NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

Daily Articles Apostasy FBIS Mailing

Home CD-ROM Library
Listing Database List
Hear Bro.
About Way of Friday News Directory of What Must I do
Cloud’s
Life Notes Churches to be Saved?
Sermons
Order Subscribe to
Publications Order Video Make an
Advanced Bible O Timothy
Catalog Series Offering
Study Series

Google Search
WWW SEARCH Way of Life Literature

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE

VERSIONS

Distributed by Way of Life Literature’s Fundamental

Baptist Information Service. Copyright 2001.

These articles cannot be stored on BBS or Internet sites or sold or

placed by themselves or with other material in any electronic format
for sale, but may be distributed for free by e-mail or by print. They
must be left intact and nothing removed or changed, including these
informational headers. This is a listing for Fundamental Baptists
and other fundamentalist, Bible-believing Christians. Our goal
in this particular aspect of our ministry is not devotional but is TO
PROVIDE INFORMATION TO ASSIST PREACHERS IN THE
PROTECTION OF THE CHURCHES IN THIS APOSTATE HOUR.

How to Subscribe
Please note that this is not a free service. We take up a
quarterly offering to fund this ministry, and each
subscriber is expected to participate.

To Subscribe or Unsubscribe:
Click on the following link to go to
http://www.wayoflife.org/fbis/subscribe.html

Some of these articles are from O Timothy magazine. David W.

Cloud, Editor. O Timothy is a monthly magazine in its 18th year of
publication. Subscription is $20/yr. Way of Life publishes many
helpful books. The catalog is located at the web site: http://www.
wayoflife.org/.

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (1 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

Way of Life Literature,

P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 480610368.
1-866-295-4143 (toll free: USA & Canada),
519-652-2619 (voice), [email protected] (email)

Internet Discount on Fundamental

Baptist CD-ROM Library

Sale! Way of Life Advanced Bible

Studies Series

Updated November 28, 2006 (first published September 13, 1999) (David Cloud,
Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061,
866-295-4143, [email protected]; for instructions about subscribing and
unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the
article) -

One of the many myths surrounding the subject of Bible versions is the idea that
Evangelical scholarship today is trustworthy. Following is a letter from the late Dr.
James Boice to missionary doctor Tom Hale on the subject of Bible texts and
versions. In this letter, Dr. Boice advises Dr. Hale to lean on “current evangelical
scholarship”:

“There are some in this country and elsewhere who are very zealous for the textus
receptus, prepared by the humanistic scholar, Erasmus, and used as the basis for the
King James translation. This has led some, quite unwisely in my judgment, to
defend the King James Version as the only true and faithful English text. Let me say
that the concerns of some of these people are undoubtedly good. They are zealous
for the Word of God and very much concerned lest liberal or any other scholarship
enter in to pervert it. But unfortunately, the basis on which they are operating is
wrong, and I have always tried to do what I could in a gentle way to lead them to
appreciate good, current evangelical scholarship where the Greek text and the
translations are concerned” (Letter from James M. Boice, Tenth Presbyterian
Church, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to Dr. Thomas Hale, United Mission to Nepal,
Kathmandu, September 13, 1985).

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (2 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

Dr. Hale, a medical doctor in Nepal, had written to Boice for counsel on the matter
of Bible texts and versions. In the summer of 1985, Dr. Hale visited our home in
Kathmandu and began a discussion about Bible versions. Dr. Hale was involved
with a Nepali Bible study translation project and wanted to know what I could share
with him about the texts and versions. We had an interesting time going through
some of the reasons why the new versions differ from the old Protestant ones, and
after he returned to his hospital in central Nepal, we continued our conversation via
correspondence. I also gave him some books on the subject, including, if I
remember correctly, Dr. Edward F. Hills’ Defending the King James Bible and D.O.
Fuller’s True or False? On July 28, 1985, Dr. Hale wrote the following:

“Thank you very much for your long and thoughtful letter to me about the
Greek texts. I greatly appreciate the time you took to answer me, and I have
found what you have written to be most informative, and indeed, worrisome.
I hadn’t realized that the battleground, as it were, is in the area of the Greek
texts.”

I was amazed at this. The man is a student of the Scriptures and has sat under the
ministries of key Evangelical leaders, yet he had never heard that one of the major
differences between the King James Bible and the modern versions is the different
Greek texts upon which they are founded.

As time passed it became evident that Dr. Hale had rejected the Received Text in
favor of the modern critical text. A chief factor in this decision was the counsel he
received from Dr. Boice, pastor of the Tenth Presbyterian Church, Philadelphia, and
head of the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy. Hale wrote to Boice to seek
his opinion on Bible versions, and Hale sent me a copy of Dr. Boice’s letter when he
concluded our conversations on the subject.

As we have seen, Boice encouraged Dr. Hale to trust Evangelical scholarship,

ignoring the heretical New Evangelical leaven that has permeated Evangelicalism in
the past 50 years.

During the first half of the twentieth century, Evangelicalism in America was
identified with Fundamentalism. Many historians make this connection, including
Mark Ellingsen (The Evangelical Movement) and George Marsden (Reforming
Fundamentalism). Marsden says, “There was not a practical distinction between
fundamentalist and evangelical: the words were interchangeable” (p. 48). When the
National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) was formed in 1942, for example,
participants included such staunch Fundamentalist leaders as Bob Jones, Sr., John R.
Rice, Charles Woodbridge, Harry Ironside, David Otis Fuller, and R.G. Lee.

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (3 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

By the mid-1950s, though, a clear break between separatist Fundamentalists and

non-separatist Evangelicals occurred. This was occasioned largely by the
ecumenical evangelism of Billy Graham. The stronger men dropped out of the NAE.
The terms Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism began “to refer to two different
movements” (William Martin, A Prophet with Honor, p. 224).

The sons of Evangelical-Fundamentalist preachers determined to create a “New

Evangelicalism.” They would not be fighters; they would be diplomats, positive
rather than militant, infiltrators rather than separatists. They would not be restricted
by a separationist mentality.

The term “New Evangelicalism” defined a new type of Evangelicalism to

distinguish it from those who had heretofore born that label. Thus, in the very label
is the witness to the fact that Evangelicalism of old, regardless of any weaknesses,
was biblically dogmatic, militant, and separatistic. The term “New Evangelicalism”
was possibly coined by the late Harold Ockenga (1905-1985), probably the most
influential Evangelical leader of the 1940s. He was the pastor of Park Street Church
(Presbyterian) in Boston, founder of the National Association of Evangelicals, co-
founder and one-time president of Fuller Theological Seminary, first president of
the World Evangelical Fellowship, president of Gordon College and Gordon-
Conwell Theological Seminary, a director of the Billy Graham Evangelistic
Association, and chairman of the board and one-time editor of Christianity Today.
In the foreword to Dr. Harold Lindsell’s book The Battle for the Bible, Ockenga
stated the position of New Evangelicalism:

“Neo-evangelicalism was born in 1948 in connection with a convocation

address which I gave in the Civic Auditorium in Pasadena. While reaffirming
the theological view of fundamentalism, this address repudiated its
ecclesiology and its social theory. The ringing call for a repudiation of
separatism and the summons to social involvement received a hearty
response from many Evangelicals. ... It differed from fundamentalism in its
repudiation of separatism and its determination to engage itself in the
theological dialogue of the day. It had a new emphasis upon the application
of the gospel to the sociological, political, and economic areas of life.”

While Ockenga may or may not have coined the term “New Evangelicalism,” it is
certain that the movement itself was not “born” with his convocation address. He
did not create the movement; he merely labeled and described the new mood of
positivism and non-militancy that was quickly permeating his generation. Ockenga
and the new generation of Evangelicals, Billy Graham figuring most prominently,
determined to abandon a militant Bible stance. Instead, they would pursue dialogue,
intellectualism, and appeasement. They determined to stay within apostate
denominations to attempt to change things from within rather than practice biblical

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (4 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

separation. The New Evangelical would dialogue with those who teach error rather
than proclaim the Word of God boldly and without compromise. The New
Evangelical would meet the proud humanist and the haughty liberal on their own
turf with so-called scholarship rather than follow the humble path of being counted a
fool for Christ’s sake by standing humbly and simply upon the Bible. New
Evangelical leaders also determined to start a “rethinking process” whereby the old
paths were to be continually reassessed in light of new goals, methods, and ideology.

Dr. Charles Woodbridge, a professor at Fuller Theological Seminary in its early

days, a founding member of the National Association of Evangelicals, and a friend
of men such as Harold Ockenga and Carl Henry, rejected the New Evangelicalism
and spent the rest of his life warning of its dangers. In his 1969 book, The New
Evangelicalism, he traced the downward path of New Evangelical compromise:

“The New Evangelicalism is a theological and moral compromise of the

deadliest sort. It is an insidious attack upon the Word of God. ... The New
Evangelicalism advocates toleration of error. It is following the downward
path of accommodation to error, cooperation with error, contamination by
error, and ultimate capitulation to error!” (Woodbridge, The New
Evangelicalism, pp. 9,15).

Each passing decade witnesses more plainly to the truth of Dr. Woodbridge’s
observations. Toleration of error leads to accommodation, cooperation,
contamination, and ultimate capitulation. This describes the history of New
Evangelicalism precisely.

In 1958, William Ashbrook wrote Evangelicalism: The New Neutralism, which

began with the following warning:

“This is the age of ‘isms,’ some good, mostly bad! One of the youngest
members of Christendom’s fold is called The New Evangelicalism. It might
more properly be labeled The New Neutralism. This new ‘Evangelicalism’
boasts too much pride, and has imbibed too much of the world’s culture to
share the reproach of fundamentalism. It still has enough faith and too much
understanding of the Bible to appear in the togs of modernism. It seeks
neutral ground, being neither fish nor fowl, neither right nor left, neither for
nor against--it stands between! ... Bible-believing Christians would do well
to beware of the New Evangelicalism for four valid reasons. First, it is a
movement born of compromise. Second, it is a movement nurtured in pride
of intellect. Third, it is a movement growing on appeasement of evil; and
finally it is a movement doomed by the judgment of God’s Holy Word.”

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (5 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

In A History of Fundamentalism in America, Dr. George Dollar observes:

“It has become a favorite pastime of new-evangelical writers, who know so

little of historic Fundamentalism, to call it offensive names, as if to bury it by
opprobrium. The real danger is not strong Fundamentalism but a soft and
effeminate Christianity--exotic but cowardly. It is sad that these men would
not heed the warning of W.B Riley about the menace of ‘middle-of-the-
roadism’” (Dollar, A History of Fundamentalism in America, 1973, p. 208).

Pastor Rolland Starr, who in the 1960s wrote The New Evangelicalism: The
Deadliest Ism of All, warned that “Apostasy Avenue is a one way street and it is all
downhill.” The history of New Evangelicalism has demonstrated the truth of that
simple statement.

God says, “Walk ye in the old paths,” but the New Evangelical reassesses the old
paths. God says, “Remove not the ancient landmarks which thy fathers have set,”
but the New Evangelical has removed them one by one. God says, “Have no
fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness,” but the New Evangelical reasons
that such fellowship is necessary. God says, “A little leaven leaventh the whole
lump,” but the New Evangelical thinks he can reform the already leavened lump.
God says, “Evil communications corrupt good manners,” but the New Evangelical
thinks good manners can uplift evil communications. God says, “I resist the proud
but give grace to the humble,” but the New Evangelical thinks the way to reach the
world is by meeting them on their own proud territory, matching them scholarly
degree with degree.

NEW EVANGELICAL PHILOSOPHY HAS PERMEATED

EVANGELICALISM

The New Evangelical leaven spread rapidly. It was popularized through pleasant
personalities and broadcast through powerful print, radio, and television media.
Christianity Today, for example, was founded in 1956 to voice the new philosophy.
New Evangelicalism became the working principle of large interdenominational
organizations such as the National Association of Evangelicals, National Religious
Broadcasters, Youth for Christ, Campus Crusade for Christ, the Evangelical Foreign
Mission Association, World Evangelical Fellowship, the National Sunday School
Association, etc. It was spread through educational institutions such as Fuller
Theological Seminary, Wheaton College, Gordon-Conwell, and Moody Bible
Institute. Historian David Beale observes that the New Evangelical philosophy
“captured many organizations, fellowships, associations, and denominations that
originated as strictly Fundamentalist groups” (Beale, In Pursuit of Purity, p. 263).

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (6 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

The Evangelical movement today is the New Evangelical movement. For all
practical purposes, they are one and the same.

“Part of the current confusion regarding New Evangelicalism stems from the
fact that there is now little difference between evangelicalism and New
Evangelicalism. The principles of the original New Evangelicalism have
become so universally accepted by those who refer to themselves as
evangelicals that any distinctions which might have been made years ago are
all but lost. It is no doubt true to state that ‘Ockenga’s designation of the new
movement as “New or Neo-Evangelical” was abbreviated to
“Evangelical.” ... Thus today we speak of this branch of conservative
Christianity simply as the Evangelical movement’” (Ernest Pickering, The
Tragedy of Compromise, p. 96).

NEW EVANGELICALISM IS NOT A DENOMINATION OR A GROUP. It is a

spirit or mood of compromise. . It is a rejection of many of the negative aspects of
New Testament Christianity. It is an attitude of positivism. Old-line Presbyterians
can be New Evangelical. Old-line Methodists can be New Evangelical. Fundamental
Bible churches can be New Evangelical. Southern Baptists can be New Evangelical.
INDEPENDENT FUNDAMENTAL BAPTISTS CAN BE NEW EVANGELICAL.
Many are, and the number appears to be growing rapidly. Beware, friends. Don’t be
deceived by the label. Examine the content, and avoid that which is contrary to the
Word of God.

“The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his
going” (Proverbs 14:15).

NEW EVANGELICALISM PAVED THE WAY FOR ACCEPTANCE OF

MODERN VERSIONS

It can be demonstrated that New Evangelical compromise has paved the way for
today’s wholesale acceptance of the modern versions in the Evangelical world. It is
important to understand that the phenomenon of New Evangelicalism had only
recently arrived on the scene when the Revised Standard Version was published.
Already in 1952 Billy Graham, New Evangelicalism’s foremost popularizer,
accepted a copy of the RSV and told a crowd of 20,000 people:

“These scholars have probably given us the most nearly perfect translation in
English. While there may be room for disagreement in certain areas of the
translation, yet this new version should supplement the King James Version
and make Bible reading a habit throughout America” (Graham, cited by
Perry Rockwood, God’s Inspired Preserved Bible, nd., p. 15).

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (7 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

Graham’s endorsement of the Revised Standard Version foreshadowed

Evangelicalism’s capitulation to the endless stream of modern versions. Graham has
endorsed practically every new version to appear on the scene, no matter how
flippant and unfaithful, including the Living Bible (which he almost single-handedly
rescued from oblivion), J.B. Phillips’ New Testament (Phillips, The Price of
Success: An Autobiography, p. 116), and the blasphemous Good News for Modern
Man (Today’s English Version) which replaces the word “blood” with “death” in
speaking of the atonement of Jesus Christ and which corrupts the passages
presenting the Godhead of Jesus Christ.

As New Evangelicalism has gradually leavened the entire Evangelical world over
the past fifty years, the modern versions have increased in popularity. Many seem
confused by the fact that most Evangelical leaders today give wholehearted
endorsement to the critical Greek text as well as to the versions based upon them.
“How could all of these men be wrong?” they muse. The answer, which many find
difficult to accept but which is based upon historical reality, lies in the fact that New
Evangelicalism is a form of apostasy. It is founded upon a willful repudiation of
many of the negative aspects of biblical Christianity.

THE APOSTATE FRUIT OF NEW EVANGELICALISM

It is God who has commanded that His people separate from error; it is God who
has commanded that His people “earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to
the saints.” When these and other aspects of old-time Evangelicalism were rejected,
the power and blessing of God was removed.

Even influential Evangelical leaders have noted the rapid and frightful spiritual
decline of their own movement. Dr. Harold Lindsell, (1913-1998), who was vice-
president of Fuller Theological Seminary and editor of Christianity Today, made
this amazing statement at the 27th annual convention of the National Association of
Evangelicals (NAE) in April 1969: “Evangelical Christianity is in spiritual jeopardy
right now. Complacent, affluent, self-satisfied, we are lacking of great spiritual
dynamic” (D.A. Waite, What’s Wrong with the N.A.E. - 1969?).

In 1979, Dr. Lindsell was even bolder:

“I must regretfully conclude that the term evangelical has been so debased
that it has lost its usefulness. ... Forty years ago the term evangelical
represented those who were theologically orthodox and who held to biblical
inerrancy as one of the distinctives. ... WITHIN A DECADE OR SO
NEOEVANGEL-ICALISM, THAT STARTED SO WELL AND
PROMISED SO MUCH, WAS BEING ASSAULTED FROM WITHIN BY

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (8 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

IN-CREASING SKEPTICISM WITH REGARD TO BIBLICAL INFALL-

IBILITY OR INERRANCY” (Harold Lindsell, The Bible in the Balance,
1979, p. 319).

By 1985, Lindsell had become even more forceful about the decline of
evangelicalism: “Evangelicalism today is in a sad state of disarray. ... It is clear that
evangelicalism is now broader and shallower, and is becoming more so.
Evangelicalism’s children are in the process of forsaking the faith of their
fathers” (Christian News, Dec. 2, 1985).

Another popular Evangelical leader, Dr. Francis Schaeffer (1912-1984), gave a

similar warning at the 1976 convention of the National Association of Evangelicals
in Washington D.C. He spoke on “The Watershed of the Evangelical World,” which
is the infallible inspiration of Holy Scripture. Schaeffer observed: “What is the use
of evangelicalism seeming to get larger and larger in number if significant numbers
of those under the name of ‘evangelical’ no longer hold to that which makes
evangelicalism evangelical?” (D.A. Waite, What’s Wrong with the N.A.E. - 1976?).

A 1996 Moody Press book entitled The Coming Evangelical Crisis also documented
the apostasy of Evangelicalism.

“Although most of today’s professing evangelicals would acknowledge that

theology, in some sense of the word, does matter, a recent survey in
Christianity Today revealed that this is more lip service than anything else.
According to this survey ... theology, in any sense of the word, is really not
all that important to the very people to whom it should matter most: those in
the pew and in the pulpit. BOTH GROUPS LISTED THEOLOGICAL
KNOWLEDGE AS LAST IN TERMS OF PASTORAL PRIORITIES. ...
WE ARE SADLY EXPERIENCING, ON A RATHER LARGE SCALE, A
SUBJECTIVISM THAT BETRAYS ITS WEAKENED HOLD ON THE
OBJECTIVE TRUTH and reality of Christianity by its neglect or even
renunciation of its distinctive objective character. ... Men ... really wish to
have a creedless Christianity. ‘Creeds,’ they shout, ‘are divisive things; away
with them!’ ... Where does this leave us? An undogmatic Christianity is no
Christianity at all” (Gary L.W. Johnson, “Does Theology Still Matter?” The
Coming Evangelical Crisis, Moody Press, 1996, pp. 58,66,67).

“... evangelicalism in the 1990s is an amalgam of diverse and often

theologically ill-defined groups, institutions, and traditions. ... THE
THEOLOGICAL UNITY THAT ONCE MARKED THE MOVEMENT
HAS GIVEN WAY TO A THEOLOGICAL PLURALISM THAT WAS
PRECISELY WHAT MANY OF THE FOUNDERS OF MODERN
EVANGELICALISM HAD REJECTED IN MAINLINE

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (9 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

PROTESTANTISM. ... Evangelicalism is not healthy in conviction or

spiritual discipline. Our theological defenses have been let down, and the
infusion of revisionist theologies has affected large segments of
evangelicalism. Much damage has already been done, but a greater crisis yet
threatens” (R. Albert Mohler, Jr., “Evangelical What’s in a Name?” The
Coming Evangelical Crisis, 1996, pp. 32,33,36).

These are sad testimonies. It is strange to note that these men, though they see the
apostate confusion in modern Evangelicalism, do not clearly see that this is the
product of the rejection of biblical separation and absolutism. These leaders
continue to reject and misrepresent Bible-believing Fundamentalism. This present
Evangelical generation is polluted with the Modernism and Ecumenism and
Romanism and Humanism and Psychology and Worldliness from which it has
refused to separate. God is not mocked. A “little leaven leaventh the whole lump”
and “evil communications corrupt good manners.” A man, church, denomination, or
movement cannot reject biblical separation and a zealous defense of the whole
counsel of God without paying the consequence of apostasy.

EVANGELICALISM’S APOSTASY IS SEEN IN ITS COZY RELATIONSHIP WITH

ROMAN CATHOLICISM

Most popular Evangelical men and organizations have strong and growing
sympathies toward the Roman Catholic Church. In the book “Evangelicals and
Rome” we give extensive documentation of this. Christianity Today, founded by
Billy Graham and other New Evangelical leaders, has three Roman Catholic editors.
Evangelical publishers are busy putting out books sympathetic to Rome and calling
for ecumenical relationships.

As early as 1971 Fleming H. Revell published A PREJUDICED PROTESTANT

TAKES A NEW LOOK AT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH by James Hefley. The author
is a graduate of the Southern Baptist Seminary in New Orleans and pastored a
Baptist church for eight years. He describes how his prejudice against the Roman
Catholic Church has dissolved in recent years because of the alleged changes in
Catholicism since Vatican II. He praises “the increasing willingness of Catholics to
join together in evangelism, Bible study, solving community problems, and
ecumenical relations” (p. 122). He thinks it is great that Catholics have begun to
work with Evangelical organizations such as Campus Crusade for Christ, Youth for
Christ, Fellowship of Christian Athletes, Wycliffe Bible Translators, and
InterVarsity Christian Fellowship (pp. 118,122,123). In one chapter, Hefley
describes in glowing terms his experience of visiting with Catholic leaders at the
archdiocese headquarters in New Orleans. He calls the priests “father.” He “felt a
warmth” while attending a Catholic mass (p. 109).

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (10 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

In 1979, Tyndale House Publishers came out with THREE SISTERS by Michael
Harper. This book called for ecumenical unity between Evangelicals, Charismatics,
and Roman Catholics. The author stated, “It is my own conviction that a growing
unity between the three forces in the Christian world is both desirable and
possible” (p. 41).

In 1984, Thomas Howard’s book EVANGELICAL IS NOT ENOUGH (Thomas

Nelson Publisher) called for a movement toward liturgical, Catholic-style worship
among Evangelicals. Howard, who was a professor at Gordon College for 15 years,
is from a family of prominent Evangelicals. His father, Philip, was editor of the
Sunday School Times; his brother David Howard was head of the World Evangelical
Fellowship; and his sister Elizabeth married the famous missionary Jim Elliot, who
was martyred by the Auca Indians in Ecuador. The year after the publication of
Evangelical Is Not Enough, Thomas Howard converted to the Roman Catholic
Church and left Gordon College to teach at Catholic seminaries in Boston. Other
converts to Rome in recent years have testified that Howard’s book assisted them in
taking their journey. When asked about Howard’s conversion to Catholicism, J.I.
Packer gave the following amazing reply, “I don’t think becoming a Catholic is
anything like the tragedy of a person becoming a theological liberal and losing touch
with objective authority altogether. Catholics are among the most loyal and viral
brothers evangelicals can find these days” (J.I. Packer, Christianity Today, May 17,
1985).

In 1985, InterVarsity Press stirred the ecumenical waters with A TALE OF TWO
CHURCHES by George Carey (who later became the Archbishop of Canterbury).
Carey called for the “eventual reunion of the two streams [Protestantism and Roman
Catholicism] of Western Christendom.” The foreword to this book, subtitled Can
Protestants & Catholics Get Together, was written by J.I. Packer.

Also in 1985 Wheaton College professor Robert Webber published

EVANGELICALS ON THE CANTERBURY TRAIL, describing his journey from a
Baptist (his father was a fundamental Baptist preacher) and fundamentalist (he is a
graduate of Bob Jones University) heritage to the ecumenical Episcopal-Catholic
philosophy he holds today. Webber accepts the Roman Catholic Church as a true
apostolic church, tracing his “family tree” from Jesus Christ “through the Apostles,
the primitive Christian community, the Apostolic Fathers, the Eastern Orthodox
Church, the Catholic Church,” to “the Church of the Reformation” (p. 66). He
describes his experiences at graduate school, in which he first tasted of ecumenical
relations with Roman Catholics (p. 62). He describes his love for sacramentalism
(pp. 47-56). He says he has to “swallow hard” when he hears missionaries to Latin
America describe Roman Catholics as unsaved (p. 68). He calls the “concept of the
purity of the church” a “strait-jacket that made me increasingly uncomfortable,”

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (11 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

because it “stifled my experience of the whole church” (p. 71). He looks upon the
Reformation as an evil thing because of the division it created from Rome, and he
looks forward to the day when the division will be healed (p. 171).

In 1990, Thomas Nelson published EVANGELICAL CATHOLICS: A CALL FOR

CHRISTIAN COOPERATION TO PENETRATE THE DARKNESS WITH THE
LIGHT OF THE GOSPEL by Keith Fournier, a Roman Catholic apologist. The
foreword was written by Charles Colson. “But at root, those who are called of God,
whether Catholic or Protestant, are part of the same Body. … It’s high time that all
of us who are Christians come together regardless of the difference of our
confessions and our traditions and make common cause to bring Christian values to
bear in our society. When the barbarians are scaling the walls, there is no time for
petty quarreling in the camp. Keith Fournier stands in the breachtruly orthodox in
his adherence to Catholic doctrine and fully evangelical in his relationship to Christ
and His creation. Keith’s ministry is one of healing. … I pray that his book will be a
bridge across many of the historic divisions in the church that have weakened our
stand in today’s culture. … We have much to forgive, much to relearn. But
Evangelical Catholics can help us do both so we can band together against the rising
tides of secularism which threaten to engulf us” (Chuck Colson, foreword,
Evangelical Catholics, p. vi).

In 1994, InterVarsity Press came out with the HANDBOOK OF CHRISTIAN

APOLOGETICS by two Roman Catholic authors, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli.
Kreeft is a Catholic apologist who believes that Mary will ultimately conquer Satan
and who believes that even Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists will probably go to
Heaven. Tacelli is a Jesuit priest and a professor at Boston College. Why would
InterVarsity choose Catholics to write such a book, or why would they publish such
a book by Catholics? If asked about Catholic theology, InterVarsity leaders would
doubtless reply that they do not agree with a large part of it. That being the case,
why not have Bible-believing authors, or at least thorough-going Protestants, write a
book on Christian apologetics? The answer is the ecumenical agenda of these
“evangelical” organizations.

In 1994, the Navigators’ NavPress published A HOUSE UNITED?

EVANGELICALS AND CATHOLICS TOGETHER: A WINNING ALLIANCE FOR
THE 21ST CENTURY. The authors are Roman Catholic Keith Fournier and
Evangelical William Watkins, a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary. The
foreword is written by Pat Robertson. In 1991, Robertson invited Fournier to
become executive director of the American Center for Law and Justice at Regent
University. In the foreword to Fournier’s book, Pat Robertson said that Catholics
and Protestants “have a moral imperative to join together” to oppose cultural evils
such as abortion, and he praised Fournier for his “deep dedication to helping to heal
the divide” that “separated the Body of Christ.” The back cover of A House United?

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (12 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

has recommenda-tions by seven men, including Terry Lindvall (President of Regent

University), Ralph Reed (formerly Executive Director of the Christian Coalition),
and Vinson Synan (Pentecostal chairman of the North American Renewal Service
Committee). Synan sets the tone with his comments: “Keith Fournier is truly a
twentieth-century apostle of unity for the Body of Christ. His back-ground as an
evangelical and charismatic Catholic has prepared him well to write A House
United?a book that adds light and grace to the current religious situation in
America.”

In 1995, Baker Books encouraged the Evangelical-Roman Catholic alliance with the
publication of ROMAN CATHOLICS AND EVANGELICALS: AGREEMENTS AND
DIFFERENCES by Norman Geisler and Ralph MacKenzie. Though the authors
acknowledge vast dif-ferences between Evangelicals and Catholics, they conclude
that these should not be a cause for separation. This statement from the book’s
foreword sets the tone for the whole: “Nevertheless, when all is said and done,
evangelical Protestants and tradition-alists, believing Roman Catholics have so
many convictions and com-mit-ments in common that it would be foolish as well as
wrong in the sight of the One whom we all claim as our Lord Jesus Christ to
wrangle with each other in the face of the common enemy” (Foreword by Harold O.
J. Brown, Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and Differences, p. 12).

Also in 1995, Word Publishing came out with EVANGELICALS & CATHOLICS
TOWARD A COMMON MISSION Together, edited by Charles Colson and Richard
John Neuhaus. Contributors to the book include J.I. Packer (Regent College), Mark
Noll (Wheaton College), and Avery Dulles (Jesuit priest and professor at Catholic
University). Chuck Colson is the well-known and popular Evangelical leader who
founded Prison Fellowship, and Richard Neuhaus is a convert to the Roman
Catholic Church from Lutheranism. These are the two men most responsible for the
controversial Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT) statement that was
released in 1994 and signed by 38 Evangelical and Catholic leaders. The back cover
to Evangelicals & Catholics Together says: “This courageous book seeks a way to
allow sectarian strife between the two groups to give way to a decision to work
together to mend the fabric of values that has been relentlessly rent in the last thirty-
five years. Here, both evangelical and Roman Catholic authors ask whether the time
has come to present a united front against the onslaught of publicly sanctioned
unbelief in the land.”

In 1997, InterVarsity Press published RECLAIMING THE GREAT TRADITION:

EVANGELICALS, CATHOLICS AND ORTHODOX IN DIALOGUE. It was edited
by James Cutsinger and contained articles by Harold O.J. Brown, Peter Kreeft,
Richard Neuhaus, J.I. Packer, and others. The book is a collection of material from
an ecumenical dialogue held at Rose Hill College, May 16-20, 1995. The objective
of the dialogue was to answer the question: “How can Protestants, Roman Catholics

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (13 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

and Eastern Orthodox Christians talk to each other so as together to speak with
Christ’s mind to the modern world?” (p. 8). The answer, of course, is that this is
impossible among those who do not hold the same doctrines, nor even believe the
same gospel. Paul did not seek to dialogue with those who corrupted the gospel; he
rebuked them and announced God’s curse upon them (Galatians 1). In doing so, he
was not expressing hatred or bigotry; he was demonstrating love toward those who
were in danger of being deceived by false teachers.

These books were published by major Evangelical publishers, and they illustrate the
rapidly growing sympathy between Evangel-icals and the Roman Catholic Church.

While most of these books acknowledge that there is doctrinal error in the Roman
Catholic Church, they claim that Rome has changed for the better, that Roman
Catholicism is not a cult, is not total apostasy. They speak of Rome’s heresies in
gentle, “understanding,” scholarly tones rather than labeling them the blasphemies
they really are. Let me give an example. In Roman Catholicism: Evangelical
Protestants Analyze What Divides and Unites Us, John Armstrong says, “For
centuries the magisterium had insisted that there was no salvation outside the
church ... which meant, of course, the Roman Catholic Church. This sometimes
caused a decidedly uncharitable response to Protestant evangelicals, who were
considered lost outside of Rome and her sacramental system” (emphasis added). To
describe Rome’s fearful, bloody, centuries old persecution of Bible-believing
Christians as “decidedly uncharitable” is insanity.

Many of today’s Evangelicals want to believe that Rome’s official doctrinal position
is not the real position of the so-called evangelical Catholic today. These books call
upon Evangelicals to lay aside the age-old divisions and to work hand-in-hand with
Roman Catholicism in social, religious, and political causes.

The cover jacket for A House United? quotes Pentecostal Vinson Synan’s
recommendation of the book: “Keith Fournier [a Catholic apologist] is truly a
twentieth-century apostle of unity for the Body of Christ.” This unscriptural unity in
the so-called Body of Christ is one of the apostate keynotes of late twentieth-century
Evangelical-ism. It is obvious that NavPress, publisher of this book, and the
Navigators organization that owns NavPress, have succumbed to the Evangelical-
Roman Catholic juggernaut.

EVANGELICALISM’S APOSTASY IS ALSO SEEN IN ITS QUESTIONING OF

BIBLICAL INFALLIBILITY

The downgrade of the doctrine of biblical inspiration has been docu-mented even by
Evangelicalism’s own leaders.

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (14 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

In 1976, Carl F.H. Henry, first editor of Christianity Today, lifted his voice to warn
of this frightful problem:

“A GROWING VANGUARD OF YOUNG GRADUATES OF

EVANGELICAL COLLEGES WHO HOLD DOCTORATES FROM NON-
EVANGELICAL DIVINITY CENTERS NOW QUESTION OR DISOWN
INERRANCY and the doctrine is held less consistently by evangelical
faculties. ... Some retain the term and reassure supportive constituencies but
nonetheless stretch the term’s meaning” (Carl F.H. Henry, chairman for the
1966 World Congress on Evangelism, “Conflict Over Biblical Inerrancy,”
Christianity Today, May 7, 1976)

Almost 25 years ago this leader warned of Evangelical scholars who disowned or
questioned biblical inerrancy. Henry even warned that some Evangelical scholars
are deceitful in their use of biblical and traditional Christian terms. They use terms
like “infallible” and “inerrant,” but they do not mean by this that they believe the
Bible is without error.

The same year that Dr. Henry warned of Evangelical graduates disowning inerrancy,
Richard Quebedeaux, author of The Young Evangelicals and The Worldly
Evangelicals, added the following details:

“Most people outside the evangelical community itself are totally unaware of
the profound changes that have occurred within evangelicalism during the
last several yearsin the movement’s understanding of the inspiration and
authority of Scripture, in its social concerns, cultural attitudes and
ecumenical posture, and in the nature of its emerging leadership. ...
evangelical theologians have begun looking at the Bible with a scrutiny
reflecting THEIR WIDESPREAD ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRINCIPLES
OF HISTORICAL AND LITERARY CRITICISM ... The positionaffirming
that Scripture is inerrant or infallible in its teaching on matters of faith and
conduct but not necessarily in all its assertions concerning history and the
cosmosIS GRADUALLY BECOMING ASCENDANT AMONG THE
MOST HIGHLY RESPECTED EVANGELICAL THEOLOGIANS. ... these
new trends ... indicate that evangelical theology is becoming more centrist,
more open to biblical criticism and more accepting of science and broad
cultural analysis. ONE MIGHT EVEN SUGGEST THAT THE NEW
GENERATION OF EVANGELICALS IS CLOSER TO BONHOEFFER,
BARTH AND BRUNNER THAN TO HODGE AND WARFIELD ON THE
INSPIRATION AND AUTHORITY OF SCRIPTURE” (Richard
Quebedeaux, “The Evangelicals: New Trends and Tensions,” Christianity
and Crisis, Sept. 20, 1976, pp. 197-202).

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (15 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

Another warning appeared a year later:

“A SURPRISING ARRAY OF EQUALLY DEDICATED

EVANGELICALS IS FORMING TO INSIST THAT ACCEPTANCE OF
HISTORIC CHRISTIAN DOCTRINES DOES NOT REQUIRE BELIEF IN
AN INERRANT BOOK. ... What has made it a new ball game today is the
emergence of A NEW TYPE OF EVANGELICAL. These persons accept the
cardinal doctrines of Christianity in their full and literal meaning but AGREE
THAT THE HIGHER CRITICS HAVE A POINT: THERE ARE ERRORS
IN SCRIPTURE, and some of its precepts must be recognized as being
culturally and historically conditioned” (G. Aiken Taylor, “Is God as Good
as His Word?” Christianity Today, Feb. 4, 1977).

That same year Pastor Mark Buch of Vancouver, British Columbia, who was
involved in the Fundamentalist movement from the 1930s, gave this testimony to
Evangelicalism’s corruption:

“[Evangelicalism] today has fallen away from the old faith and this is not the
case of an exception among them, it is common and general. They no longer
believe in the veracity, the verbal inspiration of the Holy Bible and they have
gone a whoring after all sorts of innovations and foolishness in order to fill
their churches...” (Buch, In Defence of the Authorized Version, 1977, p. 33).

In his 1978 book, The Worldly Evangelicals, Richard Quebedeaux warned that
many Evangelical scholars are deceitful about their doctrinal heresies:

“Prior to the 60s, virtually all the seminaries and colleges associated with the
neo-evangelicals and their descendants adhered to the total inerrancy
understanding of biblical authority (at least they did not vocally express
opposition to it). … But it is a well-known fact that A LARGE NUMBER, IF
NOT MOST, OF THE COLLEGES AND SEMINARIES IN QUESTION
NOW HAVE FACULTY WHO NO LONGER BELIEVE IN TOTAL
INERRANCY, even in situations where their employers still require them to
sign the traditional declaration that the Bible is ‘verbally inspired,’ ‘inerrant,’
or ‘infallible in the whole and in the part,’ or to affirm in other clearly
defined words the doctrine of inerrancy that was formulated by the Old
Princeton school of theology and passed on to fundamentalism. SOME OF
THESE FACULTY INTERPRET THE CRUCIAL CREEDAL CLAUSES
IN A MANNER THE ORIGINAL FRAMERS WOULD NEVER HAVE
ALLOWED, OTHERS SIMPLY SIGN THE AFFIRMATION WITH
TONGUE IN CHEEK” (Quebedeaux, The Worldly Evangelicals, p. 30).

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (16 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

We must not forget that these statements describe conditions 20 YEARS AGO and
things are much worse now!

The aforementioned Harold Lindsell published two volumes on the downgrade of

the Bible in Evangelicalism, with particular focus on Fuller Seminary, the Southern
Baptist Convention, and the Lutheran ChurchMissouri Synod. Lindsell’s The Battle
for the Bible was first published in 1976. The sequel, The Bible in the Balance,
came out in 1979. This careful documentation by a man who was in the inner circle
of Evangelicalism’s leadership for decades leaves no doubt that the Evangelical
world of the last half of the twentieth century is leavened with apostasy.

“MORE AND MORE ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS

HISTORICALLY COMMITTED TO AN INFALLIBLE SCRIPTURE
HAVE BEEN EMBRACING AND PROPAGATING THE VIEW THAT
THE BIBLE HAS ERRORS IN IT. This movement away from the historic
standpoint has been most noticeable among those often labeled neo-
evangelicals. This change of position with respect to the infallibility of the
Bible is widespread and has occurred in evangelical denominations, Christian
colleges, theological seminaries, publishing houses, and learned
societies” (Harold Lindsell, former vice-president and professor Fuller
Theological Seminary and Editor Emeritus of Christianity Today, The Battle
for the Bible, 1976, p. 20).

In 1984, well-known Evangelical leader Francis Schaeffer published The Great

Evangelical Disaster. The book’s title describes the thesis. The cover jacket says,
“In this explosive new book Dr. Francis Schaeffer exposes the rise of compromise
and accommodation, and the tragic consequences of this, within the evangel-ical
church.” The issue that Schaeffer called “the watershed of Evangel-ical-ism” is the
inspiration and authority of the Bible. He testified, “Within evangelicalism there are
a growing number who are modifying their views on the inerrancy of the Bible so
that the full authority of Scripture is completely undercut” (The Great Evangelical
Disaster, p. 44).

A more recent exposure of the corruption of doctrine in the Evangelical world is

found in No Place for Truth: or Whatever Happened to Evangelical Theology?
(1993) by David F. Wells, at Gordon-Conwell Theolog-ical Seminary. Time
magazine described Well’s book as “a stinging indictment of evangeli-calism’s
theological corruption.” Though Wells is himself a committed New Evangelical he
properly identifies Evangelical-ism’s chief prob-lem as its repudiation of bibli-cal
separation and its accommodation with the world:

“Fundamentalism always had an air of embattlement about it, of being an

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (17 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

island in a sea of unremitting hostility. Evangelicalism has reacted against

this sense of psychological isolation. IT HAS LOWERED THE
BARRICADES. IT IS OPEN TO THE WORLD. The great sin of
Fundamentalism is to compromise; the great sin in evangelicalism is to be
narrow” (emphasis added) (David Wells, No Place for Truth, p. 129).

Wells also made a telling statement that acknowledges precisely where the New
Evangelical world is today:

“But in between these far shores [Anglo-Catholicism and Fundamentalism]

lie the choppy waters that most evangelicals now ply with their boats, and
HERE THE WINDS OF MODERNITY BLOW WITH DISCONCERTING
FORCE, FRAGMENTING WHAT IT MEANS TO BE EVANGELICAL.
This is because evangelicals have allowed their confessional center to
dissipate” (p. 128).

In 1995, Dr. Carl Henry was continuing to warn about unbelief within Evangelical
circles: “Much of the same revolt against truth emerged during the recent theology
conference of postliberal speak-ers sponsored jointly with Inter-Varsity at Wheaton
College. NOT A SINGLE REPRESENTATIVE OF HISTORIC EVANGELICAL
ORTH-O-DOXY COMMITTED TO THE UNBROKEN AUTHOR-ITY OF THE
BIBLE WAS FEATURED...” (Calvary Contender, July 1, 1995).

Consider the following summary of the downgrade of the doctrine of inspiration by

today’s Evangelical leaders:

My main concern is with those who profess to believe that the Bible is the Word of
God and yet by, what I can only call surreptitious and devious means, deny it. This
is, surprisingly enough, a position that is taken widely in the evangelical world.
Almost all of the literature which is produced in the evangelical world today falls
into this category. In the October 1985 issue of Christianity Today, (the very
popular and probably most influential voice of evangelicals in America), a
symposium on Bible criticism was featured. The articles were written by scholars
from several evangelical seminaries. Not one of the participants in that symposium
in Christianity Today was prepared to reject higher criticism. All came to its
defense. IT BECAME EVIDENT THAT ALL THE SCHOLARS FROM THE
LEADING SEMINARIES IN THIS COUNTRY HELD TO A FORM OF HIGHER
CRITICISM.

These men claim to believe that the Bible is the Word of God. At the same time,
they adopt higher critical methods in the explanation of the Scriptures. This has
become so common in evangelical circles that IT IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (18 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

FIND AN EVANGELICAL PROFESSOR IN THE THEOLOGICAL SCHOOLS

OF OUR LAND AND ABROAD WHO STILL HOLDS UNCOMPROMISINGLY
TO THE DOCTRINE OF THE INFALLIBLE INSPIRATION OF THE
SCRIPTURES. The insidious danger is that higher criticism is promoted by those
who claim to believe in infallible inspiration (Herman Hanko, The Battle for the
Bible, pp. 2,3). [Hanko’s book should not be confused with Harold Lindsell’s book
by that same name.]

The author of the above critique is a professor at the Protestant Reformed Seminary,
Grandville, Michigan.

EVANGELICALISM’S APOSTASY IS SEEN IN ITS REPUDIA-TION OF BIBLICAL

HOLINESS

Evangelicalism’s apostasy is not only seen in its relationship with Rome and its
downgrade of biblical inspiration, it is also seen in its repudiation of biblical
holiness. The old Fundamen-talism was staunch-ly and boldly opposed to
worldliness. The New Evangelical crowd has rejected and redefined this. The result
has been incredible to behold. R-rated and PG-13 movies are given positive reviews
in Evangelical publications. Evangelical music groups look and sound exactly like
the world. Many Evangelical Bible College campuses have the look and feel of
secular colleges. The students wear the same clothes (or lack of clothes) as the
world; they drink the same liquor; they dance to the same music; they celebrate the
same worldly events; they care about the same worldly concerns. Richard
Quebedeaux documented this more than 20 years ago in his book, The Worldly
Evangelicals.

“The Gallup Poll is correct in asserting that born-again Christians ‘believe in

a strict moral code.’ But that strictness has been considerably modified
during the last few years … the monthly question and answer column
(patterned after ‘Dear Abby’) in Campus Life, Youth for Christ’s magazine,
gives the impression that more born-again high school age couples are
having INTERCOURSE than is generally supposed. Among evangelical
young people, MASTERBATION is now often seen as a gift from God.
DIVORCE AND REMARRIAGE are becoming more frequent and
acceptable among evangelicals of all ages, even in some of their more
conservative churches. This new tolerant attitude toward divorce has been
greatly facilitated both by the publication of positive articles and books on
the problem by evangelical authors and by the growth of ministry to singles
in evangelical churches. … Some evangelical women are taking advantage of
ABORTION on demand. Many younger evangelicals occasionally use
PROFANITY in their speech and writing (though they are generally careful
to avoid traditional profanity against the deity). Some of the recent

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (19 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

evangelical sex-technique books assume that their readers peruse and view
PORNOGRAPHY on occasion, and they do. Finally, in 1976 there emerged
a fellowship and information organization for practicing evangelical
LESBIANS AND GAY MEN and their sympathizers. There is probably just
as high a percentage of gays in the evangelical movement as in the wider
society. Some of them are now coming out of the closet, distributing well-
articulated literature, and demanding to be recognized and affirmed by the
evangelical community at large” (Quebedeaux, The Worldly Evangelicals,
1978, pp. 16,17).

Describing this moral apostasy in The Great Evangelical Disaster, Francis Schaeffer
said:

“How the mindset of accommodation grows and expands. The last sixty
years have given birth to a moral disaster, and what have we done? Sadly we
must say that the evangelical world has been part of the disaster. ... WITH
TEARS WE MUST SAY THAT ... A LARGE SEGMENT OF THE
EVANGELICAL WORLD HAS BECOME SEDUCED BY THE WORLD
SPIRIT OF THIS PRESENT AGE” (Schaeffer, p. 141).

The rejection of biblical holiness is particularly evident on the campuses of

Evangelical colleges and seminaries. This was observed by James Hunter in his
book Evangelicalism The Coming Generation (1987). He documents “the evolution
of behavioral standards for students at these colleges”

“What has happened at Wheaton College, Gordon College, and Westmont

College is typical of most of the colleges in this subculture. From the time of
their founding to the mid-1960s, the college rules unapologetically prohibited
‘profaning the Sabbath,’ ‘profane or obscene language or behavior,’ playing
billiards, playing cards and gambling, using intoxicating liquors or tobacco,
theater and movie attendance, and any form of dancingboth on- and off-
campus” (Hunter, p. 169).

Hunter goes on to observe that these rules have largely been dropped, and the
worldliness on Evangelical college campuses has increased significantly in the
twelve years since his book was published.

In 1996, the moral apostasy of today’s Evangelicalism was affirmed by the Alliance
of Confessing Evangelicals in the Cambridge Declaration. The declaration, signed
by 80 theologians and church leaders, was released on April 20, 1996, at the end of
a four-day conference in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The signers included James
Montgomery Boice, J.A.O. Preus III, David Wells, Albert Mohler, and Michael

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (20 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

Horton, and represented Lutheran, Reformed, Baptist, Congregational, and

Independent denominations.

“Today the light of Reformation has been significantly dimmed. The

consequence is that THE WORD ‘EVANGELICAL’ HAS BECOME SO
INCLUSIVE AS TO HAVE LOST ITS MEANING. … As Biblical authority
has been abandoned in practice, as its truths have faded from Christian
consciousness, and its doctrines have lost their saliency, THE CHURCH
HAS BEEN INCREASINGLY EMPTIED OF ITS INTEGRITY, MORAL
AUTHORITY AND DIRECTION. … As evangelical faith becomes
secularized, its interests have been blurred with those of the culture. THE
RESULT IS A LOSS OF ABSOLUTE VALUES, PERMISSIVE
INDIVIDUALISM, AND A SUBSTITUTION OF WHOLENESS FOR
HOLINESS, recovery for repentance, intuition for truth, feeling for belief,
chance for providence, and immediate gratification for enduring hope” (The
Cambridge Declaration, 1996).

Warnings such as these have been largely ignored by the Evangelical world.

EVANGELICALISM’S APOSTASY IS SEEN IN ITS ACCEPTANCE OF HERETICS

Evangelicalism’s apostasy is also seen in its acceptance of heretics. We could give

dozens of examples, but I will mention one to illustrate the point: Bruce Metzger.

The February 8, 1999, issue of Christianity Today contains an editorial by Michael

Maudlin, Managing Editor, entitled “Inside CT.” Maudlin’s editorial boasts that
“never before in the twentieth century has the church amassed so many highly
skilled, believing scholars to illumine our Scriptures, our theology, our traditions,
our church work.” Who are these “believing scholars”? He mentions five of them:
Craig Blomberg, Bruce Metzger, Edwin Yamauchi, Ben Witherington III, and D.A.
Carson.

Maudlin’s definition of “believing” is strange. Take Metzger, for example. He is a

Princeton Theological Seminary professor, an editor of the United Bible Societies’
Greek New Testament, and the head of the continuing RSV translation committee of
the apostate National Council of Churches in the U.S.A. The Revised Standard
Version was soundly condemned for its modernism when it first appeared in 1952.
Today its chief editor sometimes is invited to speak at Evangelical forums. The RSV
hasn’t changed, but Evangelicalism certainly has! Metzger was the chairman for the
Reader’s Digest Condensed Bible and wrote the introductions to each book in this
butchered version of the Scriptures. In these, Metzger questions the authorship,
traditional date, and supernatural inspiration of books penned by Moses, Daniel, and

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (21 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

Peter, and in many other ways reveals his liberal, unbelieving heart. Consider three
examples:

Genesis: “Nearly all modern scholars agree that, like the other books of the
Pentateuch, [Genesis] is a composite of several sources, embodying
traditions that go back in some cases to Moses.” (Metzger’s introduction to
Exodus).

Exodus: “As with Genesis, several strands of literary tradition, some very
ancient, some as late as the sixth century B.C., were combined in the makeup
of the books” (Metzger’s introduction to Exodus).

Deuteronomy: “It’s compilation is generally assigned to the seventh century

B.C., though it rests upon much older tradition, some of it from Moses’
time” (Metzger’s introduction to Deuteronomy).

These statements are not “believing” statements. They are outright lies and heresy.
Bruce Metzger is an unbelieving heretic. The Lord Jesus Christ and the Apostles
told us that the Pentateuch was written by the historical Moses (who is mentioned
843 times in the Bible). It is not a compilation that gradually took shape over many
centuries.

Metzger's heresy is further evident in the notes to the New Oxford Annotated Bible
RSV (1973). Metzger co-edited this volume with Herbert May. It first appeared in
1962 as the Oxford Annotated Bible and was the first Protestant annotated edition of
the Bible to be approved by a Roman Catholic authority. It was given an imprimatur
in 1966 by Cardinal Cushing, Archbishop of Boston, Massachusetts. Metzger wrote
many of the rationalistic notes in this volume and put his editorial stamp of approval
on the rest. The notes claim that the Pentateuch is “a matrix of myth, legend, and
history” that “took shape over a long period of time” and is “not to be read as
history.” The worldwide flood of Noah’s day is said to be a mere “tradition” based
on “heightened versions of local inundations.” The book of Job is called an “ancient
folktale.” The book of Isaiah is said to have been written by at least three men. The
stories of Elijah and Elisha contain “legendary elements.” Jonah is called a “popular
legend.” The Gospels gradually took shape after the deaths of the Apostles. Peter
probably did not write the book of 2 Peter.

These statements are unbelieving lies. The Pentateuch was written by the hand of
God and Moses and completed during the 40 years of wilderness wandering
hundreds of years before Samuel and the kings. The Old Testament did not arise
gradually from a matrix of myth and history, but is inspired revelation delivered to
holy men of old by Almighty God. The Jews were a “people of the book” from the
beginning. The Jewish nation did not form the Bible; the Bible formed the Jewish

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (22 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

nation! Jesus Christ affirmed the historicity of Jonah. The historicity of Job is
affirmed by Ezekiel (14:14,20) and James (5:11).

In his “Introduction to the New Testament” in the New Oxford Annotated Bible,
Metzger completely ignores the divine inspiration of the Holy Spirit and claims that
the Gospels are composed of material gathered from oral tradition. The Bible says
nothing about this, but Jesus Christ plainly tells us that the Holy Spirit would guide
the Apostles into all truth (John 16:7-15). The Gospels are divine revelation, not
some happenstance editing of oral tradition.

Christianity Today calls Bruce Metzger a “believing scholar.” In reality, he is an

unbelieving heretic, and the fact that so many Evangelical leaders recommend his
writings is a testimony to the apostasy of Evangelicalism today.

THE LAST DAYS TO BE CHARACTERIZED BY APOSTASY

The fact that the walls between truth and error are being torn down in one
generation, though grievous, should not surprise us. Did the Apostles not prophesy
of apostasy, compromise, spiritual decline, doctrinal confusion, and religious
duplicity? Note passages such as Matthew 7:15-23; 24:3-5,11,24; Acts 20:29-30; 2
Corinthians 11:1-4, 11-15; Colossians 2:4,8,18-19; 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12; 1
Timothy 4:1-6; 2 Timothy 3-4; 2 Peter 2-3; 1 John 2:18-24; 4:1-3; Jude; and
Revelation 13 and 17. According to these prophecies the course of the church age is
characterized by deepening religious apostasy and a false unity which will grow
throughout the age and will come into full blossom just prior to Christ’s return in
power and glory.

This is exactly what has happened during the past 1900 years of church history, yet
this present generation has witnessed a tremen-dous increase in the pace of the
apostasy. Not only are the Protes-tant denominations moving back toward the
Roman fold, but also those who had not before affiliated with Rome’s deep error are
being enticed by her ecumenical overtures.

The Last Days apostasy is like a river flowing toward Rome. Those who do not
resist the flow and paddle up stream will be swept away. Evidence of this is
contained throughout this report.

The apostasy is also like a strong wind. In the Northwest, where we live, we have
powerful winds that sweep in off the Pacific Ocean dur-ing the winter season. I live
on an island and our house is locat-ed a mile from the west shore. We have learned
that unless you stake a newly planted tree, it will be bent by the winds and will
remain bent and crooked. That is similar to what happens today if a Christian does

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (23 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

not actively resist and separate from the spirit of error.

Behold Billy Graham, Chuck Colson, Bill Bright, Jack Van Impe, James Robison,
Pat Robertson, and a myriad of other Evangelical leaders who have associated with
the Roman Catholic Church through ecumenical activities and have become
sympathetic with Rome and blinded to the horror of its blasphemous errors. They
admit that Roman Catholicism teaches error, but they do not have heartfelt
convictions about the blasphemous character of those errors.

“Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners” (1

Corinthians 15:33).

Rome hasn’t changed, but Evangelicalism certainly has.

Thus the situation we find among Evangelical leaders today concerning Bible texts
and versions is not surprising. They believe in a “concept Bible.” The inspired Word
of God is not to be found in one place, but it is scattered throughout the texts and
versions. What are we to say to this? I say that in light of the carnal, apostate
condition of Evangelicalism, it is not surprising that its leaders and institutions
cannot see the truth about Bible versions. A man who thinks the pope is a great
evangelist (as Billy Graham does) or that Karl Barth was a great Christian (as many
of today’s Evangelical leaders do) could not be trusted to give sound advice about
Bible versions or any other spiritual matter. Men who are unwilling to proclaim
Romanism an abomination or who hesitate to label the historic-critical views of
Scripture as wicked heresy simply cannot be trusted.

The pure Gospel and the pure Bible have always been held by the minority, the
remnant. In light of the prophecies of the New Testament Scriptures that foresee the
apostasy of the visible “church,” I do not find it strange that the pure Bible is
rejected by the majority of those who profess to be Christians today.

[This message is excerpted from the book MYTHS ABOUT THE MODERN BIBLE
VERSIONS. This 360-page book is available from Way of Life Literature, P.O. Box
610368, Port Huron, MI 48061.]

See "Fundamentalism, Modernism, New Evangelicalism."

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (24 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]

NEW EVANGELICALISM AND BIBLE VERSIONS

Way of Life Literature. Copyright 1997-

2001.
P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 480610368.
1-866-295-4143 (toll free: USA & Canada),
519-652-2619 (voice),
[email protected] (email)
http://www.wayoflife.org/(web site)

Canada: Bethel Baptist Church, 4212

Campbell St. N., London, Ont. N6P 1A6
1-866-295-4143 (toll free),
519-652-2619 (voice), 519-652-0056 (fax)

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newevangelicalism.htm (25 of 25) [8/5/2008 5:59:08 PM]