The Importance of Separation
One occasionally hears the wry observation that fundamentalists
believe in all the fundamentalsÑincluding separation. The force of this remark is
to imply that fundamentalists separate, not only from people who deny the
fundamentals, but also from genuine Christians who believe all the fundamentals
but who do not separate. The remark is usually meant to be a reductio ad
absurdum of
fundamentalism, leaving the impression that a fundamentalist is a Christian who
separates from everyone indiscriminately.
Of course, separation can be, and sometimes is, practiced
divisively and schismatically. Nevertheless, not every separationÑnot even
every separation from a believerÑis a schism. The New Testament requires at
least some separations between Christians, such as when a believer rejects
church authority (Matt.18:15-17), engages in scandalous conduct (1 Cor. 5:11),
or trifles with apostolic teaching (2 Thess. 3:6, 14-15). Admittedly,
Christians raise many questions about the application of these passages (What
issues qualify for separation? What levels of fellowship are affected?). No one
can deny, however, that some separations between believers are authorized and even
required. The question is whether a refusal to separate is ever serious enough
to qualify for one of the passages that require separation from other
Christians.
In order to answer this question, we must remind ourselves about
the nature of Christian unity, the problem of apostasy, and the reasons for
separating from apostates.
Unity is always a function of that which unites, and fellowship is
always a function of that which is held in common. The one thing that all
Christians hold in common and that unites them is faith in the gospel. People who possess this faith are united
by the Holy Spirit into the Body of Christ, the true church. Since the
possession of faith is invisible, the true church is sometimes called the
ÒinvisibleÓ church. Membership in the true, invisible church is the most
fundamental form of Christian fellowship and unity.
We cannot directly observe saving faith, so we do not know certainly
who is included in the invisible church. We do not know who possesses faithÑbut we can know
who professes it. Therefore, while we let God judge who is in the invisible
church, we must evaluate the professions of those who wish to be recognized as
Christians. We must gauge whether or not an individual actually professes to
have faith in the gospel.
What is the gospel? Paul described it as the message that Christ
died for our sins and rose again (1 Cor. 15:1-8). The gospel assumes that we
have sinned, that our sins have placed us under GodÕs wrath, and that we cannot
save ourselves. It assumes that Christ is returning to execute GodÕs judgment
upon the living and the dead. It assumes that Christ is a qualified sin-bearer,
i.e., that He is truly divine and truly human, born of a virgin, sinless in His
person, and righteous in all His acts. It assumes that we have an
authoritative, inerrant source from which to learn all of these things.
The list of truths that are assumed in or implied by the gospel is
quite long, and we do not yet know everything that belongs on it. What we do
know, however, is that these assumptions and implications are extremely
important, so important that to deny any one of them is to deny the gospel
itself.
These necessary assumptions and implications of the gospel are
called the fundamentals. A fundamental doctrine is precisely a doctrine that is
essential to the gospel. One need not know every fundamental in order to
believe the gospel, but to deny a fundamental is always to deny the gospel
itself.
Here is our rule: we recognize as Christians only those people who
profess faith in the true gospel. Obversely, we recognize no one as a Christian
who denies the gospel. The gospel itself is the basic category for determining
Christian recognition.
Christian fellowship is obviously not possible with people who are
not Christians.
Whenever we refuse to recognize someone as a Christian, we are ipso
facto declaring
that person unfit for Christian fellowship. No Christian fellowship or unity can
exist with a non-Christian, because the one basic thing that unites Christians
in fellowship is the gospel itself. Therefore, no
Christian unity, fellowship, or recognition can exist with an
individual who denies the gospel.
An infidel is a person who rejects Christianity and denies the
gospel. Atheists are infidels. Muslims are infidels. Buddhists are infidels. No
Christian fellowship is possible with infidels. That kind of fellowship would
be a contradiction.
An apostate is a person who denies the gospel while claiming to be
a Christian. The difference between an apostate and an infidel is that an apostate
names the name of Christ. Apostates want to be recognized as Christians. They
want to be accepted into Christian fellowship. Like infidels, however,
apostates deny the gospel. Also like infidels, apostates are excluded from Christian
fellowship. Since they deny the gospel, they reject the very foundation of
Christian fellowship and unity.
This point cannot be overstated. Apostates are not Christians.
They are enemies of Christ. They must never be recognized as Christians. They
must never be regarded as suitable objects of Christian fellowship or unity.
They are outside the household of the faith. To extend any show of Christian
commonality, recognition, mutuality, fellowship, or unity to them is worse than
hypocrisy. It is to betray the gospel. It just might be the most scandalous
thing that a Christian could do.
We have to make two choices about every doctrine. We must first
decide whether we believe it. We must next decide how important we think it is.
These two choices must be made about the fundamentals. Christians believe all
the fundamentals; apostates deny at least some. Even those who believe the
fundamentals, however, do not all agree about how important those doctrines
are.
Some Christians do believe the fundamentals, but they do not
believe that acceptance of the fundamentals should be made a test of
Christianity or of Christian fellowship. Such people do not deny the gospel. Indeed, they
may even defend the truth of fundamental doctrines. In the nature of the case,
however, they demean the gospel. They remove the gospel from its position of
definitive centrality for Christian faith and fellowship. They knowingly seek
to extend Christian fellowship and recognition to gospel-deniers.
A professing Christian who robs a liquor store or commits perjury
will ruin a testimony. A Christian leader who has an affair will ruin a
ministry. But a Christian who knowingly extends recognition and fellowship to
an apostate imperils the gospel itself. Such a Christian is guilty of doctrinal
indifference, of spiritual apathy, of disobedience to Christ, and of grave
unfaithfulness to the gospel.
At the very least, we should never look to such persons as Christian
leaders. Furthermore, our willingness to involve them in the LordÕs work ought to
be severely truncated. Scripture gives clear instruction about how to handle
professing believers who become involved in lesser scandals such as sexual
immorality, greed, idolatry, slander, drunkenness, and fraud (1 Cor. 5:11). How
much more seriously should we treat the professing Christian who publicly
demeans the gospel by removing it from its position as the adjudicator of
Christian recognition and fellowship?
Separation is not a fundamental of the faith, but it grows
directly out of a correct understanding of the importance of the fundamentals.
Separation from apostates is the necessary corollary of Christian unity. The
gospel has authority to create unity among those who receive it, and it has
authority to preclude unity with those who deny it. Separation from apostates,
therefore, is a matter of acknowledging the authority of the gospel itself. To
reject separation is not some ordinary disobedience of Scripture. It is a grave
act, and it requires an equally grave response.
This essay is by Kevin T. Bauder, president of Central
Baptist Theological Seminary. Not every one of the professors, students, or
alumni of Central Seminary necessarily agrees with every opinion that it
expresses.