Correspondence With Pastors Who Support Promise Keepers

By David W. Cloud

Way of Life Literature, 1701 Harns Rd., Oak Harbor, WA 98277
dcloud@wayoflife.org (e-mail)
http://www.wayoflife.org/ (web site)

[This material cannot be stored on BBS or Internet sites without permission from the author. Any articles which are redistributed by e-mail or print must be left intact and nothing must be removed or changed, including these informational headers. All rights are reserved. O Timothy is a monthly magazine. Annual subscription is US$20 FOR THE UNITED STATES. Send to Way of Life Literature, Bible Baptist Church, 1701 Harns Road, Oak Harbor, Washington 98277. FOR CANADA the subscription is $20 Canadian. Send to Bethel Baptist Church, P.O. Box 9075, London, Ontario N6E 1V0. The Way of Life web site is located at http://www.wayoflife.org/]

The August 1995 issue of the National Liberty Journal contained an article by Pastor Billy Hamm entitled "The Promise Keepers Phenomenon." Dr. Hamm, Pastor of the Mountain States Baptist Temple, Denver, Colorado, has served five terms as treasurer of the Baptist Bible Fellowship. In the late 1970s he pastored the First Baptist Church of Hollywood, California, and taught at Pacific Boast Baptist Bible College. On July 29 I wrote to Pastor Hamm and expressed my concerns about his article. He did not respond, but he apparently shared it with some friends, and a Pastor Otis Nixdorf did give me a reply. Since Pastor Hamm's article was a very public piece of writing, I have decided to publish my letter to him, as well as excerpts from the letters to and from Pastor Nixdorf. A few editorial changes and some additions have been made to prepare this material for publication:

TO PASTOR BILLY HAMM

FROM DAVID W. CLOUD

RE: PROMISE KEEPERS ARTICLE IN NATIONAL LIBERTY JOURNAL

JULY 29, 1995

Hello, Pastor Hamm. I trust all is well and that you are enjoying the Lord's richest blessings. I am the Editor of O Timothy magazine and Director of Way of Life Literature, a Fundamental Baptist publishing ministry based in the Bible Baptist Church of Oak Harbor, Washington.

I have a less than pleasant duty at this moment, and I hope you will bear with me. I just read your article on Promise Keepers in the National Liberty Journal, and it disturbed me. I feel it is weak in the extreme, especially in light of the fact that the author is an Independent Baptist preacher. We all know that it is a good thing to preach the Gospel to men and to challenge them to be men of God in a nation that desperately needs the same. But I am convinced that Promise Keepers is one of the most dangerous movements for biblical Christianity to come down the pike in a long time, and I am disturbed that your review of PK was presented largely in a positive light. The following are the particulars of why I believe your report is weak.

1. WHILE YOU MENTIONED PK'S ECUMENISM, YOU DID NOT GIVE DETAILS OF JUST HOW RADICAL THIS MOVEMENT'S ECUMENISM IS. The strong Catholic connection, for example. PK Founder Bill McCartney has said there is room within Promise Keepers for Catholics. The Roman Catholic newspaper The Tidings ran a very favorable report on Promise Keepers, noting that "there is no attempt at proselytizing for drawing men away from their faith to another church" and "there is no doctrinal issue which should cause concern to the Catholic Church" (The Tidings, Archdiocese paper, Los Angeles, March 31, 1995). Even Mormons are participating in Promise Keepers. Mormon leaders of Palos Verdes, California, have come out publicly in support of PK. In an article which purports to review "the Promise Keepers phenomenon," the failure to detail the depth of PKs ecumenism is a serious neglect.

2. YOU DID NOT MENTION THE PK'S RADICAL CHARISMATIC CONNECTION.

Many of the top leaders are members of John Wimber's Vineyard movement which has largely adopted such unscriptural and dangerous practices as "spirit slaying," "power evangelism," and the "laughing revival." I have heard Wimber on various occasions and read many of his books, and he is extremely radical and unscriptural and dangerous. Promise Keepers' magazine, New Man, is published by Charisma magazine, an extremely radical charismatic publication.

3. WHILE YOU CITED SOME WORDS FROM "ONE FUNDAMENTALIST PASTOR" WHO HAS STOOD AGAINST PK'S ERRORS, YOU GAVE FAR MORE SPACE TO THOSE WHO SUPPORT PK. You quoted, for example, the Denver Post's Chuck Green (who is not noted for his spiritual wisdom) saying, "... there's little harm in a stadium full of well-meaning fathers, spending the weekend listening to sermons and swaying to gospel music, rededicating themselves to their families." This would be true if it were not for the fact that Promise Keepers is a Christian movement which will have a powerful influence upon churches and upon the doctrinal thinking of Christian men. To allow Chuck Green to spout his well-meaning, but humanistic philosophy to the readers of the National Liberty Journal without any type of correction borders on the criminal, in my view.

I don't know who the "one fundamentalist pastor" is whose review you quoted, but I could wish that you would have quoted more from him and others with his spiritual discernment and less from PK's friends. Your review was written basically from a neutral standpoint. That's the way the New Evangelical crowd approaches a subject such as this, but it is not the position God has given the man of God. We are to preach the Word, reprove, rebuke, exhort, to call a spade a spade, to expose the false teachers plainly.

Anything which seeks to break down the God-ordained barriers between truth and error, between sound doctrine and heresy, is of the devil, regardless of its high-sounding goals.

FROM: OTIS NIXDORF

TO: DAVID CLOUD

DATE: MON, 31 JUL 1995

SUBJECT: PROMISE KEEPERS

Dear David,

I read your response to Dr. Hamm's article and thought I would share with you my experience with Promise Keepers.

I am the Pastor of East Side Baptist Church of Independence, MO. Last year I had three of my men go to Denver to the PK conference. They came back and took me to dinner and explained to me about the event and what they had received from it.

I listened skeptically until they began sharing how they were challenged to begin praying for their pastor and supporting the local church more. Bill McCartney had told them to pray for their pastor and help him in any way they could.

That love and loyalty has continued as I have observed genuine spiritual growth and commitment to Christ Jesus. Also, one of the men shared with me a video of John Maxwell preaching on moral integrity. I must say it was one of the most powerful messages on the subject I have ever heard. I played the tape on a Sunday Night and revival began that night. The altar was full as men began to confess their secret sins to God and commit to being holy.

Again I must say I was impressed. I decided I would like to go to one of the conferences this year and see for myself. We took 20 of our key leaders to Minneapolis. The first night John Wesley White preached a basic salvation message, and thousands responded to receive Christ as Savior. I couldn't believe my eyes. I thought this would just be a spiritual "pep rally", and yet before my eyes I saw men coming to Christ as I have never seen before. Each one was individually counseled and given literature including the Romans Road to salvation.

Then later Tony Evans preached a great message on the need to be Godly Men. I must say I was moved also and challenged from this thoroughly scriptural message. One after another the preachers delivered sound scriptural messages. Joseph Stowell shared about the inerrant Word of God, Charles Colson mentioned that abortion was sin.

Suddenly it occurred to me as I saw Methodists, liberal Christian Church-Disciples of Christ all around me hearing sound biblical preaching like they have never heard before, I was really moved. I could see how that God was using Promise Keepers to deliver His Word where liberal churches have failed.

It was a great emotional boost for our church too. I saw some guys who had been hard and unresponsive to me or the Spirit's leadership transformed. I looked back and saw them singing praises to God and the worshipping Christ. Then I saw their attitude toward me, their family and God change. One was a leading deacon. He had grow so hard I was praying sincerely that God would touch his heart. And that truly happened. Everyone who went was thoroughly excited about being a Godly man. That really made me happy! Now every Monday at 6:00 am about 20-25 men meet for prayer and fellowship at a local Denny's. I doubt I could have accomplished that on my own.

I am aware of the dangers of Promise Keepers. I am a Fundamental Pastor who stands for the truth. But I honestly did not hear any false doctrine, and was moved by heart felt worship in a way I never have been before. I really believe that Promise Keepers is a work of God that is calling men to be committed in their relationships to God, their families, other believers, and their local church.

I have heard about such revivals i.e. Moody, Torrey, Wesley ... but now I have seen it first hand. I am sure if you were reporting about Moody in his day, you would have plenty to criticize him about. He wasn't a Baptist, Was ecumenical in his crusades, and raised money for the YMCA from nearly any source he could get it. Did God use D.L. Moody?

Seriously, I am not trying to change your mind, I just wanted to share my experience with PK. I am busy winning souls and building a church.

In the Love of Christ,

Otis Nixdorf

TO: PASTOR OTIS NIXDORF

FROM: DAVID CLOUD

DATE: JULY 31, 1995

SUBJECT: PROMISE KEEPERS

Thanks for taking the time to share your experiences with Promise Keepers. I am glad you are seeing blessing in the lives of men in your church. Frankly, though, I have heard the same type of testimony from men who have become involved in the "laughing revival." I am not trying to be a smart aleck. It is a fact. Great numbers of testimonies I have read of pastors involved with the "Toronto Blessing" sound very much like the one you gave in regard to PK. I am saying that apparent spiritual blessing is not in itself sufficient cause for accepting a movement. I am sure you will agree, but it does appear that this is exactly what you are doing in regard to PK, because the primary thing you had to say to me is that PK has produced good fruit in the lives of your men.

I could point to marriages which have been saved by seminars conducted by Roman Catholic priests. I could point to men who have become better husbands and fathers because of their involvement in Mormonism. I am saying that this in itself does not tell us if a movement is scriptural.

The bottom line to me is that Promise Keepers has a dangerous and unscriptural goal to break down doctrinal barriers. This is not merely a side product of PK, it is one of their chief aims. One of the Promises solemnly urged upon every Promise Keeper is to "reach beyond any racial and denominational barriers to demonstrate the power of biblical unity." That alone marks it is something that I am not to participate in, and something I must warn other men about. Romans 16:17.

God can and does use the Gospel in spite of the fact that the one preaching it might not be completely obedient to the Scriptures. Some people are saved under the ministries of women pastors. My wife was saved through a Billy Graham crusade. She is a wonderful, Bible-based Christian. But she is a biblical Christian IN SPITE OF the Graham methodology, not BECAUSE of it. As a young Christian she joined a New Testament Baptist church and was trained in sound doctrine and taught biblical separation. On the other hand, multitudes of others who have attended Graham crusades through the years have been brought into the snare of Modernism and Romanism and other isms because of Graham's unscriptural and wicked bridge building.

You said you did not hear anything wrong at the PK meeting. One of the great deceptions of New Evangelical compromise is not so much what it teaches that is wrong, but what it refuses to teach that is right. It refuses to deal with many of the biblical negatives, such as separation and plain rebuke of sin. You won't hear the New Evangelical lift his voice and warn God's people plainly about Romanism or Modernism. His positive-only emphasis does not allow it. But this is contrary to God's Word: 2 Timothy 4:1-6.

You described the messages at a Promise Keeper rally as "sound biblical preaching." This, and the other descriptions you gave, leads me to believe that you do not understand the nature of today's Evangelicalism. The Evangelical world today is permeated with apostasy, though it is whitewashed with an appearance of piety and faith. Today's Evangelical clothes his apostasy in biblical terminology. IT IS A FACT THAT TODAY'S EVANGELICALS ARE POLLUTED WITH MODERNISM.

Consider this 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 even 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 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).

The author of the above critique is Professor of Church History and New Testament, Protestant Reformed Seminary, Grandville, Michigan. Today's Evangelical theologian says, "I believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God," but he does not necessarily mean it is the ABSOLUTELY PERFECT WORD OF GOD IN EVERY DETAIL. He leaves the possibility that the Bible is incorrect in some of its "scientific" statements and details. Further, the Evangelical theologian is holding hands with out-and-out modernists, with Romanists, and with other forms of heresy, because he refuses to practice biblical separation. The Fundamentalist who joins hands with Evangelicals through Promise Keepers is thereby holding hands with every form of apostasy and confusion.

YOU SAID THE "LIBERAL CHRISTIANS" ATTENDING PK RALLIES ARE HEARING "SOUND BIBLICAL PREACHING LIKE THEY HAVE NEVER HEARD BEFORE." Are they hermits? Can they not listen to these very same Evangelical and Charismatic speakers through the popular Christian media, through radio and books and television? How much sound biblical preaching do they really hear? Do they hear the doctrine of Repentance? Do they hear the doctrine of Hell? Do they hear the doctrine of Eternal Judgment? The doctrine of Separation? Are damnable heresies (2 Peter 2:1) exposed at these PK rallies so that those in attendance will flee from such things as Infant Baptism, Romanism, Modernism, Neo-Orthodoxy, Unitarianism, Universalism, Self-Esteemism, Sacramentalism?

Instead, that which is served up at PK rallies is the typical positive-emphasis, pop psychology-oriented, man-centered theology that is heard on Christian radio 24 hours a day.

The wise pastor will teach his people these things and ground them in the ability to discern the subtle error of New Evangelicalism. Those churches which are so grounded will not have to struggle mightily against every unbiblical movement which comes along. The members themselves will stand against such things as Promise Keepers because they will understand the nature of apostasy today and will be in a constant militant stance to reject and separate from error.

YOU SAID CHUCK COLSON WAS A SPEAKER. He is one of the most dangerous men alive today. He is at the forefront of the Evangelicals & Catholics Together movement to break down the walls of separation between Catholics and non-Catholics; his wife is a Roman Catholic. Yet those who participate in PK rallies come away thinking that he is a great man of God. To allow our church members to be brainwashed by dangerous New Evangelical neutralists is criminal, but this is exactly what a pastor does if he does not warn his people to avoid movements such as PK.

You said that liberal Christians are hearing sound biblical preaching. Tell me this: Are they told that God requires His people to LEAVE apostate churches? Are they given plain instruction about how to find a sound church? Of course not. That would be diametrically opposed to Promise Keepers' stated goals and philosophy. PK is ecumenical. It does not take a position on what kind of church is biblical and what kind of church is apostate. It does not take a position on doctrine. It is neutral. It merely encourages men to be active and supportive of their churches, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THOSE CHURCHES ARE SCRIPTURAL. That is why Bill McCartney said in Denver in 1990, "Hear me: Promise Keepers doesn't care if you're Catholic."

YOU SAID THAT PROMISE KEEPERS INFLUENCES MEN TO SUPPORT THEIR PASTORS AND LOCAL CHURCHES. I realize that this is one of its stated goals. But what happens when the pastor and the church stand in direct conflict to Promise Keepers philosophy? My contention is that an ecumenical organization CANNOT strengthen a Fundamental, Bible-believing church. Promise Keepers goal to strengthen the church is in direct contradiction to its goal of breaking down denominational barriers. It is my contention that these two goals are diametrically opposed. I do not believe the claim that is made by PK supporters that Promise Keepers builds loyalty in men toward their pastors. I don't believe that is true because I believe PK IS TEACHING MEN TO BE DISLOYAL TO ANY PASTOR WHO BELIEVES DOCTRINE IS IMPORTANT AND WHO TEACHES BIBLICAL SEPARATION. I believe that men influenced by Promise Keepers will develop a spirit of antagonism and stubbornness toward strong New Testament doctrine and separation. They will be forced to make a choice, and they will choose Promise Keepers over the faithful pastor who desires to practice biblical separation. Consider the following testimony which I received from Miguel Betancourt, Associate Pastor of Ferndale Baptist Church, North Charleston, South Carolina:

"We have three men in our church (avg. Sun. AM attendance is 200-250) who have been hoodwinked by PK. One man is responsible for getting the other two involved and has been pushing PK amongst others in the congregation. [Even though he has angered several laymen for his persistence in promoting PK when the church and its leadership will not officially support it, I am the one accused of being divisive and stirring up trouble!] In addition to conversations that I have had with him, our pastor has also spoken to him about PK (its ecumenism, etc.). I don't believe the talking has done any good, much less any of the info. that has been presented to him. He travels from church to church promoting the PK program (by invitation of course) and has very close ties with PK staff members in Atlanta. Presently he is in Florida on official PK business.

As far as helping you to understand the rationale behind all this, the observation you mentioned in a previous note (8/2) to me may very well be true:

"I don't believe the fidelity to pastoral authority runs very deep in men influenced by PK, though. Consider this scenario: A group of men in a supposedly Bible-believing church get involved in PK and come to their pastor and tell him that they are going to support him in every way possible. I'm just guessing, but I have a strong feeling based on experience in this type of thing that if that same pastor were to speak plainly to his men about the apostasy and deep compromise of the PK leaders and if he were to plainly instruct them in biblical separation and warn them to avoid such men and movements, those same men would oppose him. I believe that when PK philosophy would run counter to the pastor's philosophy, the men would tend to support PK (David Cloud).

"Although this man vocalizes his total support and submission to our pastor, and is faithful (when able) to attend church services and Sunday 8:30 am men's prayer meeting, yet by his activity and heavy involvement in the planning of PK rallies and conferences, he shows his unwillingness to give any serious consideration to what his shepherd has been saying. Perhaps your "strong feeling" is a correct assessment as to the reason why loyalty to PK ultimately seems to supersede loyalty to the scriptural admonitions given to him.

"I know of other fundamental churches who have been informed and warned about PK yet some of their men have participated in it. One rather large, influential fundamental Baptist church in the upstate had around thirty men travel to the PK conference in Atlanta. In Michigan, a couple of pastors have informed me that in spite of the warnings given, they had a few men attend the PK rally in the Silverdome" (Miguel Betancourt, Ferndale Baptist Church, North Charleston, South Carolina, August 4, 1995).

YOU MENTIONED MOODY AND OTHER REVIVALISTS OF BYGONE GENERATIONS. You said Moody "was ecumenical in his crusades, and raised money for the YMCA from nearly any source he could get it. Did God use D.L. Moody?" On the one hand, I do not doubt that many souls were saved under Moodys Gospel preaching. On the other hand, I DONT REALLY KNOW TO WHAT EXTENT GOD USED MOODY, AND TO WHAT EXTENT HIS ECUMENISM SPOILED HIS MINISTRY IN THE EYES OF GOD. How can we know such a thing? The only thing I know for certain is what the Bible says. God has given the churches a job to do, and He has also told them precisely HOW that job is to be done. We do not have any sort of liberty to disobey the Word of God for the purpose of doing good. It has always been this way. When God told Noah to build the ark, Noah did not have the liberty to change the design. Moses did not have the liberty to change any detail of the Tabernacle. And Gods churches do not have the liberty to ignore biblical separation for the sake of winning souls. A solemn part of the Great Commission is to teach Christ's disciples "to observe ALL things whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matt. 28:19,20). To preach the Gospel is only a start. We are to train the converts in every detail of New Testament doctrine. This is impossible in an ecumenical context.

It is insanity and ultimate confusion to disobey God in order to obey God.

Moody was indeed ecumenical. Are you saying it does not matter if a man practices doctrinal separation as long as he wins souls? This is the tired old heresy promoted by Billy Graham for the past 40 years, and the fruit has been the building up of the harlot church. Let me note the following important points: (1) Moody worked even with Modernists; Henry Drummond, who worked with Moody in Scotland and who spoke at Northfield schools, rejected many of the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith, yet Moody spoke highly of him when Drummond died at age 45. (2) It is also true that Modernism was only in early bloom in Moodys day, and the denominations were not as apostate as they are today. (3) Good men did speak out against Moodys ecumenism in his own day. Charles Haddon Spurgeon warned in The Sword and the Trowel that to yoke together with the Church of England in his day was to cooperate "with an established semi-Papal Church." Spurgeon noted in the Sword and Trowel that Drummonds book The Greatest Thing in the World should actually be called "the strangest thing in the world," because it was "the gospel with the gospel omitted." Drummond called for men to love like Christ, but he did not establish this Christ-like life upon the foundation of regeneration through Christs atonement. (4) Moody paid a heavy price for his flirtations with liberal denominations. His own son sided with the Modernists against the things his father had stood for, and the school Moody founded quickly capitulated to Modernism. A survey taken in 1985 found that 12% of the students at Northfield Schools claimed to be atheists.

YOU SAID YOU ARE BUSY WINNING SOULS AND BUILDING A CHURCH. That is commendable. We have busy with that for more than two decades, in foreign countries and in North America. We have planted churches in a country in which such work is illegal. BUT THE FACT IS THAT A CHIEF PART OF THE GREAT COMMISSION IS THE PROTECTION OF THE CHURCHES FROM ERROR. The Apostles gave constant attention to this, and if such was required 2,000 years ago, certainly it is MUCH MORE required today.

"Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 3). "As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine" (1 Timothy 1:3). To protect Gods flock from error is one of the solemn qualifications and duties of a pastor (Titus 1:9-13).

Sincerely in Christ,

David Cloud

Conclusion

A Fundamental Bible-believing church which refuses to stand plainly against Promise Keepers, and which allows its men to become active in this movement, will not long remain a militant, separatistic church. The seeming little leaven of PK's ecumenical philosophy will leaven the entire church.

The following is from a message I received August 1 from Miguel Betancourt, Associate Pastor, Ferndale Baptist Church, 4830 Piedmont Ave., N. Charleston, South Carolina. We printed Betancourt's report on Promise Keepers in an earlier issue of O Timothy.

"I can see the dilemma a fundamental pastor can find himself in as he labors so ardently without any apparent results and then comes across a movement that seems to be the catalyst for spiritual renewal among the men in his church. He finds himself in a pickle--condemning a movement and exposing its errors when it has his men coming back to him saying, Pastor, from now on, I'm going to support you every possible way I can. I want to follow your leadership; serve the Lord in any capacity I can; I'm going to pray for you and love you more than I have before. What fundamental pastor wouldn't desire a sincere commitment to Christ and the local church?

"To me, it seems that the single stone over which many men are stumbling is the visible results of which many testify (salvation decisions, renewed commitments, changed lives, etc.). [Even in our church, men who traveled to Atlanta have come back with similar statements that Pastor Otis made. They seem to have a renewed commitment to the Lord. And as typical with other PK'ers, they meet for breakfast at a local restaurant every Thurs. at 6 am.] They often ask, How can a movement that has sparked so many revivals be so dangerous? As so oftentimes is the case, the faulty standard of one's own subjective experience tends to hold greater weight or exert greater influence upon one's thinking than objective revelation. Consequently, doctrine is ignored for the visible results that have been so earnestly desired. The prospects of venturing out onto such a slippery slope as that are frightening. The sad truth is, I believe, many have fallen and are falling for the age-old Jesuit sophistry--the end justifies the means.

"One man from our high school faculty went to the PK conference in Atlanta out of curiosity. He had read my critique and a copy of your Open Letter to a Promise Keepers Representative before he left the low country. I also gave him a copy of Dr. Pickering's booklet, Promise Keepers and the Forgotten Promise (P.O. Box 1463, Decatur, AL 35602). He came back confused between the info he had read and what he saw. He, like Pastor Otis, testified to being tremendously blessed by the teaching, preaching, and hearing 70,000 men raise the roof with songs of praise to the Lord. He wants to sit down and talk about it soon.

"I think your comments in response to Pastor Otis' letter were well expressed. Many will testify they are changed BECAUSE of PK rather than saying that IN SPITE OF PK's problems, God was gracious to use His word and through the person of the Holy Spirit, effect the change that was needed. It is difficult for many to be blessed by a man's ministry without becoming blindly loyal or emotionally attached to that person or his ministry."

Finally, I received the following remarks by Pastor Doug Hammett, Lehigh Valley Baptist Church, Emmaus, Pennsylvania:

My suspicions are:

1. If a pastor cannot lead his people to follow the Lord in the area of family, his problem may be his own family is out of control.

2. If I could not affect the lives of families in our church, I would wonder about my walk with the Lord.

3. If a man is reached at PK and not able to be helped at the church, I would wonder first about the man's depth of commitment to Christ.

4. If a man is uplifted by attending PK, could it be more emotional charge, than Bible truth, propelling the change?

I have yet to see any from PK that were first and foremost interested in Bible convictions and standards for life.

"Gods flock is being devoured by this wolf of ecumenical deception, and the hireling shepherds are leading them to the slaughter" (Al Dager, Promise Keepers Update: Mormons, Catholics Laud Mens Movement, Media Spotlight, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1995, p. 3).

FOR MORE INFORMATION ON PROMISE KEEPERS SEE

Way of Life Literature's Web Site
http://www.wayoflife.org/

WAY OF LIFE LITERATURE ONLINE CATALOG

BACK TO THE PROMISE KEEPERS ARTICLES LIST

BACK TO THE MAIN FUNDAMENTAL BAPTIST NEWS SERVICE TOPICAL LIST