The messages from the Ohio Bible Fellowship Spring Conference (April 14-15, 2023) were recorded and are available to listen to via YouTube. You can listen to the audio-only videos at the following link.

Ohio Bible Fellowship – YouTube

Our speaker was Evangelist Mark Herbster of Maranatha University. The first two messages were given at Bucyrus Bible Church and the second two at Calvary Baptist Church of Willard. The messages dealt with the topics of Biblical Unity and Separation and were well received by all.

The following paragraphs are a proposed resolution for the Ohio Bible Fellowship:

The Bible teaches that believers should enjoy unity with other members of the Body of Christ (Psa. 133:1; 1 Cor. 12:12-14; Eph. 4:1-6). This unity is based on our common faith (Eph. 4:5), desire for holiness (1 John. 1:6-7), and purpose (Phil. 1:5). The Bible also teaches that believers should be separated to God. This separation is based on a common desire for personal holiness (Titus 2:11-14), purity within the church (Matt. 18:15-17; 1 Cor. 5:6-7, 11-13), and keeping distinct from error (2 Cor. 6:14-7:1; 2 John 9-11).

The Ohio Bible Fellowship recognizes the need for both unity and separation in its purpose statement and doctrinal statement. Biblical unity is sought with like-minded churches who are committed to the same doctrines and practices (1 Cor. 14:40), who desire to advance the gospel (Matt. 28:19–20), and who proclaim the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27; 2 Tim. 4:2). Biblical separation is practiced by “furthering the separatist position for the protection of the Christian faith and the church” (2 Thess. 3:6, 14; 2 John 10–11) and by “warning of contemporary dangers” (Eph. 5:11; Jude 3).

During a time when many shy away from biblical separation, it would be easy to seek unity without it or to minimize its importance. However, this would not be complete obedience to the whole counsel of God. Let us, therefore, resolve to faithfully practice biblical unity with like-minded believers and churches whenever possible and to promote biblical separation when necessary for the purity of the Church and the glory of God.

I was just reading in Proverbs and found this statement:

“Take away the dross from silver, and it will go to the silversmith for jewelry.” — Prov. 25:4

This ancient proverb made me think of the unity-separation conundrum. In the past, fundamentalists had a strong voice for separation as can be seen in history and articles written and positions taken. In recent times, they have become less vocal about separation. In particular, separation from worldliness and from disobedient brothers have been relegated to debatable topics. The end result is that few speak about these topics anymore. Everyone does what is right in his own eyes, and nothing is said.

The proverb reminds me of our need to be pure for the Lord. Just as dross must be removed from silver to make it usable as jewelry, so we must obey God by removing sin from our lives to be usable for the Lord. Sin is not just separation from personal sin. That is important. But it also includes the refusal to separate from unbelief, worldliness, disobedient brothers, etc. To be usable for the Lord, we have to separate from those who continue in sin.

Note also what happens to the purified silver. All of it can be used by the jeweler. All of it. The simple qualification is that the dross must be removed. The same is true for us. The people who are purifying themselves for the Lord are the ones with whom God can work. These are the people we should be unified with. When we are walking in the same direction, we have fellowship and can be unified in spiritual endeavors. The ones who are not pure (worldly, disobedient, etc.) separate themselves as unclean. Because they are not purifying themselves, they show a lack of love for the Lord. Until that changes, we cannot be unified. We separate because unity with sin displeases the Lord. God’s reputation is affected by the company we keep. 

If I were to give my wife some silver jewelry that was not pure, she would not be very happy. If such jewelry were for sale, nobody would buy it. The same is true in our relationship to the Lord. If we want to be usable for the Lord, we must be willing to practice this kind of separation. As we do, we will notice others who are walking the same way. With these we can be unified.

What is it about biblical separation that seems so distasteful to Christians today? Some view biblical separatists as people who don’t know how to enjoy life. Some view them as unnecessarily cautious. Some even view them as angry and inappropriately divisive people. But is this really the case? Are biblical separatists people who have gone over the edge with zeal for God’s holiness?

We believe that God desires unity within the Church (John 17:20-23; Eph. 4:1-6). We should strive for this unity because all believers are a part of the Body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13). However, because of differences of opinion, interpretation, and practice, unity is best accomplished by believers who share the same beliefs, convictions, and practices (Acts 15:36-41). We also believe that there are situations where unity is not possible or appropriate, and where God commands us to separate ourselves. This is where the practice of biblical separation is necessary. There are three major areas of separation taught in the Bible.

1. Personal separation
   
   We believe that all Christians should live in a way that reflects the change God has made in them (2 Cor. 5:17; Titus 2:11-14), that is holy and acceptable to God (Rom. 12:1-2; 1 Cor. 6:19-20), and that evidences a love for God instead of worldly desires and attitudes (1 John 2:15-17). This necessarily requires Christians to keep themselves from certain thoughts, conversations, and actions but it should not result in complete isolation from unbelievers (John 17:15; 1 Cor. 5:9-10).
   
   For example, believers should not imbibe worldly and ungodly entertainment. If a television show or movie promotes sexual immorality, blasphemy, or covetousness, we should turn off that program and instead fill our minds with content that promotes good character. If a clothing style provokes immoral thoughts, promotes an ungodly alliance with rebellion or pride, we should not wear that kind of clothing. If having a television, computer, or mobile phone proves to be too much of a temptation to sin, a believer should limit its availability by installing protections of some sort or by limiting or removing access to such things.
   
   
2. Separation from a disobedient brother
   
   We believe that a Christian should lovingly confront another Christian who has sinned against him with a desire for his repentance, forgiveness, and restoration. If the sinning Christian does not repent, the next step is to involve other believers and, if necessary, to bring the matter before the local church (Matt. 18:15-17). If the sinning believer refuses to repent, he must be withdrawn from to show him the seriousness of his sin (2 Thess. 3:14-15) and to guard against his bad influence (1 Cor. 5:6-7). There may be situations when a believer’s sin is so egregious (1 Cor. 5:1, 11; 2 Thess. 3:6) that immediate separation is necessary.
   
   For instance, if a believer is actively imbibing sinful media, other believers should lovingly confront this behavior explaining why it is wrong according to the Bible, and with the desire for repentance and restoration. If a believer is speaking in a way that is hateful, harmful, or unkind, other believers should confront him and help him to change. If a believer has committed adultery, other believers should confront him with his sin and seek his repentance and restoration. If, however, any of these believers refuse to deal with their sin, the matter should be addressed by a larger group of believers and eventually by the church. If the sinning believer does not repent, fellowship must be removed so as to escape his influence and to show him the seriousness of his sin.
   
   
3. Ecclesiastical separation.
   
   We believe that a relationship with other churches, organizations, or believers outside of the local church can be beneficial (Col. 4:12-15; Rom. 15:26). However, these relationships should be carefully examined before fellowship is offered (1 John 1:5-7). The local church should not cooperate in a spiritual endeavor with unbelievers (2 Cor. 6:14-7:1), false teachers (Rom. 16:17-18; 2 John 9-11), or believers who are worldly (1 John 2:15-17) or disobedient (2 Thess. 3:6). Such cooperation sends a mixed message about true faith (2 Cor. 6:14) and fellowship (1 Cor. 5:11-13).
   
   If a church in the area asks for our support in a spiritual endeavor, we must examine whether fellowship is biblical. If the asking church invites the Roman Catholic church to take part and treats them as believers, we would not be able to take part in the event. If the asking church includes worldly or sensual music, we would not be able to take part. If the asking church includes false teachers or disobedient believers on their platform, we would not be able to take part. If a formerly good Christian organization or school is unwilling to practice biblical separation, we would no longer be able to support or fellowship with it.
   

Conclusion

There are two basic views about biblical separation. One views it as an unnecessary division within the Body of Christ. The examples given above are considered extreme, distasteful, and a mar on the Church’s reputation to the world. Another view is that biblical separation is something clearly taught in the Bible. The examples given above are simply obedience to God’s desire to keep believers and the Church pure and holy for Himself. Separation, in this case, is not a bad reputation to the world, but a showcase of what God truly desires.

I believe that this last view is correct. While we needn’t separate over every difference of opinion and need to show love toward those who are untaught in these things, our first responsibility is to think about what God says. When God tells us to separate ourselves from the world, our obedience draws us close to Him and gives the world an example of God’s holiness. When God tells us to separate from a disobedient brother, our obedience is designed to show him the seriousness of his sin and need for repentance. Continued fellowship with him would not accomplish God’s desire. When God tells us to separate from churches and organizations whose actions or relationships are sinful, our obedience makes a clear distinction between right and wrong, obedience and disobedience, and gives a clear picture of God’s desire for a pure Church.

Note: This article is based on the proposed revision of the doctrinal statement of Calvary Baptist Church of Willard.

Peter’s warnings in the second chapter of 2 Peter are a potent reminder that false teachers will come from within the Church and turn many away from holy living and pure doctrine. While the warnings are not particularly enjoyable to read, they do serve as necessary warnings against what has happened in the past and will happen in the future. The Old Testament believers and the early Church faced false teachers. Our current generation is also being influenced by false teachers. Because of this, we do well to heed Peter’s warnings and to speak out against false doctrine and those who propagate it.

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. Many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; and in their greed they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.¹

This morning, I came across this commentary on 2 Peter 2:1-3 by D. Martin Lloyd-Jones which was originally published between 1948 and 1950. He was a Welsh pastor known for his understanding of the Scriptures and his opposition to liberal Christianity. When Lloyd-Jones wrote his commentary on 2 Peter, some were calling for unity without purity of doctrine. With the warnings of 2 Peter 2 in mind, he wrote these warnings about ecumenism.

The whole emphasis at the moment is that we should all be getting together and forming great organizations. The concern is not so much as to the truth of the message, but to gather ourselves together into one great community. The tendency today is to minimize truth in favor of organization, and men are telling us with unwearied reiteration that the greatest tragedy of the world is the disunited church. But the tragedy, the greatest tragedy, as I understand the New Testament, is not the disunity of the church, is not the fact that the church is divided into groups and denominations, is not that we are not all in one organization, but that all the sections are preaching a false message and there has been a departure from the truth of God as it is in Christ Jesus. If we were all brought together and formed into one organization, that is no guarantee that the message preached would be true. There are false teachers; there were in the Old Testament and there are and always have been in the church.²

The modern ecumenical movement leads to a minimizing of doctrinal differences for the alleged greater good of the Church. Sadly, this idea leads instead to a steady decline of doctrinal purity. While we should seek unity amongst our Christian brothers when possible, unity must always proceed from pure doctrine and practice. As Peter points out in his second epistle, there is too much at stake. So, take heed to his warning and guard yourself against the false teaching that has pulled so many people down. Remember what God has done for you (2 Pet. 1:1-4), diligently add godly character to your faith (2 Pet. 1:5-11), and follow the divinely inspired Scriptures (2 Pet. 1:12-21) as you seek to guard yourself from anything that would pull you away from the Lord.

¹Scripture quotation of 2 Peter 2:1-3 was taken from the NASB.

²D. Martin Lloyd-Jones, 2 Peter, (Carlisle: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1983), 128-29.

Several years ago, there was a push to redefine fundamentalism. Some within the movement were unhappy with the direction and character of past generations for a variety of reasons. Past fundamentalists were defined as too separated, too concerned with outward appearances, and too strident. Some of the younger fundamentalists chose to define fundamentalism as those who were willing to do battle royal for the fundamentals. The focus on the fundamentals was a good thing except that it ignored the other battles that had been fought during the 20th century.

Last night during our prayer meeting service, the Lord brought to mind a message preached at an ACCC meeting in Parma, Ohio several years ago. The speaker was Dr. E. Allen Griffith and his message, “The Impact of Contemporary Evangelism on the Faith“, pointed out some of the concerns several of us had about the new direction. Click on the link above and let me know what you think.

A few days ago, Don Johnson posted a thoughtful article about the current battle in fundamentalism. After talking about the past battles against modernism and new evangelicalism, he sums up the current battle with this paragraph:

There is, however, a current battle. The current battle is the battle over culture. Some younger fundamentalists (and the conservative evangelicals) seem to be articulating a position that only battles over theology are legitimate, no one can do battle over non-theological matters. As long as doctrine is orthodox, there is no remaining conflict. Culture, as a neutral object, or at least as an insignificant object, must not become the focus of division. But is this challenge non-theological?

I have been thinking about the current trends in fundamentalism and found his article a refreshing perspective. Read the complete article and his conclusion at www.proclaimanddefend.org/2013/05/29/culture-is-the-battleground.