Secondary separation

A

Anchor

Member
Elect
Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Messages
277
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Rev. 2:18 FF (NLT)--"Write this letter to the angel of the church in Pergamum. This is the message from the one with the sharp two-edged sword:... I have a few complaints against you. You tolerate some among you whose teaching is like that of Balaam, who showed Balak how to trip up the people of Israel. He taught them to sin by eating food offered to idols and by committing sexual sin [Num. 25:1-3]. In a similar way, you have some Nicolaitans among you who follow the same teaching. Repent of your sin, or I will come to you suddenly and fight against them with the sword of my mouth."

Summation:
(1) Balaam showed Balak how seduce Israel into idolatry and immorality (Num. 31:16)
(2) There were those in the church who were teaching similar, paving the way for idolatry/immorality in the church
(3) The main body of the church--faithfully obedient ("...hast not denied my faith...[vs. 13]")--were those who were tolerant of those others within the body that were identifying with Balaam who taught Balak how to seduce Israel into apostasy.
(4) In short, Balak seduced Israel into apostasy; Balaam counseled him how to go about it; some in the church identified with his "doctrine"; most tolerated those "some" even though they did not teach/identify, counsel/lead, or practice apostasy themselves. 

The Savior identified those who were tolerant as the objects of His wrath--"...repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them [those who tolerate] with the sword of my mouth...."

By anybody's definition this is 2nd degree separation, and it is being mandated to the church in Pergamum by the Savior Himself. 
 
I ran this by my pastor.  He said "The principle is clear that church leadership in Pergamum should not have tolerated the doctrine of Balaam in their midst. And they should not have tolerated those to remain in their membership who held to this erroneous doctrine. But like all man-made terms that are used to describe Biblical truth ...I am reluctant to call it second-degree separation. It is separation, and/or purity (both Biblical terms). Degrees of separation make me a little nervous. Where does it stop? Lines must be drawn where the Bible draws lines, and the Scriptures are consistent in the teaching that God's people (corporately or individually) should not tolerate (be in intimate communion with or organically connected with) those who teach or embrace error. "

I agree with him.  What is being described by the writer of Revelation under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is the biblical expectation of separation. 

Some intellectual has determined that the one who merely tolerates the apostate activity has less culpability in the action. Therefore, to separate from them would be a 2nd degree of separation, going beyond what scripture demands.  However, this instance and the expectation of the Savior in it makes it clear that this is what biblical separation looks like, and the problem is in the labeling,
not the degree.  Though once or twice removed from the actual perpetrator  of the activity (Balak and Balaam in this instance) those willing to tolerate that doctrine in Christ's church, even though not practicing that doctrine, are held to the same standard--"Repent...or else...." 
 
There are cases to be made for churches separating, as you've outlined. The church that I attend split off from a mainline denomination to join and evangelical one. Beyond this, it's hard to determine how far separation should go within fundamentalism or evangelicalism. There is a danger in becoming so separate that no churches or Christians are deemed worthy of fellowship.

Also, using the NLT, as you've quote, Revelation 2:24-25, indicates that those within apostate churches can be saved by remaining true to right faith,
But I also have a message for the rest of you in Thyatira who have not followed this false teaching ('deeper truths,' as they call them?depths of Satan, actually). I will ask nothing more of you except that you hold tightly to what you have until I come.
 
Split from Mid and Post tribbers!

A group of fundamentalists left the Conservative Baptist Association and formed the New Testament Association of Independent Baptist Churches (1966). The following year, the CBF became the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship (1967).

From there sprang: Pillsbury Baptist Bible College (defunct) and Maranatha Baptist Bible College

ladd-tenny-discussion.jpg
 
FSSL said:
Split from Mid and Post tribbers!

A group of fundamentalists left the Conservative Baptist Association and formed the New Testament Association of Independent Baptist Churches (1966). The following year, the CBF became the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship (1967).

From there sprang: Pillsbury Baptist Bible College (defunct) and Maranatha Baptist Bible College

ladd-tenny-discussion.jpg
Click to expand...
Thanks. Good example. I didn't know this. This is going too far. It's not necessary to separate over this.
 
Anchor said:
Rev. 2:18 FF (NLT)--"Write this letter to the angel of the church in Pergamum. This is the message from the one with the sharp two-edged sword:... I have a few complaints against you. You tolerate some among you whose teaching is like that of Balaam, who showed Balak how to trip up the people of Israel. He taught them to sin by eating food offered to idols and by committing sexual sin [Num. 25:1-3]. In a similar way, you have some Nicolaitans among you who follow the same teaching. Repent of your sin, or I will come to you suddenly and fight against them with the sword of my mouth."

Summation:
(1) Balaam showed Balak how seduce Israel into idolatry and immorality (Num. 31:16)
(2) There were those in the church who were teaching similar, paving the way for idolatry/immorality in the church
(3) The main body of the church--faithfully obedient ("...hast not denied my faith...[vs. 13]")--were those who were tolerant of those others within the body that were identifying with Balaam who taught Balak how to seduce Israel into apostasy.
(4) In short, Balak seduced Israel into apostasy; Balaam counseled him how to go about it; some in the church identified with his "doctrine"; most tolerated those "some" even though they did not teach/identify, counsel/lead, or practice apostasy themselves. 

The Savior identified those who were tolerant as the objects of His wrath--"...repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them [those who tolerate] with the sword of my mouth...."

By anybody's definition this is 2nd degree separation, and it is being mandated to the church in Pergamum by the Savior Himself.
Click to expand...

Really?  Perhaps terms need to be defined; I thought that primary separation was separation from those teaching serious error, or heresy.  Secondary (or 2nd degree) is separating from those who don't practice primary separation; tertiary (3rd degree) is separating from those who don't practice secondary separation, and so on.

The admonition from Jesus to Pergamum sounds like an issue of primary separation -- they were allowing false teachers to teach their error.  What I am missing here?
 
Putting the secondary separation to the practical test:
If I knew that Jack Hyles or Jack Schaap had moral problems, should I have separated myself from those who refused to separate from them or FBC and Hyles Anderson College?
Knowing that Bob Jones failed to respond to rape and harassment on campus, should I have separated from those who refused to separate from them?

What is a 'secondary separate-er' to do?
 
FSSL said:
Split from Mid and Post tribbers!

A group of fundamentalists left the Conservative Baptist Association and formed the New Testament Association of Independent Baptist Churches (1966). The following year, the CBF became the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship (1967).

From there sprang: Pillsbury Baptist Bible College (defunct) and Maranatha Baptist Bible College

ladd-tenny-discussion.jpg
Click to expand...

I can't imagine separating over the split hairs of premillennialism. A-mil and post-mil are hard to swallow but fighting over pre-trib, psot-wrath and post-trib are a waste of time IMO. My eschatology is pretty simple, Jesus is coming back and expects us to be ready. Y'all want to go navel gazing on the subject have at it.
 
Anchor said:
By anybody's definition this is 2nd degree separation
Click to expand...

Not by "anybody's" definition.

Second-degree separation means that Christian A separates from Christian B because of Christian B's false doctrine (for example), but also separates from Christian C, because while  does not agree with Christian B's doctrine, he remains in fellowship with Christian B.

In Revelation 2:18ff, the followers of Balaam in the Pergamum church were not merely orthodox believers who were associated with Balaam. They actually held to his false doctrine. Disfellowshipping them would be primary separation, on the same basis as disfellowshipping Balaam himself.
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
Putting the secondary separation to the practical test:
If I knew that Jack Hyles or Jack Schaap had moral problems, should I have separated myself from those who refused to separate from them or FBC and Hyles Anderson College?
Knowing that Bob Jones failed to respond to rape and harassment on campus, should I have separated from those who refused to separate from them?

What is a 'secondary separate-er' to do?
Click to expand...

I don?t believe this scenario applies.

This scenario applies to just plain decency, to separate.  Most of the lost world had enough decency not to continue to sit and have coffee with these people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top