Easter sales is happening around town... SUFES is giving 5% off, I got Ravi's "Can Man Live Without God?" (RM 10), Wenham's "Christ and Bible" (RM3) and a biography of Shaftesbury (RM3)... Glad Sounds is giving 20%, it seems... lotsa goodies at the Subang branch. And MPH anniversary sales is giving some discounts too
Recently I have picked up a new habit of striking up conversations with people at the 'Religion' section of bookstores.
At MPH last week, I saw a couple talking about Van Til, Bahnsen and Kuyper. So I introduced myself, and we were joined by a nearby baptist pastor discussing quite a bit on islamisation, church life, mission and evangelism etc.
A funny thing happened when I found out the couple was from a reformed church that believes strongly in separation... to maintain purity of doctrine and practice, they decided not to affiliate with churches that are charismatic, arminian or use the drumset during worship :)
To build bridges, I told them I knew their pastor and have visited their church when I was in college.
Wrong move! Then they asked why I 'left' hehe...
Anyway when I told them about my current church, I could predict wat the ensuing topic is gonna be... hehehe... a machine gun barrage of how we are related to some 'apostate' organisations.
This reminds me of a long time ago when I tried to decide where should I stand at that historic moment in the evangelical movement reported in Holy Nuisance
It seemed to me that there are two choices - separation OR engagement?
While I appreciate the benefit of 'separatism' ie working with like-minded brethren to focus on church planting works rather than get embroiled with disagreement, I also noticed that a sectarian spirit often developed which is too critical of other Christians. By gathering with people who think alike, we suffer from 'theological inbreeding' and unable to cross-polinate ideas with others.
A tragic trend I have noticed, as a reformed christian myself, is that sooner or later, this critical spirit would be turned against each other...
and I've heard just too many sad stories of internal church fragmentations like this. Then even the fragments split further...
Thought long and hard about it. During this process, I was in dialogue with a KJV-Only UM student who objected to my involvement with interdenominational ministies
And I decided that separatism (while having a valid place if the situation is so rotten, to be beyond redemption) is not my cup of tea.
I do believe in the need for boundaries. Orthodoxy is a biblical idea.
But I explained to the couple at MPH tat perhaps being faithful to Christ sometimes means 'engagement' rather than isolation.
They told me that it's not easy!
Indeed, it's the harder road to take... but who says making a positive impact in the world (not of the world) is ever gonna be easy?
What good is waxing eloquent about van tilian apologetics if we never even get the chance to use it because our separatist walls are so high?
If the Malaysian church does not see positive impact on nation-building, church life or mission, what does that say abt our doctrinal shibboleths?
So, for better or worse, I threw in my lot with Stott and Packer... and evangelical pastors like ps wong who were not afraid to come out of the gated walls and meet the liberals in their own turfs.
Instead of being 'corrupted', I'd like to think that slowly we have rallied evangelicals to be bolder and make a difference in these mission bodies. This would not be possible if we had isolated ourselves in a comfort zone.
Recently I have picked up a new habit of striking up conversations with people at the 'Religion' section of bookstores.
At MPH last week, I saw a couple talking about Van Til, Bahnsen and Kuyper. So I introduced myself, and we were joined by a nearby baptist pastor discussing quite a bit on islamisation, church life, mission and evangelism etc.
A funny thing happened when I found out the couple was from a reformed church that believes strongly in separation... to maintain purity of doctrine and practice, they decided not to affiliate with churches that are charismatic, arminian or use the drumset during worship :)
To build bridges, I told them I knew their pastor and have visited their church when I was in college.
Wrong move! Then they asked why I 'left' hehe...
Anyway when I told them about my current church, I could predict wat the ensuing topic is gonna be... hehehe... a machine gun barrage of how we are related to some 'apostate' organisations.
This reminds me of a long time ago when I tried to decide where should I stand at that historic moment in the evangelical movement reported in Holy Nuisance
"A dramatic moment in the history of British evangelicalism came on October 18, 1966. At the Evangelical Alliance's National Assembly, free-church patriarch Martyn Lloyd-Jones gave the opening address. He proclaimed that the ecumenical movement had created a new situation for evangelicals in participating churches. Evangelicals could no longer be content as a wing of a national church that may have an orthodox confession, he said, but which tolerated and promoted liberalism.
Some took the speech to be a ringing call for Anglican evangelicals to leave their disordered (though never disorderly) church. John Stott, the assembly's chairman, stood up to oppose Lloyd-Jones. "I believe history is against what Dr. Lloyd-Jones has said," Stott averred. "Scripture is against him … I hope no one will act precipitately."
It seemed to me that there are two choices - separation OR engagement?
While I appreciate the benefit of 'separatism' ie working with like-minded brethren to focus on church planting works rather than get embroiled with disagreement, I also noticed that a sectarian spirit often developed which is too critical of other Christians. By gathering with people who think alike, we suffer from 'theological inbreeding' and unable to cross-polinate ideas with others.
A tragic trend I have noticed, as a reformed christian myself, is that sooner or later, this critical spirit would be turned against each other...
and I've heard just too many sad stories of internal church fragmentations like this. Then even the fragments split further...
Thought long and hard about it. During this process, I was in dialogue with a KJV-Only UM student who objected to my involvement with interdenominational ministies
And I decided that separatism (while having a valid place if the situation is so rotten, to be beyond redemption) is not my cup of tea.
I do believe in the need for boundaries. Orthodoxy is a biblical idea.
But I explained to the couple at MPH tat perhaps being faithful to Christ sometimes means 'engagement' rather than isolation.
They told me that it's not easy!
Indeed, it's the harder road to take... but who says making a positive impact in the world (not of the world) is ever gonna be easy?
What good is waxing eloquent about van tilian apologetics if we never even get the chance to use it because our separatist walls are so high?
If the Malaysian church does not see positive impact on nation-building, church life or mission, what does that say abt our doctrinal shibboleths?
So, for better or worse, I threw in my lot with Stott and Packer... and evangelical pastors like ps wong who were not afraid to come out of the gated walls and meet the liberals in their own turfs.
Instead of being 'corrupted', I'd like to think that slowly we have rallied evangelicals to be bolder and make a difference in these mission bodies. This would not be possible if we had isolated ourselves in a comfort zone.
Comments
"christ and the bible" at RM 3? yikes! and to think that i dished out US10 for that he he he he
anyway, some good news, my pastor supports the rbc da vinci code rebuttal DVD viewing... finally! "engagement"!
I think the 1966 saga which still cast a shadow over present British Evangelicalism is more a matter of seperation and reforming from without (MLJ) or staying in and reforming from within (Stott). Not so much that of seperation or engagement. Both sides would agree to the need for engaging the world.
Iain Murray's Evangelicalism Divided is in part tracing the history of post 1966. He desmontrates that MLJ's warnings then is indeed prophetic.
Yet I honestly wouldn't know if I'll heed MLJ or Stott if I was there then.
There comes a time in our experience when we have to make a choice of such historic significance. We can only pray that whichever decision is made, the church's unity will be nevertheless be preserved and GOd will be magnified and glorified.
it reminds me of the qumran community, well maybe not so extreme lar..but then again, i would never know how wrong i could be /or dogmatic for the wrong things/issues in life until i meet with people from the other side of my heaven
It boils down sometimes to where we 'draw the line'. Some take it tat as long as the official creed is orthodox, its not tat bad... some take the appointment of a dodgy character in the board or faculty as tolerating errors, deserving a walk-out. Frame wrote something thot provoking on Machens warrior children ;)