January 10, 1999 (David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, 1701 Harns Rd., Oak Harbor, WA 98277) -

On December 28 I published a report entitled "Should Churches Develop a Social Theology?" It evaluated an article entitled "Christianity and Culture" by Dr. James Singleton" from the August 1998 issue of his paper, The Whetstone (Tri-City Baptist Church, 2150 East Southern Ave., Tempe, AZ 85282). In reply to this I received a few notes belittled me and denied me the right to publish such an article. The most recent e-mail is from Michael D. Sproul, co-pastor of Dr. Singleton's church in Tempe, Arizona. I want to publish his letter and my reply because Dr. Sproul expresses a commonly held opinion that I believe is wrong.

LETTER FROM BROTHER SPROUL

Dear Brother Cloud,

A missionary friend of mine sent me your article printed below. I will not engage in a point by point refutation of what you take out of context and distort. As one fundamental pastor friend of mine says, "I am always worried about people whose whole ministry is to find dirt on other people. They have a built in prejudice to find problems in order to stay in business."

You clearly take Dr. Singleton's ministry out of context and engage in guilt by association through the whole article. Your writing reads more like a tabloid article than a Christian publication. Smearing a Christian brother through innuendo is wrong and sinful. The innuendoes of your article are best exemplified in your two sentence paragraph which reads,

"I don't know where Pastor Singleton wants to go with his social theology, but he is already on the wrong road and he cannot therefore arrive at the right destination."

There is a way to find out what Dr. Singleton believes. You don't have to guess, as you have through this article. This is what makes this article sinful on your part. Matthew 18 is not an option for you. It is a command. You are to go to your brother and talk with him. I wish you were as concerned about the clear teachings of Scripture, such as Matthew 18, as you are about issues over which good brothers can disagree. You have disobeyed a clear command of Scripture by not asking him what he believes when you admit you don't know where he is going or what he believes. The reason God placed Matthew 18 in the Bible is to protect the reputation of a brother on the chance that maybe his accuser misunderstood or was missing the meaning of the original intent of the author. Obeying Matthew 18 allows private clarification before public attacks. I come to you in a spirit of Matthew 18 to talk to you of your fault.

Dr. Singleton has paid the price for his fundamental beliefs. He walked away from a fine retirement package and security in the SBC 30+ years ago. He walked away from a comfortable church in the CBA shortly thereafter to come and start an independent, fundamental, Baptist church in Arizona, from scratch. He was 42 with two teenagers and only $300 per month for six months. When most men are settling in to a comfortable retirement scenario of not "rocking the boat", Dr. Singleton was throwing off his comfortable churches and their retirement packages on the basis of conviction to come and start a fundamental church in Arizona. Based on Scriptural commands and his 30 years of history as a fundamental leader, you owe God obedience and him the Christian ethics to contact him before you attack and smear him and the institutions and organizations he founded.

Next time you pick up your pen, I trust you will pick up a phone first. This is what Scripture commands and ethics demands.

My fellow Co-Pastor, Dr. Singleton, did not ask me to write this. I am writing because you attacked a good man in an unbiblical manner and Matthew 18 commands me to come to you. Please include me on your information list for future editions. I would like to know what you are writing without having to get it through various sources. If you are going to attack this ministry, I would like to know, at the very least, as soon as everyone else on your list does.

Your brother,

Dr. Michael D. Sproul
B.A., M.Div., D.Min.
Co-Pastor, Tri-City Baptist Church
Tempe, Arizona

____________________________

REPLY FROM BROTHER CLOUD

Hello, Bro. Sproul:

Sorry you took offense at my little article. There is no reason for the offense. As for Matthew 18, that has nothing to do with the situation. That has to do with discipline in a church. I have nothing personal against Dr. Singleton and have no reason to go to him or to his church (of which I am not a member, anyway). Dr. Singleton has every right to print public messages containing his thoughts, and I have equal right and responsibility to analyze them and respond to them -- publicly. I should not have to endure a browbeating from someone every time I attempt to do this, but I have come to expect it. There was no need to contact Dr. Singleton to determine what he believes about this subject, because he has told me what he believes in his article. I took nothing about of context. I distorted nothing. By the way, I did not say that I do not know what he believes. You made that up.

I do not consider Dr. Singleton an enemy, and the article certainly did not express such an attitude. I am thankful for every good thing Pastor Singleton has done for the cause of Christ. I trust that he has great reward at Christ's Judgment Seat and have no reason to expect otherwise. I have eaten lunch with him and have no doubt that he is a gracious Christian gentleman. That is not the issue. I believe he is wrong on the matter of a society aspect to the Great Commission and I addressed it as carefully as I could, explaining the reasons for my concern. If the Lord wants the churches to take responsibility for social and political conditions in this sin-cursed world and to seek to solve them, why did the Apostles not explain that carefully and give us an example of such a thing? If the Great Commission has a societal aspect, why did the Lord not describe it in Matthew 28; Mark 16; Luke 14; John 20; and Acts 1? I believe the road Dr. Singleton is suggesting is precisely the road upon which the New Evangelicals set out 45 years ago, and I believe it will lead to the same compromise of the Gospel and the same sidetrack from the Great Commission. If I am wrong, prove it. Deal with the issue. Don't weary yourself with personal attacks.

There was nothing hateful in my article, nothing smearing or slanderous. It was graciously and truthfully written, but it expressed my position on what the man has said. I believe his thinking on this matter is wrong and dangerous and I felt strongly enough about it to ignore the personal attack which I knew would come if I printed my concerns. (And come it has.) I can assure you, it would be much easier to keep my mouth shut about leaders in my own general "camp." I have gained absolutely nothing financially (to the contrary!) or otherwise by dealing with things that I believe are wrong among some fundamental Baptist leaders.

If I got my facts wrong, I will be glad to hear about it. There is nothing in your note, though, except a personal attack upon me. My critique was not an attack upon a person. It was an evaluation of an article. People respond to my writings publicly every single day. I don't take offense that they respond without first coming to me. They are not required to do so. When I put something into print, it is fair game for an equally public evaluation. When I see that they have not gotten their facts right, I might contact them to try to set the record straight. Usually it is simply a matter of differing opinions about the facts, and they have every right to disagree with me and to make whatever judgment of my writings that they deem right before the Lord. 1 Thessalonians 5:21. Of course, it is never easy to be analyzed. Pride always wants to rise up and take offense, but it is certainly not unscriptural or sinful to judge a man's public preaching (1 Corinthians 14:29).

You are concerned that I have somehow smeared Dr. Singleton with my cautious remarks, but you have no such concern, apparently, about applying to me the label of one who "whose whole ministry is to find dirt on other people." That is slanderous, sir. My whole ministry is not to find dirt on people. My whole ministry is to preach the Word of God and to please the God who called me to preach and to be a blessing to God's people. If my whole ministry were to find dirt on people, when did I find time to write the widely respected 5,500-entry Way of Life Encyclopedia of the Bible & Christianity? And did have I find time to plant churches in South Asia for 14 years? And when did I find time to put together massive projects such as a Directory of Fundamental Baptist Churches and a Directory of Foreign Language Literature and a multitude of other things which are a blessing to people every day? I will not mention hundreds of other things.

The stated purpose of the Fundamental Baptist Information Service, as it appears in the header to every article, is as follows: "Our goal is not devotional. OUR PRIMARY PURPOSE IS TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO ASSIST PREACHERS IN THE PROTECTION OF THE CHURCHES IN THIS APOSTATE HOUR." By its very nature, the Fundamental Baptist Information Service focuses on rather negative things. Those who do not believe in naming names of compromisers and false teachers will always consider that a "dirt finding" work, but they are wrong and I appeal to the Judgment Seat of Christ where the hearts of men will be made plain.

As for having "a built in prejudice to find problems in order to stay in business," that is absolute nonsense. A man would have to be certifiably insane to put up with the constant onslaught of hate mail that I receive (even mail such as yours) for the sake of "staying in business." As I have said, I do not gain anything materially by speaking out about things that I perceive to be wrong in my own general "camp" (meaning fundamental Baptists). I have had literally hundreds of men cut off fellowship with me because I had the gall to sound a gentle warning about something their hero has said. I have a powerful pen. Even my enemies admit that. I could have a huge ministry if I would only keep quiet on matters such as these.

I remain deeply concerned about Dr. Singleton's article, and I conclude with a statement from my critique:

"I don't know where Pastor Singleton wants to go with his social theology, but he is already on the wrong road and he cannot therefore arrive at the right destination."

I stand by that statement.

By the grace of Jesus Christ alone,

Brother Cloud