# Biblical Separation



## blhowes (Apr 2, 2008)

As was mentioned in the thread about fundamentalism, sometimes fundamentalists are too extreme in their view of biblical separation. They seem to separate from most everybody and everything (slight exaggeration). People who don't believe in biblical separation sometimes are at the other extreme and don't separate from anybody or anything.

As with many things, the correct understanding of the teaching is somewhere in the middle between the two extremes. 

I've copied an exerpt below from a fundamentalist church website that believes in biblical separation. The first and last sentences most would agree with:
We believe that all the saved should live in such a manner as not to bring reproach upon their Savior and Lord...Our objective is to please the Thrice Holy God in all that we do.​Sandwiched between those two good statements are other statements that may not be as good, but are based on the scriptures sited. 

1. Based on the scriptures sited, and your beliefs about separation, how would you rewrite this part of the statement of faith? 

2. Or, would you leave it as is?

3. If a person came to you who got saved after living the "life of Riley", what advice would you give him/her regarding separation from the world and other churches?



> *Biblical Separation*
> We believe that all the saved should live in such a manner as not to bring reproach upon their Savior and Lord; and, that separation from all religious apostasy, all worldly and sinful pleasures, practices and associations is commanded of God
> 
> Because our God is the Thrice Holy One we must take a separated stand regarding teaching that undermines the fundementals of the faith, including: Liberalism, Neo-orthodoxy, Neo-Evangelicalism, Eccumenicalism, Hyper-Calvinism, and the Charismatic Movement. We only use godly, conservative music and hymns in our church. Taking the music of the night club and the world and mixing it with the words of scripture is an abomination unto God and should be repented of. Our first objective in not to draw a crowd or entertain people. Our objective is to please the Thrice Holy God in all that we do.
> ...



2Ti 3:1-5 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 

Rom 12:1,2 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. 

Rom 14:13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way. 

1Jo 2:15-17 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth forever. 

2Jo 1:9-11 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him Godspeed: For he that biddeth him Godspeed is partaker of his evil deeds. 

2Co 6:14-7:1 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you. And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.​


----------



## ColdSilverMoon (Apr 2, 2008)

It looks pretty good overall, but I would delete "associations" from the first sentence and this entire sentence: "Taking the music of the night club and the world and mixing it with the words of scripture is an abomination unto God and should be repented of." I know music is a sensitive topic and I personally prefer a more traditional service, but I don't think they can make this statement based on Scripture.


----------



## blhowes (Apr 2, 2008)

joshua said:


> (particularly concerning their quip about music)
> 
> In my opinion, a return to singing Psalms, with the exclusion of instruments is the only way to snuff out the idea of musical instrument, hymns or praise songs, preferences that pervade the Churches today.
> 
> ...


Your suggestion makes sense. Instead of the focus being "not like the world", the focus is that its scripture - much easier to defend and less open to subjective decisions about what is and isn't proper music for worship.


----------



## blhowes (Apr 2, 2008)

Here's what we have so far. Any other changes needed to make this a good statement about Biblical separation?



> Biblical Separation
> We believe that all the saved should live in such a manner as not to bring reproach upon their Savior and Lord; and, that separation from all religious apostasy, all worldly and sinful pleasures and practices is commanded of God
> 
> Because our God is the Thrice Holy One we must take a separated stand regarding teaching that undermines the fundementals of the faith, including: Liberalism, Neo-orthodoxy, Neo-Evangelicalism, Eccumenicalism, Hyper-Calvinism, and the Charismatic Movement. We only use the psalter in our church. Our first objective in not to draw a crowd or entertain people. Our objective is to please the Thrice Holy God in all that we do.
> ...


----------



## blhowes (Apr 2, 2008)

joshua said:


> I think. I mean, we should worship according to God's commands, and stop having our emphasis being on: "What is the world doing these days? We must do our dead-level best to de-emulate them!" If we just worship as God has commanded, we don't have to spend all the extra efforts avoiding the foolishness of the world.


I think we're saying the same thing, your's was just a little more articulate and better stated.


----------



## Thomas2007 (Apr 2, 2008)

"As was mentioned in the thread about fundamentalism, sometimes fundamentalists are too extreme in their view of biblical separation. They seem to separate from most everybody and everything (slight exaggeration). People who don't believe in biblical separation sometimes are at the other extreme and don't separate from anybody or anything."

I was raised as an independent baptist that thought like this - we only grouped with other people that didn't group.


----------



## blhowes (Apr 2, 2008)

Another question just came to mind. Do any of you folks have any statement(s) at all on your church website about separation?


----------



## blhowes (Apr 2, 2008)

Thomas2007 said:


> I was raised as an independent baptist that thought like this - we only grouped with other people that didn't group.


Me too. At one time I probably would have separated from the majority of people on this board. Between the infant baptism and the drinking and the smoking and the listening to worldly music and ... would there be anybody left?


----------



## ColdSilverMoon (Apr 2, 2008)

blhowes said:


> Another question just came to mind. Do any of you folks have any statement(s) at all on your church website about separation?



My current church has all their mission, values, philosophy, etc in MP3 format, but here's the worship philosphy of my old church (Briarwood Presbyterian); I couldn't find anything on separation per se:

We desire true worship that:

Glorifies God 
Edifies the body of Christ (Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16) 
Magnifies the message of salvation through Christ alone (1 Corinthians 14:24-25) 

Reformed worship is God-centered and governed by the biblical guidelines given to us through scripture alone. In our worship, we seek to be connected to the best of the past without becoming idolatrous of the past (i.e., traditional, not traditionalism), contextualized in the present without allowing popular culture to dictate our approach to worship, and establishing worship that sets a standard for the future.

Drawing from all the bounty that God has given to His church, from the rich musical and liturgical traditions that have come down to us from our past to the exciting new movements of God today, enables us to set a worship “feast” or “banquet” before the people of God--a well-balanced “meal” to strengthen the body of Christ and keep her healthy spiritually.


----------



## blhowes (Apr 2, 2008)

ColdSilverMoon said:


> My current church has all their mission, values, philosophy, etc in MP3 format, but here's the worship philosphy of my old church (Briarwood Presbyterian); I couldn't find anything on separation per se:
> 
> We desire true worship that:
> 
> ...


I like the wisdom of the bolded part of your quote.


----------



## Gage Browning (Apr 2, 2008)

joshua said:


> (particularly concerning their quip about music)
> 
> In my opinion, a return to singing Psalms, with the exclusion of instruments is the only way to snuff out the idea of musical instrument, hymns or praise songs, preferences that pervade the Churches today.
> 
> ...



You make a good argument on guitars and drums etc...
My question is how do you only sing Psalms which never actually name the name of Christ? I know they point to him in type and shadow, I know the Psalms was God's songbook, but to disallow other songs, hymns or spiritual songs that actually name the name of Christ seems strange to me. Thoughts?


----------



## Pergamum (Apr 2, 2008)

A statement about separation in a church's doctrinal statement is like saying, "Look at me, I'm a Fundy." and usually is evidence that "lifestyle" issues are added to the Gospel, such as drinking, smoking, movies, dress, often with a peculiar local interpretation of what Christians should be doing about all of these issues.

I, myself, am always suspicious when I hear churches that always talk about submission, rightly dividng the Word, or...the subject of this post, "separation".. it is code talk...


----------



## Pilgrim (Apr 2, 2008)

joshua said:


> (particularly concerning their quip about music)
> 
> In my opinion, a return to singing Psalms, with the exclusion of instruments is the only way to snuff out the idea of musical instrument, hymns or praise songs, preferences that pervade the Churches today.
> 
> ...



I'm with you, brother. I don't know that a return to _a cappella_ EP is the only way to avoid this. But the question is, once instruments and songs of human composition are allowed in, by what standard are we to judge what we are to sing? As Dr. Rowland Ward wrote: 



> If we want to travel from songs that are Scripture to doctrinally accurate free songs, a significant yet at times fairly fine point, let us not only get our history straight but also understand the principles of Biblical worship. Otherwise the train may go express to Sound Hymns, then stop all stations to Mime, Dance and Clowns, and ultimately end at Ichabod.


----------



## blhowes (Apr 2, 2008)

Pilgrim said:


> I'm with you, brother. I don't know that a return to _a cappella_ EP is the only way to avoid this. But the question is, once instruments and songs of human composition are allowed in, by what standard are we to judge what we are to sing?


I hate to continue too far down a rabbit trail that may lead to an EP debate, but what the hey - its "MY" thread.

The same standard a pastor uses when deciding what to preach in a sermon. A good pastor typically (I'd imagine) spends a good number of hours searching the scriptures, preparing their sermon, making sure what he says is correct. What if a pastor spent a proportional amount of time selecting the music with the same care he spends preparing sermons?


----------



## Gage Browning (Apr 2, 2008)

Thanks Joshua...I have seen that. My persuasion is probably different than many.


----------



## ModernPuritan? (Apr 2, 2008)

Gage Browning said:


> joshua said:
> 
> 
> > (particularly concerning their quip about music)
> ...



Since Father, Son, Holy spirit= the God Head, Id contend that any attribute or reference to God in Psalms is appropriate and not simply a "foreshadow" various references to God being the Rock of my salvation and so forth.... Its just as true today, as it was 3,000 years ago no? 

Just so many churches are blind.. 

"You allow a talented singer, to sing a solo;
a talented actor to act a part .
Soon the house of God 
will be; the house of art." 
- MP


----------



## py3ak (Apr 2, 2008)

Pergamum said:


> A statement about separation in a church's doctrinal statement is like saying, "Look at me, I'm a Fundy." and usually is evidence that "lifestyle" issues are added to the Gospel, such as drinking, smoking, movies, dress, often with a peculiar local interpretation of what Christians should be doing about all of these issues.
> 
> I, myself, am always suspicious when I hear churches that always talk about submission, rightly dividng the Word, or...the subject of this post, "separation".. it is code talk...



Pergamum, that may be true, and your sensitivities are probably correct. But how _would_ you discuss, "Come out from among them and be ye separate" without using the word _separation_? As to why you would want to, well, apart from being in the Bible, don't we _want_ to stand against World Council of Churches type garbage?

And of course you can say the thing about any of the other topics: the Bible says to submit one to another; the Bible says we should "rightly divide the word of truth". What we have to do is talk in a clear way which actually sets out what we believe, and should distinguish us from the abuse of these ideas; but without giving up that they are Scriptural ideas.

Bob, I hope this isn't as off topic as it seems: it's my little defense of having a statement about separation on your website.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Apr 2, 2008)

joshua said:


> I think that Jesus' Hebrew name _yeshuoah_ (spelling?) is used in the Psalms. It's translated _Salvation_ (thanks to Rev. Winzer in that other thread).



<<holds hand to mouth>> ...must...not..sidetrack...thread...


----------



## Herald (Apr 2, 2008)

I was lurking in this thread and wasn't going to jump in, but the EP issue caught my eye. EP is not going to make a church more godly or more worldly. The arguments on both sides are eloquent and quite convincing. Separation has been around since at least the Essenes. The Gnostics of the first century carried separation into the New Testament church. Monasticism is with us today. Surviving under the pale of monasticism is the ascetic lifestyle of the Amish and certain sects of Mennonites. Modern day separatist-fundamentalism is alive in well in BJU-friendly churches. As with all separatist movements within christendom, the modern fundamentalist churches begin with a good premise: avoid the evils of the world in order to be more like Christ. The basic problem with this approach is that it can't sustain it's well intentioned beginning. Consider this:



> *Judges 2:8-11* 8 Then Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the LORD, died at the age of one hundred and ten. 9 And they buried him in the territory of his inheritance in Timnath-heres, in the hill country of Ephraim, north of Mount Gaash. 10 All that generation also were gathered to their fathers; and there arose another generation after them who did not know the LORD, nor yet the work which He had done for Israel. 11 Then the sons of Israel did evil in the sight of the LORD and served the Baals,



How long did it take for Israel to turn its back on God? Not long. 1 & 2 Kings and 1 & 2 Chronicles is testament to Israel and Judah's repetitive apostasy. During the period from David to the Judah's exile there were a number of sustained revivals (yes, "revivials"). But invariably the dog would turn to it's own vomit. It is our way when we fence grace. The bible college I went to was much like BJU, it legislated separatism. All they accomplished was to heap guilt on individuals who could not possibly live up to the standard set for them. Such an impotent understanding of God's grace.


----------



## ModernPuritan? (Apr 2, 2008)

North Jersey Baptist said:


> I was lurking in this thread and wasn't going to jump in, but the EP issue caught my eye. EP is not going to make a church more godly or more worldly. The arguments on both sides are eloquent and quite convincing. Separation has been around since at least the Essenes. The Gnostics of the first century carried separation into the New Testament church. Monasticism is with us today. Surviving under the pale of monasticism is the ascetic lifestyle of the Amish and certain sects of Mennonites. Modern day separatist-fundamentalism is alive in well in BJU-friendly churches. As with all separatist movements within christendom, the modern fundamentalist churches begin with a good premise: avoid the evils of the world in order to be more like Christ. The basic problem with this approach is that it can't sustain it's well intentioned beginning. Consider this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



which college did you go to??

its a shame, ive meet a few formerly reformed folk who have been killed by pharisees- i mean um BJU, sorry didn't mean to equate the two


----------



## Herald (Apr 2, 2008)

The school I am referring to is the Word of Life Bible Institute in Pottersville, New York.


----------



## blhowes (Apr 2, 2008)

py3ak said:


> Bob, I hope this isn't as off topic as it seems: it's my little defense of having a statement about separation on your website.


Seems to me to be right on topic, especially the reference to the "come out from among them" passage.


----------



## ModernPuritan? (Apr 2, 2008)

> Biblical Separation
> 
> 1) Please God in our worship of Him as such we do not allow such innovations as instruments, drama, solos, and choirs in our services though they may certainly be used appropriately in other venues we believe that God stated that we are to as a congregation worship only in the method that He has expressly given.
> 2) Please God by the lifes we live. As such we ask our congregants to exercise discernment through personal bible study and prayer as to what they eat, drink, wear, watch, or listen too.
> ...



I would write something like this (above in quotes)

trying to stay, very well grounded where appropiate, but even keeled where appropiate


----------



## timmopussycat (Apr 2, 2008)

joshua said:


> (particularly concerning their quip about music)
> 
> In my opinion, a return to singing Psalms, with the exclusion of instruments is the only way to snuff out the idea of musical instrument, hymns or praise songs, preferences that pervade the Churches today.
> 
> ...



As a 30 year church musician let me teach you. If churches really want to keep doctrinal orthodoxy and a God focused practice, it's not really difficult to police church music under the conditions you describe. One text from John 4 "worship in spirit...and in truth" well applied is enough to do the job. 
There are two grounds for objection to any given piece of worship music: theological and musical.
One can reject heretical or doctrinally unbalanced praise choruses on theological grounds as not being worship in truth, and make sure the use of any instrument is a) skillful and b) accompanying the music not calling attention to itself and distracting from God by pointing out that distracted worship is not truly ascribing worth to God. 
We can choose music for our worship texts that fittingly accompanies those texts. 
I have seen this work for over 30 years in churches small and large so I know it can be done. Mind you it does take some teaching of the congregation by the pastor about what worship is to form a foundation.


----------

