Fuller boasts over 4,500 students from over 67 countries and 108 denominations so their loosy-goosey theological, political, and social positions are understandable as well as untenable and unscriptural.

The Evangelicals who founded the school did not like the Fundamentalists’ doctrine of separation, especially ecclesiastical separation. They did not agree with the Apostle Paul’s command to “come out from among them” because they wanted to stay in their denominations and maintain their perks, power, and positions. After all, they reasoned, one can carry personal and doctrinal purity just so far. They also did not want to pay the price of being shunned, slandered, and sacked by their churches. Many religious leaders had moved up in this world and enjoyed the “good life.” So they had to be careful, you know. One must be practical.

They said that they would remain in corrupt denominations and fight; well, they stayed in but they refused to fight. New Evangelicals are lovers not fighters and they don’t understand that true lovers love truth enough to fight for it. Most Evangelical leaders will not fight unbelief and corruption but they gladly fight Fundamentalists!

Another reason for breaking with Fundamentalists was the perceived need for social involvement. Most people would think that the debacle of the 1920s and 1930s with the infiltration of the social gospel into mainline churches would be enough evidence to make anyone eschew such unscriptural folly.

Most Evangelical leaders cannot or will not delineate between an individual Christian’s responsibility to society and a church’s responsibility. Therefore, modern Evangelicals are in hot pursuit of the social gospel as seen in many of the megachurches and emergent churches which are often led by playboy preachers in faded blue jeans, tee shirts, spiked hair, and gold chains. Usually with a BMW or Mercedes parked out front. And the television charlatan tools around town in a Rolls Royce!

The third leg to the Evangelical stool is their desire for a passionate love affair with theological liberals. So there was an understanding between them: unbelieving liberal preachers would overlook the unfortunate culture of these erstwhile Fundamentalists and these Fundamentalists would overlook the radical unbelief of the liberal clergy–people who were no more Christian than an emaciated alley cat. In fact, at least the cat was not a hypocrite, professing to believe the truth while all the time hating it. As one Evangelical confessed to this understanding between New Evangelicals and Leftist Liberals: we will call you “brother” if you will call us “scholar.” So they climbed into bed with each other and it is a sorry, sordid, sinful affair. And it is an affair.

All the above always results from a weak view of Scripture. From their beginning, the New Evangelicals, Christianity Today, and Fuller Seminary were weak on inerrancy. Inerrancy means there are no errors in the Bible while infallible means that errors are impossible. Harold Lindsell declared in The Battle for the Bible that “The very nature of inspiration renders the Bible infallible, which means that it cannot deceive us. It is inerrant in that it is not false, mistaken, or defective.” Lindsell presciently suggested in 1976 that caving on the doctrine of the inerrancy was “the thread that would unravel the church.” He was right on target as we watch this take place daily.

The ordained weasels among us have twisted inerrancy to mean that everything in the Bible is to be taken literally but even a fool knows that there are many metaphors, similes, and hyperboles in the Scripture. Proper hermeneutics will take care of that. No, inerrancy simply means, “without error.” As the Belgic Confession states, with the canonical books “there can be no quarrel at all.” The Bible is simply, “true.”

Billy Graham gave this heresy impetus when he declared in 1986, “I personally never use the word ‘inerrancy.’ I almost wish the word had never been used. I don’t think its [sic] a necessary word.” What a tragedy, but then Graham has gone through life having dinner with radical unbelievers and Evangelicals and throwing Fundamentalists a few crumbs now and then. During his meetings they have been relegated to sit in the back of the auditorium, metaphorically speaking.

Those Christians interested in obeying the Bible refused to “hook up” with the unbelieving crowd for any reason. I gladly associate with that principled crowd!

Copyright 2013, Don Boys, Ph.D.

My critics will question why I feel a need to deal with this issue since there are numerous homosexuals who have “come out of the closet.” I have chosen to do so because she is a high profile Evangelical who presents her sexual relationship as rather common, caring, and commendable. After all, she is honest about her perversion! I also deplore, detest, and deny her explanation as if any sane, sensitive, and scriptural person would agree with her. Frankly, she and others like her should have stayed in the closet.

Jennifer was somewhat disingenuous when she declared that “there are LGBT Christians everywhere. There are LGBTQ Christians at Bob Jones University, Azusa Pacific University, Biola University, Fuller Seminary, Wheaton College…” Note that she presented a mixed bag to confuse the issue. That was disgraceful, disingenuous, and dishonest. Bob Jones University and Biola do not enroll “outed” homosexuals and do not recognize LGBT clubs. Fuller Seminary does! Of course, her disgraceful action is an old ploy used for millennia to prop up a weak argument and to justify personal sins.

Jennifer was reared in an evangelical home but she admits to having two lesbian relationships in high school but is not apologetic for them. She now lives with a partner and is “one of two mothers to our adopted boys, now ages four and five (and a stepmom to my partner’s 15 year old adopted daughter).” She doesn’t seem to know or admit that unmarried sex (normal or abnormal) is always wrong back when she was in high school and today! Her evangelical parents support her in her abnormal relationship!

She enrolled in Moody Bible Institute and admitted that she “always felt defective and ashamed.” As a seminary graduate, Jennifer should know that she feels defective because she is defective. It is called the sin nature. At Moody she reports that she was taught “that women were somehow weaker, and therefore not allowed to preach or teach the Bible.” Moody did not teach me that. They taught me that women are not to teach and preach in the pulpit because the Bible forbids it, not because women are weak. It is God’s plan to use men in leadership positions.

Jennifer whines on: “If God gave women gifts in preaching and teaching, why would he not allow them to use those gifts?” There are many ways a woman can use her talents but not in leadership positions even if they have far more ability than many men. A committed servant would be willing to be used in a capacity that is not glamorous or public. It seems many highly qualified women rebel at sincere service and revolt at hidden service. Feminists want the forbidden pulpit the way Eve wanted the forbidden fruit.

Jennifer asked, “What about this emphasis on women’s submission to men? I never saw this emphasis on submission in either my grandparents’ or parents’ relationship.” Bingo! That may be a part of or the source of her problem with choosing a bed partner. Like most feminists, she rebels at submission as many Christian women do. Often the reason is an overbearing, arrogant man who always talks about being the “head.” Usually, such a man doesn’t have much inside his head. Whatever the reason, God planned that a wife should submit to her husband. (As teeth grind from sea to shining sea.)

Jennifer admits that she did not observe submission on the part of her mother or grandmother. At Moody she was shocked to hear that being taught. She should have been taught that at home and “caught” it at home and church.

She started attending a Metropolitan Community Church (specifically for homosexuals) so that explains more about her decision making. But she, like so many homosexuals, seeks her own kind to provide solidarity, support, and security.

She seeks to cover her perversion by applauding her honesty. She said, “I have chosen to be honest with everyone in my life, a value I believe is integral to my faith.” Honesty is one of the most important personal attributes; however, it never justifies one crawling into bed with one of the same sex! (Or with one of the opposite sex if unmarried.) That is an abomination which I’m sure Jennifer has heard before. Personal purity is also integral to personal faith.

One of her supporters compared her perversion to his poor eyesight placing them on the same level. One does not choose to have poor eyesight but one does choose to sleep with one of the same sex. Did I mention that God calls that an “abomination”?

Jennifer claims that God now accepts her as she is with all her failings; however, He does not condone, commend, or congratulate our sins (“failings”). That kind of warped thinking gives one permission to almost glory in his or her sins then profess victimhood for any criticism.

Like every homosexual I have debated on talk shows, Jennifer declares that her perversion must be accepted because Christ never said a word about perversion. I’m not sure whether she is being self-serving or is ignorant of the Scripture. It doesn’t matter whether Christ said it or John, Paul, or Peter said it. Christ’s words are no truer than any Bible author! (I’ve never read that or written that before, but it is true.) Truth is truth and truth cannot be any truer than truth. It is a misnomer to say, “true, truer, truest.”

Moreover, homosexuals seek to move the conversation away from perversion to honesty, greed, gluttony, anger, etc., and they pride themselves in observing the proper way to deal with those sins while they continue to live an abnormal, aberrant, and abominable lifestyle. Of course, when I express that truth, critics want to call me a hater and bigot! Happens every time. That is easier than dealing with the issue in an honest, biblical way. It is interesting that I’m expected to be tolerate of their perversions but they aren’t tolerate of my positions.

Jennifer declared, “I truly believe that this [lesbianism] is the way God made me. God doesn’t make junk.” God never made a homosexual any more than He made a thief, killer, or liar. We make ourselves what we choose to be with small decisions very early in life.

Dedicated Christians do not hate and are not mean when they tell the truth about perversion. They are simply standing (hopefully without self-righteousness) for the truth.

I always thought truth was important and never changes.

Copyright, 2013

Fuller was founded by old time Fundamentalist, Charles E. Fuller, along with Harold Ockenga, and a few other “recovering Fundamentalists” who wanted to be known as “Evangelicals” or “New Evangelicals.” But now, like many Evangelicals, the seminary has drunk the toxic Kool-Aid of heresy and I doubt they will rest in peace.

Fuller Seminary and the evangelical movement were started in the late 1940s to disassociate themselves from Fundamentalism. Fundamentalists were considered too militant, too non-conformist, too separatist–in other words, too biblical. Fundamentalists made loosey-goosey preachers feel as uncomfortable as a dog in hot ashes. Many early Evangelicals admitted that they held to the doctrines of old fundamentalism but wanted to be more inclusive and intellectual. Or at least to make a pretense at intellectualism and they wanted the respectability that would never accrue to Fundamentalists. I believe the Apostle Paul said something about Christians being considered the off scouring of the earth.

After watching the compromise, conformity, and capitulation of Evangelicals such as the people at Fuller, I am thrilled they decided to separate from Fundamentalists in the late 1940s. That way, I don’t have to apologize for them or to inform everyone that I am not one of them. It is incredible that those people separated from genuine, Bible Christians but refused to separate from worldly, weird, and even wicked liberal professing but non-possessing Christians!

It is a fact that when doctrine is loosely held, everything begins to slide. That is why God commands us in Acts 2:42 to continue “stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.” Fuller Seminary has never been steadfast other than being steadfastly against Fundamentalists! They love Liberals and hate Fundamentalists!

God warns us in Eph. 4:14 to grow up; think like an adult. Don’t be “tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine.” Fuller has been tossed about since it opened its doors because it did not have a sure Anchor.

In 1 Tim. 1:10 Paul warns, “For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine.” The word “arsenokoitais” means “them that defile themselves with mankind” or sodomites. Sodomy was the sin that was a “crime against nature” and the unmentionable sin. Sodomy was common in Greece and Rome, even China–and as it is today. Sodomites are now acceptable at Fuller–as long as they are celibate!

The homosexual group calling itself, “One Table” exists to “support the LGBTQ community at Fuller Seminary,” while also offering “a safe place for dialogue between LGBTQ students and the wider Fuller community.” The student/founder wants to “carve out … acceptance for other gays in the broader evangelical community through his role as president of the nation’s first LGBT student club sanctioned by a major evangelical seminary.” He made his intentions clear and Fuller gave permission for the group to meet on campus!

But it gets worse because the LGBTQ leader has grandiose ambitions of queer “evangelism.” He said, “I really hope that people will see Fuller and One Table as a model of what the body of the church is supposed to do in this situation.” However, what the church is supposed to do is preach that perversion is sinful; consequently, homosexuals must repent, and if there is no repentance, they must be excluded from church membership as a declaration of the seriousness of their sin and as a warning to others. Such action will also be a display of love for truth and for the homosexuals as well a display of courage on the part of the church. Those who approve of “gays” hate them while those of us who disapprove of their activities love them!

The school official who approved the group declared that permitting the group on campus was not an acceptance of homosexuality; but of course, he doesn’t know the definition of the word! Acceptance means approval! Officials require group members to be celibate and cannot advocate politically for their lifestyle of choice. That naïve official has been living in a cave for 25 years. Plus, the club’s leader has already identified with the LGBTQ movement and its agenda!

Fuller’s new president, Mark Labberton, declared that the school’s position “is clear.” As a mug of mud. The “gay” club leader clearly stated his intention to affirm the rights of homosexuals in the “broader evangelical community” (that would include Fuller) yet Mark declared that the “gay” club could not be “an advocacy group to alter seminary policy nor to direct any efforts in that direction.” The seminary president and the club president are not singing the same hymn. And everyone knows the resident lesbian will be the group’s biggest supporter.

I wonder what will be the next “Evangelical” college or seminary to see the “progressive” light and welcome homosexual groups to the “table.” That “table” is sure not God’s table since only His family sits there.

Copyright 2013, Don Boys, Ph.D.