Anti-Discernment Zealot/ "Pastor" James Macdonald uses RACE CARD to defend WOF peddler T.D. Jakes

[billiefan2000]

JAMES MACDONALD, ELEPHANT ROOM 2, AND THE RACE CARD?
By Ken Silva pastor-teacher on Jan 31, 2012 in Current Issues, Features

Apprising Ministries continues coverage of the fallout from ER2.

Apparently, this is now a race issue.

Beginning at 4:00 into the video in Post-Elephant Room Interview, Part 1

Patial transcript courtesy of Christine Pack of Sola Sisters:

Bryan Loritts: “Some of the strongest reactions were African Americans in the blogosphere….um, I’ll just go ahead and say it, who strike me as wanting so bad to be in the white theological world. And to take a little bit of a tangent here, and I’ll get back, the loudest voices in the conservative evangelical world, in my estimation right now, are your older, white reformed voices. And so that implicitly sends the message that mature Christianity in the conservative evangelical world is ‘older white.’ And you’ve got some African Americans who so idolize that – what some people would call white idolization – that they then feel as if they’ve got to be the voice for black culture to speak against people like T.D. Jakes. So what happens is, you kind of prop them up. When the truth of the matter is, the term ‘black’ is very complex…….We’re different, we’re different. So my concern is, African Americans, a small minority speaking against Jakes, and then leveraging that in the white theological world for some of these older white theologians….”

James MacDonald: “What would they be leveraging it for?”

Bryan Loritts: “To fit into their circles….”

James MacDonald: “Opportunity…?”

Bryan Loritts: “We want to be in their circles. And so we’ll allow ourselves to used as a puppet. That is my perception of some of this backlash.”



JAMES MACDONALD, ELEPHANT ROOM 2, AND THE RACE CARD? : Apprising Ministries

[billiefan2000]

sola sisters website said it best about this



TRANSLATION: If you are white and will not accept Modalist heretic T.D. Jakes as a brother in Christ, then you are racist.

If you are black and will not accept TD Jakes as a brother, it is because you are being used as a puppet by the white reformed community.


Our question: Is everybody okay with the race card being so blatantly played?

[mattfivefour]

My comment has nothing to do with a defense of T.D. Jakes. god will judge him, and in the meantime I do not send people to his church. Nor would I invite him to speak at mine. But, that aside, my only comment to the Sola Sisters would be "Take a pill!" The discussion excerpted (and it is important to realize this is just a brief excerpt of the actual conversation) is not "playing the race card" it is discussing a reality in America. Get a grip, folks! Or we at the point that to fully discuss an issue is forbidden because the thought police (aka some ODMers) will tear you to shreds and send you to apostasy jail for trying to articulate the reality of an issue?

[paul&katie]

Blog | Grace Family Baptist Church

Looking Ahead
As I look ahead, I think two things are very important. First, I believe T.D. Jakes is wrong on the doctrine of the Trinity, and wrong on the gospel. I am also involved directly in a matter (the ER2 controversy) that has brought discussion of those facts to light. Consequently, my mandate to “hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it” (Titus 1:9) obligates me to be on record in the matter. I have done that.

Second, the racial overtones of this matter have gotten out of hand (see here, for example), and must be addressed. The ER2 controversy is now pitting black evangelicals against white evangelicals, and against each other with T.D. Jakes as the centerpiece. This is an opportunity to pull back the curtain on the awkward racial dynamic in evangelical circles. Race is a convenient ‘dodge’ for those with weak arguments, and an inconvenient truth for those who harbor prejudice. Beyond that, it is an absolutely confusing subject for myriad evangelicals who simply love Christ, love his church, and want desperately not to offend their brothers and sisters in the Lord by using “black” when they should have used “African American,” or vice versa!

The irony is that this issue is most pronounced when heterodoxy is in play. For example, when a white evangelical disagrees with a solid, Reformed, black pastor on a technical theological issue, there is rarely a charge of racism. However, let that black brother be part of a heterodox or heretical group (i.e., Oneness Pentecostalism, Word of Faith, Black Liberation Theology, etc.), and suddenly the white brother who makes the argument against him faces charges of racism! Why? Partly because of... RACISM!

You see, some of this boils down to what has sometimes been called, “the soft bigotry of lowered expectations.” Asking black people to adopt orthodox theology (when Lord knows they don’t have access to the same schools, books, opportunities, and, in the minds of some... lack sufficient intelligence) is asking them to negate their blackness. While, on the other hand, the solid, Reformed, well-educated black pastor is NOT REALLY BLACK. Therefore, he’s fair game. Irony of Ironies... that is racist! And that’s what has to be dragged out of the shadows.

I’m not angry with James MacDonald. He’s my brother, and I love him. We disagree. We both understand that. Ironically, that’s what The Elephant Room is supposedly all about. Brothers should be able to disagree with one another and still be brothers. There’s just one problem: Embracing Jakes while rejecting others because we question his history of modalism and Word of Faith teaching... that’s the real “Elephant in the Room”?

[paul&katie]

Phill Johnson disagrees:

Pyromaniacs: Elephantiasis

I know it's not my day to post, but this: is probably the most blatantly racist presentation I have ever witnessed from an ostensibly "mainstream" evangelical source.

The take-away message is this: If you're an old white guy with any hint of Reformed theology in your confessional statement and you don't think T. D. Jakes's equivocations at Elephant Room 2 were sufficient to erase decades of concern about his Oneness leanings and his relentless proclamation of a false Prosperity Gospel—then you must be a racist. And even if you don't think you're a racist, you should shut up anyway. Because in the black community relationships are more important than any doctrine, including the gospel and the Trinity. We all should strive to subjugate doctrine to relationships anyway.

If on the other hand you are a young black man with Reformed convictions—or any black person who just has a keen interest in doctrinal and biblical accuracy—you are a sellout and a reproach to your own community. The only possible explanation is that you are guilty of "White Idolatry." You secretly wish to earn favor with Whitey. You should not only shut up, you should be ashamed. As far as the importance of relationships is concerned, we don't really care to have one with you.

End of discussion.

So much for open dialogue and not hiding behind walls of disagreement. The Elephant Room experiment clearly wasn't really about that in the first place. It wasn't about real unity or truth, either.

How does 2000 years of Christian consensus on the doctrine of the Godhead get sent to the back of the bus so blithely in the name of unity and racial reconciliation?

And why the deafening silence from so many men and ministries who supposedly are committed to standing for the defense and proclamation of core gospel truths? If you can be intimidated into silence by the race card when a greed-mongering prosperity-gospel Sabellian-sympathizer is being hailed by once-sound evangelicals as someone to be emulated, what doctrine will you defend openly and publicly?

[billiefan2000]

Voddie Baucham accuses ER2 defenders of cult-like ‘Ethnic Gnosticism’
Posted on Friday, 3 February 2012


As the fallout from The Elephant Room 2 (ER2) continues to spread, Dr. James White, director of Alpha and Omega Ministries, has interviewed Dr. Voddie Baucham on White’s The Dividing Line programme.


Baucham is a black pastor of Southern Baptist Grace Family Baptist Church in the Houston area of Texas.



He declined an invitation to ER2 because of Jakes’ presence.

The insightful discussion centred upon the accusations of racism made by Brian Crawford Loritts and others towards those who have spoken out against T.D. Jakes and his presence at The Elephant Room. Baucham had earlier characterized Jakes as ‘an example of the worst the black church has to offer’.

During the hour-long interview, Baucham identified the position of those trying to silence ER2’s critics as Ethnic Gnosticism, accusing them of engaging in cult-like behaviour. The term Ethnic Gnosticism refers to some hidden or secret knowledge known only to a select ethnic group. Baucham explained:

Here’s one of the things that happens. And this is the great irony: it’s almost cult like. On the one hand you can say to a person, ‘You can’t say that because you don’t understand the black community and the black experience.’

Well, then somebody like myself, or Anthony Carter, or [garbled], or [garbled], or somebody like us, comes out and says, ‘Oh, actually, I agree that there are these problems with T.D. Jakes.’ Then the immediate response is ‘Well, you’re just a sell out. You’re just an Uncle Tom. You’re just trying to curry favour with white people. And the bottom line is that you’re not really black.’

And, so, that’s what the cults do. [They say:] ‘If you can’t answer my question, it’s because you’re ignorant. If you can answer my question, then I’ll find another way around.’ And that’s why I say it’s Ethnic Gnosticism.

Baucham went on to explain how cultural filters prevented some in the black community from calling out gross sin, criminal behaviour, and even heresy. Alluding to the claims of James MacDonald, who said that he did not press Jakes further because ‘the issue was not as essential, or because the relationship was not ready’, Baucham then continued:

And so, open sin being tolerated in the name of Ethnic Gnosticism, it’s got to be dragged out into the light. If people do things that are racist, they need to be called on it, because it’s sin. But if people do things that are, you know, other areas of sin, they need to be called out on that as well.

And we can’t say that because of our fear of being accused of the sin of racism, when that’s not our motivation, that we’ll refuse to call out other things. That’s just wrong. That’s just wrong.

And the idea that our relationship has to be at a certain place before you can call that out, that’s just, that’s just not Bible. And it’s not loving the brother. If you love someone, you have to confront them in their sin. You have to confront them in their error. That’s the height of love.

Both White and Baucham cited Galatians 3:28 as evidence that particular topics should not be off-limits for Christians due to fear of accusations of racism. In context, this verse teaches that the Gospel of Jesus Christ’s life, death and resurrection for sinners transcends and breaks down all ethnic and cultural barriers:

For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

(Gal. 3:26–29)




The entire interview is required listening for anyone wishing to understand how ER2’s defenders are trying to use race to silence their critics.

It can be found here: http://www.aomin.org/podcasts/20120202.mp3




Voddie Baucham accuses ER2 defenders of cult-like

[billiefan2000]

Cleaning Up After the Elephants? MacDonald Takes to the Airwaves
Article by Erin Benziger, Do Not Be Surprised


Sola Sisters: Cleaning Up After the Elephants? MacDonald Takes to the Airwaves


James MacDonald has been making the radio rounds this week as he speaks to the Elephant Room 2 controversy surrounding T.D. Jakes.



On Monday, he was a featured guest on Chris Fabry Live, an afternoon talk show that can be heard on Moody radio stations across the country.


Audio of that show is available here. Moody Radio | Chris Fabry Live! | February 6, 2012 | A Controversial Conversation // Grace and Truth



Tuesday morning, MacDonald appeared on Moody's local Chicago morning show, The Morning Ride, to speak briefly with host Mark Elfstrand. The full audio of that interview can be heard here.



As is to be expected, the topic of T.D. Jakes largely dominated these discussions.


Between these two interviews, there is a lot that could be addressed, and so the intent of this post is not to embark on a minute-by-minute critique, but to simply alert the reader to a few rather interesting comments made during these two conversations.


Please note that quotations made herein of these radio interviews may not be verbatim. The reader is encouraged, then, to listen to the interviews for him or herself.



Tuesday morning's discussion was quick and to the point. Not too many minutes in, we can hear MacDonald unquestioningly state, "I don't believe he's [Jakes] a modalist."


This conclusion, according to MacDonald, is based upon Jakes' answers to Driscoll's questions in the Elephant Room 2.


MacDonald says, "[Jakes] didn't get an A+ on the exam, but he didn't get a B either." Let's look again at part of the ER2 conversation between Driscoll and Jakes.




Driscoll: We all would agree that in the nature of God there is mystery, and it’s like a dimmer switch: how much certainty, how much mystery.


But within that, Bishop Jakes, for you the issue between Trinitarianism and Modalism at its essence is is one God manifesting Himself successively in three ways? Or one God three persons simultaneously existing eternally – so, your best What is your understanding now?


And I understand, there is some mystery – for sure. Would you say its One God manifesting Himself in three ways, or One God in three persons?



Jakes: I believe that neither one of them totally did it for me, but the latter one is where I stand today.


Driscoll: One God Three Persons?


Jakes: One God – Three Persons. One God – Three Persons, and here is why…there… I am not crazy about the word persons this is…most people who follow me know that that is really.

My doctrinal statement is no different from yours except the word…


Driscoll: “manifestations”


Jakes: Manifest instead of persons. Which you describe as modalist, but I describe it as Pauline. When I read…let me show you what I’m talking about…when I read I Timothy 3:16 – I didn’t create this, Paul did:

“And without controversy” which I think we have…we have been bickering about something which Paul describes as a mystery, and I don’t think we should do that. “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness.


For God was manifest in the flesh.” Now Paul is not a modalist, but he doesn’t think it is robbery to the divinity of God to think God was manifest in the flesh. And I think maybe it’s semantics, because [garbled], but Paul says this before this fight was started. But He also says he “was manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, believed in the world, and received up into glory.”


Now, when we start talking about that sort of thing, I think that it is important that we realize that there are distinctives between the Father and the working of the Son. the Father didn’t bleed, the Father didn’t die, only a different person in Jesus Christ…is coming back for us in the person of Jesus Christ.


Jesus Christ is with us, but only indwells us through the person of the Holy Spirit;


we are baptized into the body of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. I don’t think any of that is objectionable to any of the three of us. So that is consistent with my belief system. I’m with you. I have been with you. I teach/preach that all the time.


There are many people within and outside quote unquote denominations labeled Oneness that would describe that the same way. There are some that would not.


But when we get to know people by their labels, then comes all the baggage of how we define that label. And we miss…it’s almost like the stereotypical ideologies we have about races.


We have ideas about denominations and movements. The reason I’m proud of what you said earlier about people who have dual affiliations: We are taught in society that if we disagree with any movement, we leave. We sever. Oh, you said something I disagree with we fall out and then we walk away.


I still have fellowship, associations, relationship, and positions within and without Trinitarian and Onenness movements. Because I believe that until we bridge the gap between our thinking and humble both sides and say, “We are both attempting to describe a God we love, that we serve, and that we have not seen. And that we are viewing Him through the context of the Scriptures, but that with a glass darkly.”

Why should I fall out and hate and throw names at you when all that I know and understand, be it very orthodox, is still through a glass darkly? and then face to face – None of our books about the Godhead or anything else will be on sale in heaven.


You know why? Because we’re only authorities down here, with our little kingdoms in this world. I think it’s important that we realize that our God is beyond our intellect.


And if you can define Him and completely describe Him and say you are the end-all definition of who God is, then He ceases to be God. Because the reason Paul says it is a mystery, is that we deify the fact that God does things that don’t fit our formulas.


And because people’s formulas and understandings of a description of an unbiblical God did doesn’t make them demonic. (Online Source)





It seems that James MacDonald still has not realized that he may very well have been duped by Jakes, who is a careful and skilled communicator.


Yes, he affirmed "3 persons," but still prefers to use the language of the modalists.


Jakes' use of 1 Timothy 3:16 especially ought to cause us to wonder if he has truly abandoned his Oneness roots, as this is a common "go to" verse for the Modalist argument.


If you haven't already taken the time to listen to this discussion between James White and Voddie Baucham on this particular topic, I suggest you do so.


It will shed a great deal of light on what precisely T.D. Jakes was saying in his response.

In his appearance on Chris Fabry Live, MacDonald expanded a bit on his acceptance of Jakes - or of anyone - who doesn't hold to the precise doctrine to which MacDonald himself may adhere.


He declared that the Trinity is a "non-negotiable," and that it is "central" and a "key pillar" of Christianity.


Yet, he continued, he does not feel it "necessary to hold people to a creedal preciseness about their Trinitarianism to see that person as a Christian."


MacDonald stated something similar to this in the past, so it is clear that his position has not changed.


Yet, the Trinitarian nature of God is just that - an undeniable fact of His nature, and while none of us will fully grasp this side of Heaven how the Trinity exists as the Bible says it does, the bottom line is that the Bible is still quite clear on the subject.


This isn't about "creedal preciseness" (though, creeds such as the Athanasian Creed were developed based on biblical truth), it is about accepting - or rejecting - what God has revealed in His Word.

Nevertheless, for James MacDonald, it all comes down in the end to his continued claim that ER2 "isn't about the issues."


Instead, according to MacDonald in both of these interviews on Moody radio, the whole purpose was to "model how to talk to people we disagree with."


Hm...really? Then why does it seem that there is actually very little disagreement between the various participants of the Elephant Room? Toward the end of his Tuesday morning interview,


MacDonald stated that "most of the critique is coming from people who weren't there, at any of the 70 locations..."



Well, Pastor MacDonald, in case you have forgotten, some of us did want to be there. But I digress.




At about 35 minutes into the interview with Chris Fabry, the subject of race was brought into the discussion.


It was quite interesting to hear MacDonald state that "ethnicity was not part of the subject, and I [MacDonald] think that trying to make it part of the subject is troubling."


What is troubling here is the complete backward nature of that statement.


While many initially were critical and questioning of Jakes' inclusion in this event, the concerns ultimately had nothing to do with T.D. Jakes' race.




The issue has always been the attack of the faith once for all delivered to the saints. Race was not truly brought into this controversy until a blog post (that has since been removed) was written by Bryan Loritts.



The issue of race was brought even more boldly to the forefront when James MacDonald posted this video, wherein some very disconcerting and, quite frankly, some seemingly racist comments were made:




So, whether James MacDonald likes it or not, it appears as though it was his camp that unnecessarily dragged the "race card" into this situation. Nevertheless, if James MacDonald doesn't want race to be the issue, and none of the critics of ER2 ever felt that race was the issue, then let us move on.

Not long after this subject was addressed between Fabry and MacDonald, Fabry brought up the oft-neglected (by MacDonald, anyway) elephant of T.D. Jakes' prosperity gospel.



In this part of the discussion, James MacDonald indicated that a private conversation had taken place (among whom, we do not know, though it is obvious that it was at least allegedly between MacDonald and Jakes).


During this conversation, says MacDonald,


T.D. Jakes expressed that he would "not currently accept the designation of prosperity or Word of Faith as an accurate description of what he believes. [...]

As of two weeks ago [Jakes] would not accept these terms in a private conversation as an accurate description of what he believes."



MacDonald continued and stated that Jakes' "ministry will have to bear that out." Indeed it will. After all, the prosperity preaching gig is quite lucrative and it is undoubtedly not abandoned lightly. And it is most certainly not forsaken without repentance.


But then, when T.D. Jakes states that he would not describe himself as a prosperity preacher, is that to be viewed as an acknowledgement that he was at one time,

but now has turned from such lies?


Or is it merely someone rejecting a less-than-desirable title for himself?



If T.D. Jakes truly desires to no longer preach an aberrant prosperity gospel, then may we assume that he will soon be denouncing and apologizing for the teachings contained in footage such as this?





And if Jakes has turned from his Word-Faith leanings, then it is curious that, just a week prior to the Elephant Room, he delivered a more-than-mildly Word-Faith-esque sermon at Code Orange Revival.



If the reader is unfamiliar with this, I suggest visiting this careful critique of Jakes' COR sermon, written by Daniel Neades at the Better Than Sacrifice blog.



Yet, James MacDonald claims that he "learned a ton" from this sermon delivered by Jakes. Perhaps this explains why MacDonald could be content with Jakes simply "not accepting" the designation of being a Word of Faith or prosperity preacher.




For those who have long respected and looked to James MacDonald for biblical teaching, it would be helpful to know just how strong his confrontation, or conversation, with Jakes was regarding Jakes' Word of Faith heresy.


To simply be content with someone rejecting a title is a rather unfortunately weak position, especially when the evidence of that designation is 20+ years strong.


If indeed Jakes has turned from his Word of Faith heresy, it would be edifying to the Church to see a public repentance and renunciation of it, considering that Jakes' ministry has been so public - and so detrimental - for so many years.





James MacDonald did make one comment in his Tuesday morning interview with which some might agree. He stated, "a lot of this [the critique] is rooted in fear."




Agreed, but not with the same motivation and meaning behind the statement as MacDonald would claim.


Yes, Pastor MacDonald, perhaps fear is a motivator of some of the critiques:


fear that the Word of God is no longer being held with the same power and authority within the visible church;



fear that the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith are being swept under the rug in favor of joining hands and espousing "love and unity;"


fear that some of American Christianity's most influential leaders have chosen the path of compromise.



Fear that perhaps we have begun to place our fear of men over and above our fear of God.



I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.

But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.



As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.



For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ. (Galatians 1:6-10)



Sola Sisters: Cleaning Up After the Elephants? MacDonald Takes to the Airwaves

[myinnuendo999]

What's appalling is when the race card is used to cover up error especially when used to divert the essential doctrine of the Trinity that is being hijacked by the error of modalism as acceptable. In the context of the ER2 , this is exactly what James is doing by using the race card to divert attention and divide people from the real problems by creating obfuscations and it is sickening to me. For someone who calls himself a Pastor? It's the timing of all this as a gambit as to why it's so egregious--it's plain wrong and unbiblical.

Rom 16:17 I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.

So the body of Christ has this racial problem-- I don't deny that. But this is not the issue at hand with James MacDonald it's a red herring. The doctrine of the Trinity is the issue and it's not a secondary issue. Pull on a loose thread here and all of Christianity unravels. This is not one of those doctrines we can agree to disagree upon. The Trinity is at the very heart of the gospel. If we lose the Trinity, we lose the gospel, we lose salvation, we lose Christianity itself


As a separate issue, if Genuine believers truly love one another and there's a brother or sister that is struggling with RACE (in the body of Christ), then lets put our arm around each other and work it out in the name of Jesus Christ according to the TRUTH. Don't divide the body of Christ with the race issues to protect a Heretic-TD Jakes though. The REAL issue is the Trinity in this whole fiasco.

We all have hurts and pains and many things we need to LEARN to give to the Lord Jesus and be healed because the problem is our evil wicked hearts. Sometimes that takes a brother or sister to come along side us and carry that burden with us as well.

[billiefan2000]

JAMES MACDONALD TEACHES US TO “DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO”
By Ken Silva pastor-teacher on Feb 11, 2012 in Current Issues, Features



By Apprising Ministries special correspondent Erin Benziger of Do Not Be Surprised…
This is a repost of an original article on Do Not Be Surprised…

This evening, James MacDonald, of Harvest Bible Chapel and Walk in the Word, sent out the following tweet:


(Online Source)

Clearly this must be a case of “do as I say, not as I do.” Or, perhaps MacDonald merely has forgotten his now infamous “reformed Nazi” tweet of August 18, 2011:


(Online Source)

Tonight, not long after publicly criticizing those who criticize publicly, MacDonald said this:

(Online Source)


Hm, I guess Jesus goofed in Matthew 23, rebuking the Pharisees before the crowds.


Sadly, as MacDonald alluded to in his first tweet mentioned here, those who “publicly criticize” on Twitter can easily be blocked and ignored. Go ahead, just stick your fingers in your ears, maybe those who defend the truth and refuse to compromise God’s Word will just go away…

Look, no one is out to “get” anyone here, and no one is calling for a tar and feathering, but the irony and the hypocrisy of the situation is really becoming ridiculous. Ultimately, let us continue to pray for Harvest Bible Chapel, for its congregation, and for its pastor.

The original appears complete with a comments section for you to join the discussion right here.




JAMES MACDONALD TEACHES US TO “DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO” : Apprising Ministries

[Ducati]

For decades we tried ending segregation and now that its been abolished there are some that fight to get it back.

[billiefan2000]

related:

HARVEST BIBLE CHAPEL CLAIMS ITS SECOND (KNOWN) ER2 CASUALTY
By Ken Silva pastor-teacher on Feb 29, 2012 in Current Issues, Features



By Christian Research Network correspondent Erin Benziger of Do Not Be Surprised…
This is a repost of an original article on Do Not Be Surprised…

From the website of Harvest Bible Chapel in Prescott, Arizona:

Over the last 11 months or so, Harvest Bible Chapel Chicago (HBC Chicago) has made statements and taken actions that we strongly believe reflect a change in the direction of critical parts of their ministry. We believe these actions and resulting changes can be categorized into three areas:

ASSOCIATIONS vs. ENDORSEMENTS

We believe that HBC Chicago has begun championing the idea that Christians can associate with those teaching heresy (such as those who engage in teaching the Word of Faith and Prosperity Gospels) without necessarily endorsing them or their ministries, implicitly or explicitly.

Scripture tells us… 2 John 1:9-11, “Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. [10] If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, [11] for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.”

We strongly believe that when church leaders associate with those teaching false and/or heretical doctrine, it confuses and misleads God’s people into potentially dangerous areas of belief and acceptance. Scripture is clear, those who teach heresy are not to be received, much less embraced. We therefore must sharply disagree with HBC Chicago on this matter.

THE SLIPPERY SLOPE

We believe HBC Chicago has begun communicating the idea that in these last days, unnecessary divisiveness exists and at its root is overly restrictive adherence to Biblical doctrines, that it is more important, for the sake of unity, to extend grace and loosen strict adherence to Biblical doctrines.

Scripture tells us… 2 Timothy 4:1-4, “I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: [2] preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. [3] For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, [4] and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.”

We strongly disagree that by making previously non-negotiable doctrines appear to be negotiable (or effectively deemphasizing them by ignoring them), greater unity can be attained by embracing those who would otherwise be excluded from orthodox Christianity. The warning in Scripture is clear, the danger to the church in the last days is not a lack of unity, but a lack of standing firm on Biblical truth. We as an elder team have a deep conviction that this drift is occurring. We do not believe HBC Chicago is disavowing Biblical truth, but instead is leading down a path which leaves wide openings for the presentations of “other” gospels as legitimate, orthodox and main-stream. We therefore must sharply disagree with HBC Chicago on this matter.

CLARITY vs. CONFUSION

We believe that one of our roles as Elders in Christ’s church is to be diligent in helping bring clarity to God’s people in areas of truth and faith. Since the Elephant Room 1 Conference, we have experienced more and more confusion from Harvest-related events and we believe that the confusion has grown exponentially due to Elephant Room 2.

Scripture tells us… Titus 2:7-8, “Show yourself in all respects to be a model of good works, and in your teaching show integrity, dignity, [8] and sound speech that cannot be condemned, so that an opponent may be put to shame, having nothing evil to say about us.”

God’s Word instructs us to have clear communication with integrity. We therefore must sharply disagree with HBC Chicago on this matter. (Online Source)

The elders of HBC Prescott conclude their message to the congregation with the following:

Over this time period, we have repeatedly and privately expressed our concern with the leaders of Harvest Bible Fellowship. After many months of prayer and consideration, we have reached a point in time that we believe to continue our association with HBC Chicago would appear to be endorsing their decisions, which would cause confusion for the flock that is under our care. So it is with a heavy heart, out of what we see is our obedience to our responsibility to our Lord to care and shepherd His flock, that we must end our association with HBC Chicago. (Online Source)

The reader is encouraged to access this post in its entirety here. Indeed, the elders of HBC Prescott did a fine job of expressing their concerns with Harvest Bible Chapel Chicago. One will notice that every point is rooted clearly and soundly in Scripture, and thus their subsequent decision to separate from Harvest Bible Fellowship was one grounded in the truth and conviction of God’s Word. We commend this church and its leadership for taking such a strong stand in making what was most assuredly a difficult decision.

Sadly, this is not the first casualty of the Elephant Room 2 and the leadership of Harvest Bible Chapel (HBC) and Harvest Bible Fellowship (HBF). The reader may recall that, in January 2012, Harvest Bible Church in Detroit made the same decision to separate from HBF:

For five years our church has been privileged to be a part of the Harvest Bible Fellowship (HBF). We appreciate the ministry of James MacDonald and the HBF leaders. We have been blessed to take part in the planting of Bible-preaching, Christ-exalting churches all over the world. Dozens of our church members have been equipped in ministry through Harvest’s annual conference. The Harvest Fellowship has had a significant role in the strengthening of our church.

However, it is with great sadness that our elders have unanimously decided to part ways with Harvest Bible Fellowship. This is not due to any change in our church’s position, but due to what we believe is a change in the Fellowship’s direction. James MacDonald seems insistent in pushing boundaries in the area of associations with men whose ministry philosophy, practice, and even theology we can’t endorse. As a member of HBF, our desire was for good, consistent, conservative leadership from HBF. When we became a member of HBF five years ago this is what we received and this is what we could wholeheartedly endorse; however, in our estimation that has changed. We have been surprised by significant decisions made by James MacDonald (and supported by HBF), resulting in our trust being shaken regarding their guidance as well as future direction as a movement of churches. Despite several personal conversations with HBF leadership, our concerns have not been assuaged. (Online Source)

The elders of HBC Prescott voiced quite well the over-arching problem when they declared, “The warning in Scripture is clear, the danger to the church in the last days is not a lack of unity, but a lack of standing firm on Biblical truth.” It is unfortunate that James MacDonald and the leadership of HBF cannot see this same truth.

May we keep these courageous churches and their leaders in our prayers as they continue to stand boldly for the truth of God’s Word. Surely they have chosen the way of the Apostle Paul, seeking to please God rather than man (Galatians 1:10).

SEE ALSO:
ER2 Claims First Acts 29 Casualty

The original appears complete with a comments section for you to join the discussion right here.



HARVEST BIBLE CHAPEL CLAIMS ITS SECOND (KNOWN) ER2 CASUALTY : Apprising Ministries