations. As a result, during the 1950s and 1960s, high profile Fundamentalists such as Dr. Carl McIntire with the American Council of Christian Churches, Edgar Bundy of the Church League of America, and Billy James Hargis (later implicated in a sex scandal) of the Christian Crusade exposed the Ecumenism and Communism of the NCC and the WCCC through both nationwide radio broadcasts and patriotic rallies.

"They focused their attacks on the National Council of Churches and the World Council of Churches as 'apostate, un-American, pro-Communist, and treasonous ecclesiastical organizations.'" (30)

The efforts of these and other Fundamentalists, along with the general conservative mood of Americans in the 1950s, led to another mass exodus from mainline denominations in the 1960s. This all seemed to signal a failure of the Ecumenical Movement, but in 1963 the cavalry arrived in an attempt to rescue the religious infidels.

For more than 1400 years the Roman Catholic Church was not only self-righteous, but in its own eyes the Church possessed absolute infallibility. The Church of Rome lorded over monarchs, over wealthy men, and over the poor with an iron hand. Irrespective of social latitude, if one's personal beliefs were inconsistent with those of the Church-the consequences were either prison, torture, burning at the stake, or all of the above. From the Church's perspective there was no salvation apart from Rome, no Christianity apart from Rome, and no room for discussion. However, in 1962 something strangely disproportionate occurred, and many of the attitudes that prevailed for more than a millennia suspiciously disappeared.

The First Vatican Council was adjourned in 1870 after establishing definitions to the "doctrine" of papal infallibility. (31) The Second Vatican Council opened October 11, 1962 under Pope John XXIII and closed December 8,1965 under Pope Paul VI. The decrees and declarations of Vatican II signaled a paradigm shift in Catholic thought that resulted in not only a schismatic civil war within the ranks of Catholicism, but also raised serious questions as to the true source of the changes. The essence of these changes began in 1959 when Pope John XXIII called the Council "to complete the work of the First Vatican Council". (32) In 1961 he set a historical precedent by permitting Catholic observers to officially attend the third assembly of the World Council of Churches, and he also afforded places of honor to Protestant and Orthodox observers at all of the Vatican II sessions. (33) The resulting bombshell labeled the "Decree on Ecumenism" included the following excerpts:

1. All who have been "justified in faith in baptism" are members of the
Body of Christ; they all have the right to be called Christian; the children of the Catholic Church call them brothers.
2. The Catholic Church believes that the separated churches and communities "are efficient in some respects." But the Holy Ghost makes use of these churches; they are a means of salvation to their members.
3. Catholics are encouraged to join in Oecumenical (sic) activity, and to meet non-Catholic Christians in truth and love…
4. Catholics are not to ignore their duty to other Christians…even so…Catholics sincerely believe that theirs is the Church of Christ; everything necessary must be done that others may clearly recognize it as Christ's Church.
5. …Theologians and other competent Catholics should study the history, teachings, and liturgy of separated Churches…
6. In appropriate circumstances prayers for unity should be recited jointly with non-Catholic Christians…
7. …Important differences remain…but…the fact that Christians believe in the divinity of Christ and the fact of reverence for God's word revealed in the Bible.
8. In the cause of ecumenism, the Catholic must always remain true to the Faith that he has received….(34)

The new concepts initiated by Pope John XXIII and Vatican II were a radical departure from the historic position of the Roman Catholic Institution. Even to suggest that Protestant and Orthodox were Christians, much less to use the term "brothers" was in complete contradiction of traditional Catholic doctrine. Traditionalists within the Catholic Church accused the authors of the Vatican II documents as "favoring modern philosophy over traditional Catholic doctrine"; favoring Humanism, Naturalism, and Evolution; refusing to condemn Socialism and Communism; and making agreements with "Masonry", the World Council of Churches, and "Moscow". (35) Time has proven these accusations correct, and some even suggest that Vatican II was such a radical departure from established Catholicism that one must seriously consider the possibility of a major coup within the walls of the Vatican. In the words of traditional Catholic, R. P. Georges de Nantes:

"At the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), the two men posing as Catholic popes, John XXIII and Paul VI, led the whole body of Cardinals and Bishops out of the Catholic Church and into their Vatican II sect…" (36)

While one must wonder what happened to cause such a radical change, (39) for the purposes of this discussion, the answer to that question is irrelevant. The issue at hand is simply that just when the Ecumenical Movement was about to placed in its grave, the Roman Catholic Church appeared on the scene as the knight in shining armor to rescue the movement. Not only did the Church of Rome embrace the "separated brethren", but also initiated new strategies to augment the efforts of ecumenism. (These strategies will be discussed in subsequent chapters.)

The 19th Century witnessed the laying of the foundation for the events of the first 6 decades of the 20th Century. By 1965, the stage seemed set for the alliance of Protestants and Catholics to unite and form the One-world Church. Fundamentalists at this time were not only embroiled in the battle with the Modernist-Roman Catholic alliance, but also faced the Out-come based threat of the New Evangelicals. With Fundamentalism engaged in battle on two fronts, the Mega-church seemed to be positioned to end the threat of fragmented Fundamentalism. However, God had other plans for mankind, and world events would take another turn to strike a major blow at the heart of the Ecumenical Movement.

ENDNOTES

1. "Modernist Millennium", Perilous Times Newsletter, Vol. 2 #16
2. Cloud, David. "Fundamentalism, Modernism, and New Evangelicalism",
www.Whidbey.net/~dcloud/tbns/fundamen1.htm. p.2
3. Beale, David O. In Pursuit of Purity: American Fundamentalism Since 1850.
Unusual Publications, Greenville, SC, 1986. p.348
4. Ibid. p.347
5. Ibid. p.185
6. Ibid. p.154
7. Ibid. p.156
8. Ibid. p.157
9. Hunt, David. "Am I a Fundamentalist?", The Berean Call newsletter, August, 1998. p.1.
10. Dollar, George. A History of Fundamentalism in America, Bob Jones University Press, Greenville, SC. 1973. p.204.
11. Woodbridge, Charles. The New Evangelicalism, Bob Jones University Press, Greenville, SC. p.
12. Dollar. p. 207.
13. Murray, Iain H. Evangelicalism Divided, The Banner of Truth Trust, Edinburgh, UK., 2000. p.22.
14. Ibid. p.77.
15. Ibid. p.37
16. Ibid. p.190
17. Woodbridge. p. 15.
18. "Ecumenical Movement". The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th Edition,
http://www.bartleby.com/65/ec/ecumen-mo.html. 2001.
19. Burns,Cathy. Billy Graham and His Friends, Sharing Press, Mt. Carmel, PA, 2001. p.189.
20. Ibid. p.142.
21. Ibid. p.190.
22. Ibid. p.194.
23. Ibid. p.195.
24. Reynolds, Marion H. "The Truth About the National Council of Churches",
www.fundamentalbiblechurch.net/tbcwcc.htm. p.2.
25. Murray. p.2.
26. "ENI News Highlights," Ecumenical News International, World Council of
Churches, December, 1997, http://www.wcc_coe.org/eni
27. Cloud, David. Way of Life Encyclopedia, (as quoted by) Aho, Barbara, Watch Unto Prayer Ministries, http://www.watch.pair.com/pray.html
28. Murray. p.21.
29. Reynolds. p.4.
30. Groupwatch. Interhemispheric Resource Center, Albuquerque, NM, 1988. www.irc-online.org, p.2.
31. "The Second Vatican Council". www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/v1.html, p.1.
32. "The Ecumenical Movement". Encarta Online Encyclopedia, http://encarta.msn.com/index/conciseindex/55/05553000.htm?z=1&pg=2&br=1, p.3.
33. Ibid. p.4.
34. "The Second Vatican Council". pp. 13-14.
35. Georges de Nantes, R.P. "Summary of the Principal Errors of Vatican II Ecclesiology", www.truecatholic.org/v2ecclesio.htm, January, 1984, p.3.
36. Ibid.
37. Jeffrey, Grant. Final Warning, Frontier Research Publications, Toronto, 1995, pg.161.
38. Hayes, Kathleen. "Black Virgin, Black Christ", NRI Trumpet, 5/91,p.1.
39. This aspect is discussed in detail in the article "Rome's Year 2000 Penance" at www.cuttingedge.org.

Source: - http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1506index.html