Listening to Preachers Who Associate With Heretics? - Ask Pastor Tim

This is from Jeremy.

He puts in the subject line:

"I'm often confused when I see people

who seem to have good theology

but partner up in ministry with people

that some deem heretical."

So this is one of the guilt by association

kinds of questions.

Should I fellowship with somebody

who has a friendship

or some involvement with

or a ministry with somebody

who I would deem heretical?

And so classic examples -

there's probably many.

But I guess a common one that comes up,

several years ago,

John Piper -

Mark Driscoll was one that I think

he had on his platform.

Rick Warren was another one

that he had invited out.

I think they actually videoed
that to the conference.

I don't think Warren actually went there.

He was supposed to.

But it's things like that.

Okay, should we raise eyebrows

at John Piper if he does
something like that?

There's numerous - we could go on.

Let's get to his actual question here.

"Hello, Tim. I'm not really sure

what the biblical action is when it comes

to secondary separation.

If there is a person (person A)

who is associating with
a person (person B)

who has bad theology

or is even a false prophet,

should we separate from person A?"

This is practical

especially in this day.

You know, there was a day,

it's very likely the only preachers

you would have been exposed to

is the pastor in your own pulpit.

Maybe some others in your local vicinity.

But we were limited at one time.

We're not limited now.

We're in the information age

and with our technology, we are bombarded

by all manner of things.

So the reality is this:

there's nobody that we could mention

that you don't have full access to.

I mean, as long as their
material's on the Internet

you have full access to it.

And most men in ministry -

women in ministry -

they want that access.

They want to reach you.

And so it's available to us.

So these questions about

who should I fellowhip with

or who should I separate from
(incomplete thought).

He asks this: "Do you have any guidance

on when the line should be drawn?

Does the level of heresy from person B

and/or their public stature

play into this decision?

I'm often confused when I see people

who seem to have good theology

but partner up in ministry with people

that some deem heretical.

For example, Francis Chan spoke

at an International House of Prayer

and publicly said out loud

that he loves Mike Bickle.

John Piper campaigned with Rick Warren.

So what are biblical responses to people

like Chan and Piper?

Is this activity not similar

to what 2 Corinthians 6:14-16 addresses?"

Anybody know what
that addresses right off?

James: Do not be unequally yoked?

Tim: What fellowship does light

have with darkness?

We should not be yoked.

Let me ask you this.

(Incomplete thought)

I was asking for quotations,

so it's not like anybody
could take it out of context -

except this guy.

This guy mentioned it.

We just stated what it was.

So we weren't using it out of context.

We were just stating it.

But let me ask you something,

is that text - somebody read it.

Somebody read it exactly.

2 Corinthians 6:14-16.

Somebody read that.

James: "Do not be unequally
yoked with unbelievers.

For what partnership has
righteousness with lawlessness?

For what fellowship
has light with darkness?

What accord has Christ with Belial?

Or what portion does a believer

share with an unbeliever?

What agreement has the
temple of God with idols?

For we are the temple of the living God.

As God said, 'I will make
My dwelling among them

and walk among them

and I will be their God

and they shall be My people.

Therefore, go out from their midst

and be separate from them,'

thus says the Lord,

'and touch no unclean thing,`

then I will welcome you.'"

Tim: Okay, here's the thing.

Let me ask you this.

Does that text apply to
what we're talking about?

James: Depart from Me
workers of lawlessness.

In Matthew 7, they were professing

saying, "Lord, Lord."

Tim: Well, obviously, it's
got to do with fellowship.

I mean, it's got to do with

who I'm fellowshipping with.

Now, you might say,

but does it have to do
with secondary issues?

Perhaps.

I mean, certainly, there's
spiritual principles

to draw from that.

But anyways, he says,

"Is this activity not similar to

what 2 Corinthians 6:14-16 addresses?

I.e. what fellowship has
light with darkness

and what accord has Christ with Belial?

I came across a video

that publicly calls this activity out,

and he claims that we
shouldn't be associating

with people like this."

Well, and I pulled it up.

This guy specifically that he references

is attacking Phil Johnson
and John MacArthur.

And he's saying that they're hypocrites

because he's saying on the one hand,

they will condemn somebody

like Michael Brown who affiliates

with these wild charismatics.

Guilt by association.

But they said, then John MacArthur

will stand on the same platform

with somebody like John Piper

who condones Rick Warren or Mark Driscoll.

And so they're saying

that MacArthur is being a hypocrite.

He's not playing by the same rules.

He'll condemn somebody else,

but then he himself will go do that.

Look, we need to be discerning.

The real reason that I want to
do these Bible studies is this:

Discernment.

And the idea behind discernment -

I was listening to John MacArthur

on the radio just recently,

maybe three weeks back or so.

And he was talking about
the term discernment.

And he said that the Old Testament word

has to do with a space.

The Old Testament word for discernment -

sometimes it's "understanding"

or it can be interpreted a
number of different ways.

But he said it's the idea of a space.

And he said how does that
work with discernment?

Well, it's the person that has the ability

to look at two things that at first sight

might appear to be the same.

But discernment is the ability

to separate between the two

and put a space between them.

Now, proper discernment would be able to

look at a John Piper

over against a Michael Brown

or any two different cases

and say: is it the same thing?

Or, are they actually different somehow?

That's discernment.

But let's keep going because
his question goes on.

He says, "I came across this video

that publicly calls this activity out.

He claims we shouldn't be associating

with people like this.

I would love to get your thoughts on this

because it makes things
really confusing for me.

In this video, Phil Johnson

mentions a lot of things

that he seems to contradict himself on

and it often looks like there
is a double standard."

Well, that's what the guy doing the video

is trying to make it look like.

I listened to the things

that Phil Johnson was saying

(incomplete thought).

I think it's understandable
what he's saying.

And I don't think it's a double standard.

But, he goes on to quote Spurgeon.

"Spurgeon has even said things such as,

'that I might not stultify my testimony,

I've cut myself clear from those

who err from the faith

and even from those who associate

with the ones that err from the faith.'"

That comes from "The Sword and Trowel."

"The person's argument is the following:

that when we're dealing
with false prophets

we take part in their wicked works

by partnering with them at conferences

per 2 John 10-11."

Somebody look that one up.

2 John 10-11.

And he goes on to say concerning that,

"that we're called to not associate

with them if they continue this activity

per 1 Corinthians 5:11.

Is this a correct assessment

of situations like this?"

And of course, 1 Corinthians 5

is about disassociation.

So somebody read the text from 2 John.

(from the room)
"If anyone comes to you

and does not bring this teaching,

do not receive him into your house

or give him any greeting.

Whoever greets him takes part

in his wicked works."

Tim: And then he goes on to say,

"I don't know what all this means

in terms of the appropriate response.

Do we not associate with these people

for these public figures/teachers?

Do we not recommend them to other people

because they might direct people

into the hands of wolves?

Should we not learn from them at all?

What if other people we know in the church

are learning from them?

Should we warn them?

I'm definitely confused
in a matter like this

and would appreciate any advice.

Regards, Jeremy."

So, last week, I'm telling Jared

about these Gatepost articles

that I printed off a whole
ream of paper's worth

and took with me to a
vacation several years back

with the mindset - I'm going to try

to read through all these
while I'm on vacation.

So I printed of all these
Gatepost articles

from Conrad Murrell.

And I brought this down last week

to show Jared.

So we've got it over there on the table

and we're flipping through,

and here this comes up,

and it made me think,

hey, I saw that.

I saw that Conrad dealt with something

that I think is applicable.

And I thought, oh, it's
probably buried in the middle.

It's the first one.

Now listen to this.

You can change the names here.

We can bring it up current.

Because I'll tell you, this was written

in July 1973.

Conrad just died a few weeks ago.

Back when he started writing these,

his very first one - Volume 001 -

is called "Flamboyant
Evangelical Personalities."

Now listen to this.

"What about Billy Graham?

Oral Roberts? Rex Humbard?

Katheryn Kuhlman? Bill Bright?

T.L. Osborne? Jerry Falwell?

Bill Harrington? etc."

Now, we could take all
those names right out

and you could put whatever
you wanted in there.

You could put Bickle in there.

You can put Rick Warren in there.

You could put whoever you want in there.

He says, "these are some
of the more flamboyant

evangelical personalities

that we're often asked to categorize."

And see, I think that's
what's happening here.

We're trying to put people in categories.

Is that friend or foe?

Somebody I should be
rubbing shoulders with or no?

Somebody I should be listening
to on the Internet?

Or is that danger? Is that poison?

We're trying to find the right categories.

"It's not always easy

to do a cut and dried job of it."

And that's true.

It's not easy.

And you know, the truth is

just because somebody did something

with Rick Warren several years ago,

doesn't mean that they'd do it now.

And it doesn't mean that both men

are in exactly the same
theological positions right now.

Men are changing.

Men's positions change.

Their theology is sometimes -

we hope that happens.

It's developing.

So it can be very difficult.

Plus it can be very difficult to know.

Just because you might happen to be able

to pull up YouTube,

pull up a John MacArthur sermon,

and find he's preaching at a conference

and say, what? He's on the
same stage with Francis Chan.

And don't you know Francis
Chan was with IHOP?

But you know, what if
MacArthur was thinking,

you know, I'm not inclined
to take this conference,

but I feel like God has been prompting me

for an open door with Francis Chan.

And this will give me a good
opportunity to talk with him.

And there are some things I feel
like I need to warn him about.

What if that was happening?

And you look at him and say:

we better cut him off!

When the reality is, he didn't go there

to endorse IHOP.

And it may not have had to do anything

with Francis Chan.

It may have been that
specific environment -

he felt like was something

that he felt God would have him to do.

But these things are difficult.

It's not just a cut and dry job of it.

"I doubt that it is as
necessary as we suppose."

Now, I want you to get that.

You hear what he's saying?

I doubt it's really all that important

that we figure out the categories

for all these guys.

I think that's key.

Of course, the question is why?

Why would we take that
position that it's not important?

You mean it's not important for me to know

who the false prophet is?

Maybe it's far more important you know

what the truth is than to know

who all the right and
the wrong preachers are.

But listen to what he says.

"Both the Old and New Testaments

are constantly crying out their warnings

against false prophets, false teachers,

and hirelings.

The Scriptures are too numerous to list

and too obvious to ignore.

A false teacher can readily be identified

by his false doctrine.

But these persons cannot be dispatched

or vindicated so easily."

What he's saying is this:

It's very easy to knock straw men over.

But real people are not
so easy to knock over.

The thing is when you start looking

at men's ministries,

oftentimes, they say a lot of good things.

They say right things.

What he's saying is it's not so easy

to just look at a man and say,

oh, that's a false prophet.

That's just really obvious.

There are some that are very obvious.

But you know, the vast majority

are not so obvious.

He says,

"Their deviations from fundamental

Bible truth are little more

than can be found in most men."

In other words, when you look

across the nation,

you find all sorts of people that stray

into odd beliefs just as much

as any of these men.

"A more likely test is
found in Matthew 7:16,

'You shall know them by their fruits.'

But even this is troublesome

because it takes time for fruit

to come forth and mature.

This week's report of last week

or last year's success means nothing.

The counterfeit does not always show up

that quickly.

Nor does the true grain

always show up that quickly.

William Carey labored 7 years in India

without a single convert.

Some of these have been around long enough

that some sort of fruit
ought to be showing up.

We should ask: what is the effect

of their ministries?

Does it cause men to become holy?

Does it turn the tide of wickedness

in the areas in which they serve?

Are strong spiritual men
coming forth from them?

Do their ministries cause men to see

a mighty and holy God?

Are the fear and love of God

struck upon men's hearts through them?"

Then he says this,

"At the least, we can say this.

None of these can be called

in any sense great men of God.

When the fruits are measured..."

He's talking about that list
he gave in the beginning.

He says, "When their fruits are measured,

they can't stand in the shadow

of Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield,

Charles Spurgeon, John Wesley,

Calvin, Luther."

He was very much a Calvinist,

but he says even Finney.

"This is not to say that their ministries

are all counterfeit or useless."

This is important.

"We are not required to say either,

unless we know."

You hear what he's saying?

Either - what do you mean "either"?

What he's saying is this:

We're not required to say

that somebody's ministry is counterfeit

or the real deal.

Whether it's useless or valuable.

We're not required to make an assessment

on these things unless we know.

You know how many people

just talk about other people?

And the truth is they don't really know.

They speculate or they've heard

second-hand, third-hand, tenth-hand.

Somebody rumored it abroad.

Somebody said this.

"Paul rejoices in the preaching of Christ

even though many were doing it

for wrong motives.

Who are we to judge another man's servant?

We're not responsible to analyze

everything that comes along -

only that which has to do

with our own personal ministry.

If I'm faced with a decision

of working with these men

or supporting or endorsing

a particular thing they're doing,

then I do need to find the mind of God

in the matter."

I mean, if it's impacting me -

one of these guys asks me
to preach with them -

I might need to ask.

If it was directly bearing on your life,

you had to make a decision...

but then he says,

"It's only in relation to
what God wants me to do."

And then he says this, and I boxed it.

"Let them alone."

That's good advice.

Leave them alone.

"You have enough to do

without embittering yourself,

fighting against flesh and blood.

It's only going to swell you with pride

over your own self-righteousness.

Get on with your own personal work

and refuse to be distracted by catcalls,

taunts, and questions from the sidelines.

These men's apparent
successes mean nothing.

God is keeping the records.

The laurels or the censures of men

do not influence Him.

There will be many surprises
at the Judgment Seat.

A man's results may be great

or it may be zero,

but it makes not one whit of difference

about your responsibility to God.

In all likelihood, if you follow God,

your ministry is never
going to cross the path

of the man in question.

Gamaliel wisely suggests that time

will either vindicate or condemn all men."

Look, I would say this.

If you don't like the fact that John Piper

did what he did with Rick Warren,

and that causes you to not
be able to hear him to profit,

don't listen to him.

You don't have to listen to him.

You don't have to go to his church.

Leave him alone.

He's going to stand or fall.

If you look at a man and you think:

I think that man is being influenced

by a bad influence,

and that makes me not want to be involved

in his ministry, then don't.

Listen, you can choose

whether you're going to listen

to MacArthur, Piper.

You've got that choice.

And you know what?

That link that he gave me.

Here's a guy that just wants to argue.

And he wants to be right.

And he wants to win the argument.

He wants to say:

Well, I think this about so-and-so.

And I want you to agree with me.

Listen, Conrad's exactly right.

All it does it puff people up.

You're trying to be the critiquer;

you're trying to be the judge.

You're trying to run around and say,

well, I think this,

and guilt by association.

You know what?

What I would do is this:

If somebody profits your soul;

if John MacArthur profits your soul,

but you say I don't agree
with his eschatology,

okay.

I mean, I've listened to over a thousand

of his sermons probably.

Much of my seminary training came

from listening to John MacArthur.

But I didn't listen to Matthew 24.

I didn't listen to large portions

of 1 and 2 Thessalonians. Why?

Because I thought he was dead
wrong on his eschatology.

But I listened to the other things.

You see, that's being discerning.

If you feel like, you know what,

I don't like what he
said about strange fire.

Okay, don't listen to him there.

And if you get to the point where,

you know what, he's becoming

issue-oriented enough

and it's a lot of issues
that I don't care -

look, if it's not profiting you anymore,

you don't have to listen anymore.

And he's going to stand
or fall before the Lord.

If you listen to John Piper and it's like,

wow, that really spoke to my soul.

And somebody comes along:

But do you know what he did
with Mark Driscoll in the past?

Well, okay, maybe he did,

but I'll tell you, that
message right there

helped my soul.

You know what? It's your choice

whether you want to
stop listening to him now

and not be profited by
any more of his messages.

We've got choices.

You've got choices of churches to go to

and you've got all manner of choices

of people to listen to.

And we need to be discerning.

We need to be Berean.

We need to listen to people.

I mean, just because John MacArthur

goes and stands on a stage

with Francis Chan perhaps

and Francis Chan has been

rubbing shoulders with some of these

crazy prophet guys -

well, if I don't hear that
coming across in MacArthur,

I don't know his motives.

Why sit there in the judgment seat

and try to judge those motives?

I think he's so right.

Look, you've got your own life to live.

Rather than sitting there on the
judgment seat condemning,

it's like, well, if I condemn him,

he's condemned.

And if I bless him, he's blessed.

Who are you?

Who are we? I'll tell you who we are.

If we're God's children,

we're called to be Berean.

We're called to take Scriptures

and we're called to be discerning

and to exercise ourselves in that.

And we should listen
to what people preach.

We should listen to what people teach.

And we do need to be discerning too

in the areas of, you know,

John MacArthur and R.C. Sproul

could be friends though they disagreed

on baptism and eschatology.

They could be friends.

You know what?

They believe those things
are secondary issues.

So do I.

There are some people who believe

baptism is a primary issue.

Okay.

I mean, if you do,

and because of that you
can't listen to R.C. Sproul -

I had a pastor in the past

who told me he would not allow

George Whitefield in his pulpit.

Okay.

He's free to do that.

I said, brother, I would.

I mean, are we not free?

And so, I think that's the approach

we need to take.

Live your life.

The men who help you
run faster and better,

rub shoulders with them.

If not, leave them alone.

Yes, just recently, I was asked to preach

a conference in another state.

And it was with people who

held to certain positions

and I felt like it was best

to not accept it.

I mean, when you're
confronted by things like that,

you need to weigh them out.

And I felt like that was the wise path.

We all get put in those places.

We have to make judgments.

We have to make decisions.

Don't live your life just consumed

about what that person believes

or what they're doing

or this high profile person or that one.

Run. Run, man! Run, woman!

Run your race.

Serve the Lord.

Those that help you, listen to him.

And you know what?

Just because somebody's good

doesn't mean you need to listen to them.

(incomplete thought)

You know, there's a portion of my life

where this preacher
was very helpful to me.

Then other portions where this preacher

was extremely helpful to me.

There's been another portion

where this preacher was.

It doesn't mean that the first two
I came to find out were heretical.

It's just where I was at the time.

Look, expose yourself to
what profits you the most

and helps you walk with the Lord;

helps your faith; helps your love;

helps your Christlikeness.

Any comment or questions on that

before we move on?

(from the room): I was just thinking

about the Lloyd-Jones incident

with Billy Graham.

Would you say that he would have

participated if Graham agreed

with those three things
he was talking about?

(unintelligible)

Tim: See, that was a big problem

and that was the reason that Bob Jones

separated from Billy Graham.

And that was one of the issues

that you're hearing there -

Lloyd-Jones had with Billy Graham

was the fact that he was putting

Catholics on the platform with him.

But see, this was a situation

where Lloyd-Jones - this pertained to him.

Would Lloyd-Jones stand on that platform

with Billy Graham?

Would he be involved?

And you know what?

When people come to you for counsel,

sometimes you're in a situation -

he was a pastor's pastor.

And people would come.

There can be a time to
express your opinion.

I'll tell you this,

if I feel like somebody is dangerous,

I'm going to warn you about him.

I'm going to warn the church about him.

And if somebody says what
do you think about so-and-so?

I'm going to say I wouldn't go there.

I'll tell you. Why?

Because I want to protect you from poison.

And listen, a man who will stand

on a platform with a Catholic

in my estimation is poison

because what that tells me

is he is compromising on the Gospel.

And you know, how many years later,

he sat down with Robert Schuller

and he specifically said he believed

there were other ways to God

than by faith in Jesus Christ.

See, that falls into the
category of 2 John.

And yes, when somebody
is denying the Gospel

and it's not a secondary issue -

but we each have to study the Scriptures

and determine what is a secondary issue.

We all have to come to
convictions on that ourselves.

Secondary.

Personally, I consider baptism -

I would die for my baptistic convictions,

but I wouldn't separate and disfellowship

from somebody who was a paedobaptist.

I think we need to allow

for variations in church government.

That is very secondary in my estimation.

You know, people have ideas

about closed communion

or close communion or open communion.

I'm not going to draw battle lines there.

I have convictions about it.

But I'll tell you, when
somebody starts saying

that they think there are Hindus

and Muslims and Buddhists and atheists

and that they're going
to be in heaven with us,

that is damnable lie right there.

It doesn't matter who it comes from.

Billy Graham - it doesn't matter.

It is damnable error

and we should avoid that like poison.

We should not condone such people.

(from the room)

Do you think you can
apply 1 Corinthians 15

where I think Paul is talking about

how bad company corrupts good morals

and I think the context is
about the resurrection?

Tim: Well, it is about the resurrection

and there were people
denying the resurrection.

(incomplete thought)

But see, that's personally impacting us.

That's personally me

determining who I'm
going to be companion to.

And see, when it directly involves you,

then yes, I think we have to weigh out,

we have to discern.

But there's so much happening out there

that we can just get curious

where all we do is sit there

and read the blogs

and read the latest stuff,

the latest and greatest arguments

and battles

and be putting ourselves in this position

or in this group

or wanting to defend this or that.

And we're just fighting
this stuff all the time.

Don't do that.

Don't do that.

We are called to serve the Lord.

We are called to ministry.

We are called to doing things

like reaching out to those
who sit in darkness,

and clothing the naked,

and visiting those who are in prison.

I mean, think about it.

Pure religion and undefiled
before the Lord.

What is it?

Is it to sit and argue

about guilt by association?

Or is it to visit the widow and the orphan

in their affliction?

Well, it's not the first.

So, let us follow Christ.

It's kind of like remember how

Peter - he said, "what about him?"

You know, Peter, you're going to be

led about where you don't want to go.

He was looking at John: what about him?

What was Jesus' timeless answer?

(unintelligible)

Exactly.

"If I want him to remain until I come,

what is that to you?

You follow Me."

See, we can spend all this time

gazing off at the horizons;

at what's happening
in other people's lives,

and what they're
doing in their ministries.

And Jesus is just saying:

what does that have to do with you?

You follow Me.

(from the room)

I want to speak to something
that you referenced,

because you gave an example

of someone who would perhaps be blessed

by a sermon by pastor A

and someone else come along to them

and start staying, well,
did you know this?

Do you think it's important

for Christians who seem to be well meaning

in doing that - because in your example,

you said the person who was told that

would say, yeah, you're
right, but they bless me.

But I think there's also the danger

of that person perhaps not being

in a position of maturity yet

to where they're actually now bothered

and can't listen anymore

and now they're in almost this paranoid

panic state where because of that

well meaning, or maybe not
so well meaning warning,

this person - they can't
listen to that person,

not because they're well informed,

but because their
conscience might be weak.

And I just think that that's something

that's pretty probable,

especially amonst people like us

who we have a good grasp

on what's true and what's not,

but say a young convert comes in

and they're listening to someone

who in my estimation
may be less favorable,

may be less profitable,

but that person is growing by them,

and so by me telling them,

I also run the risk of maybe putting them

in a position where they shouldn't be

as far as them being unable to listen

to that person.

Tim: Yeah, I mean, again

it might be one of the places
to leave them alone.

(from the room)
Leave both people alone.

Tim: Right. Exactly.

Leave them alone.

If I hear somebody in the church

is saying I'm really profiting

from pastor so-and-so.

And it's like, well, they
wouldn't be my first choice

or my tenth choice,

but if they're profiting from it...

(from the room)

And I say that because that
can be hard sometimes.

Because exactly like you said,

they're way down the list.

Tim: Right. Okay.