Fundamental
Evangelistic Association
selected
articles from:
©FOUNDATION
A MAGAZINE OF BIBLICAL FUNDAMENTALISM
Dennis W. Costella, Editor; Karel Beyer, Production Manager; Matt
Costella,
Copy Editor
M.H. Reynolds, Jr. (1919-1997), Founding Editor
Has Dobson's Focus Changed?
M.H. Reynolds, Jr. (1919 - 1997)
© FOUNDATION MAGAZINE May-June 1996
Fundamental Evangelistic Association
RECENT STATEMENTS to the board of directors and the staff
of Focus on the Family by its founder and president. Dr. James Dobson, appear to indicate
that his focus for the future involves major changes from his assumptions and priorities
he has held since founding Focus on the Family (FOTF) in 1977and upon which FOTF programs
have been based these last two decades. In a report to the FOTF staff the last week in
May, Dobson addressed the discussions, deliberations and some of the decisions reached at
a just completed, two-day board of directors meeting. Two main questions were considered. (1)
What is the role of a Christian ministry in a post-Christian world? (2) What is the role
of a Christian individual in a post-Christian world?
Dobson correctly pointed out that our culture is changing and that we are in a moral
free-fall brought on by a spiritual apathy. He told of one of his associates having
recently returned from visiting several churches across the country and reporting that
churches are demoralized, pastors are depressed, churches are losing members and many are
closing their doors. Dobson said, "Sure there's strong churches here and there. They
tend to be the super churches with the big pastors who have an ability to draw people in,
but the average church is less than a 100 members and they're struggling for survival and
people just seem to have less spiritual zeal." Dobson then spoke of the problems
future generations would face especially those who are growing up without proper spiritual
foundations. What he does not realize is that by giving millions of people advice based
largely on psychological suppositions rather than the pure Word of God, he and the FOTF
ministries have contributed to the very conditions he now recognizes to be so very
serious.
Dr. Dobson spoke of the assumption he made in days past when FOTF was young. That
assumption was that there was a great Christian army-a vast number of people who
understood the principles of family life; who knew that morality was important and
believed in the sanctity of life and the permanence of marriage; who believed that
marriage ought to be between a man and a woman. He said this huge Christian army could be
reached by Christian radio. Dobson said. "I never saw myself as the leader of the
army and never have been the leader of the army, but I did see myself as one of the
communicators of information to the army. So I would go on the air and say, 'You won't
believe what the Senate did today.' And, I would give them information and then people
would take that information and the army would march and they would respond and they would
defend what they believe."
But what does Dr. Dobson believe today? Has he changed his focus? Note his own words,
"That was my assumption. I no longer believe that. I don't think it works that way
anymore. I think what you've got is still an army but with little pockets-a strong church
here, a group of believers there-you've got to get these little pockets of people who are
hanging on for dear life to what they believe in, what they were taught as kids. But,
there's no way they're a force. If anything, they tend to become competitive to each
other. They tend not to speak with one voice….Really, there is no army. As a matter
of fact, people are deadened, they're desensitized… So, the army is largely
fictional."
"So, the question is, how does this ministry (FOTF) change in the light of this
apostasy, this moving away from, this less spiritual activity? You can debate those terms.
You know, I may not be right ... You can argue with the assumption but that's my
assumption and so with that assumption the question is, what do we do different? What
changes?" These are good questions but the answers given by Dobson and the FOTF
board are confusing and often contradictory.
Dobson correctly pointed out that there are two very different and competing value
systems. He described God's value system as follows: "This is the understanding that
God did it through His Son, Jesus, and what we read in Scripture is not a series of
suggestions but there are commandments. These are absolutes. These are eternal truths.
There is an immutable understanding of the nature of the universe, and this is the
permanence of marriage, and this is the offense of premarital sex and extramarital
sex-it's all of these things. It's the value system that comes out of this."
Unfortunately. instead of calling this God's value system, he described it erroneously as
the Judeo-Christian value system. Perhaps this expression was not accidental, for Dobson
is involved with a Jewish Rabbi in an ecumenical Center for Jewish-Christian Dialogue
which will be documented later in this article.
Dobson correctly set forth the basic premises of the opposite secular-humanistic value
system which he said, "begins with the assumption that God doesn't exist; therefore
there are no immutable truths and you make up your own rules as you go along. The policies
are set by what seems right . . . and in that whole understanding there are no
absolutes-you live on the basis of what seems right…This is the culture of death,
this is abortion and infanticide and euthanasia and AIDS. This is death."
Some of Dobson's subsequent statements are also significant. He said, "We dumped
our value system. So now, all of a sudden, you ought to have the biggest gap opened up
between the Church and the culture that has ever occurred. There ought to have been in
1968 incredible conflict between the Church and the culture-the dominant culture values.
God died. Remember 1967, the cover of Time magazine said God is dead ... There should have
been this antagonism, this ,dissidence but it didn't occur. Why? ... just look how the
Church has changed, it just moved with the culture. What do you do when the whole culture
moves?"
Dobson continued, "After several hours of discussion here is what we came up with
... What's the role of the Christian ministry in a post-Christian world? America is in a
moral free-fall which, barring a spiritual
decline. My observation is that the army is in disarray. The army is without central
leadership. The army is distracted, demoralized and disengaged. Today, spiritual apathy
and wickedness will, the board feels, intensify when the older generation is off the scene
... and the hope, the only hope for this culture is a national spiritual revival. There's
no political solution . . . There is no economic answer. There is no answer other than for
a sweeping national revival."
When Dobson queried the FOTF Board as to their advice to him for the future, he was
told to "continue to do what we've been doing to campaign for righteousness.
"Dobson's specific questions were: "If the army is not out there, should I
soften up? Should I temper my comments? Should I assume that I'm talking to a larger
percentage of people who don't know what we're talking about? Dobson says the answer from
the board was for him not to let up, but to continue the campaign. But the board also
said, "Place greater emphasis on the fundamentals, on the Word of God, on its
authenticity, on its inerrancy, on its foundational quality, and the need for
repentance." Dobson then told the FOTF staff, "We have to work that into our
broadcasts more, into our magazines more, into every piece of literature, into everything
we do. The hope of glory, the love of God, the justice of God-because the further we go,
the more we have to assume that fewer people understand the basics. And, whereas I started
out in 1977 with the idea that I was a psychologist who was going to try to help Christian
families raise their kids, (that was basically where we started with Focus on the Family
and if you listen to the first film series, that's what it dealt with) because the world
was different .. Now the Board is saying, 'you can't assume that that world exists,
and we must give our attention to spiritual foundations because without that everything
else is window-dressing.'"
Then Dobson said to his staff, "This is a grand strategy. This is a grand design.
It may look simplistic but there's really great wisdom in it because it is saying, 'As
the world goes to hell, we've got to become even more of a beacon, not of psychological
truth but of ultimate truth and continue to campaign for righteousness.' I want you to
understand something. This is really important. You hear me talk about the evil of
abortion, homosexuality and safe sexology and all this stuff going on-and all these are
very, very important-but there is a foundational issue below that. Those are all social
and political issues that flow out of something that is more important to me, which is the
defense of righteousness."
Hearing this kind of talk from Dobson is surprising indeed, but it can only be
accepted as genuine change if he publicly repudiates his previous assumptions, ceases the
publication of his books which espouse those false assumptions, and apologizes for
misleading millions of people all these years.
But now hear this! Dobson reported that the board had said to him, "The world
appears to have ordained two people at this time to speak to the issue of
righteousness-Chuck Colson and myself. And they urged me to work with him, maybe even in
some rallies that we would do or other things-not to talk politics, not to even talk only
the sanctity of life in these things, but to talk this-and you're going to see that in me
in years to come if the Lord allows me to remain in this responsibility because that's
absolutely critical, absolutely critical!"
"They urged me to spend more time if I can with pastors-bring the little pastors
here. You know we got a pastor's meeting in August. The big guys are coming in, the
denominational leaders are coming in. That's good but they said, 'Don't forget the little
guy out there who is struggling for survival.'. . . You are all probably aware of
this-that there is a real division about to occur in the Christian Church over this point.
You got a large number, or at least a significant number of Christian leaders who have a
power base and who want to protect it and who don't like to be called 'Christian right or
extreme right,' and don't like to be vilified in the press and don't like to take a stand
on controversial issues and don't like to see their congregations not raise as much
money and be smaller and be less significant, and they're looking for a rationalization, I
believe, for not engaging the culture. I talked to Chuck Colson yesterday about the
possibility of doing rallies next year in stadiums or wherever we can and he's very
excited about that…so maybe that will occur."
Dr. Dobson said, "There has to be a calling back of the Church and that's called
spiritual renewal and revival. It has occurred before and occurred in the late 19th
century, and maybe the Lord will use us in that regard to some small degree, If so, that's
what we're here for. I'm not (don't misunderstand me), I'm not going to quit teaching
about parenting and all the other stuff that we do, but we can't forget our basic
responsibility ... which is eternal."
The self-proclaimed change in Dr. Dobson's focus has been greatly influenced by Dr.
Adrian Rogers, a longtime Southern Baptist leader, who repeatedly enunciates the
fundamentalist position of biblical separation but refuses to take that position himself.
In the January/February 1996 issue of Foundation magazine, we printed an article titled
"Speaking The Truth But Practicing Error-The Dangerous Duplicity of Dr. Adrian Rogers
and Dr. James Dobson." In this eleven page article, we fully documented this
duplicity resulting from an address Rogers gave at the February 1995 meeting of the
National Religious Broadcasters annual convention. Titled "Standing Alone For The
Truth," some basic principles of biblical separation were set forth but negated by
the spirit of compromise that has characterized his long ministry. If Dr. Rogers really
believed what he taught concerning biblical separation at the NRB, he would have separated
from the Southern Baptist Convention. When Rogers was elected president of the SBC in
1966, he pleaded for continuing unity between those in the SBC who believed in biblical
inerrancy and those who did not. Rogers said, "May God give us increasing unity.
We're not enemies. We are brothers in our Lord Jesus Christ. We are built together, bound
together, in it together, like it or not . . . The chief strategy of the devil is to send
division . . . to get us fighting one another. God does division. I want to be a
peacemaker."
However, at the FOTF board meeting in 1996, Dobson reported that Rogers, in answering
the question "What do we do in these last days?" read the entire third chapter
of Second Timothy. This chapter talks about the last days and the kinds of people and
wicked behavior that Rogers said sounds much like what we are encountering today in the
USA. Then, Rogers said, "It's very easy to read those Scriptures and say, 'Wow, isn't
that what we're up against?" He expressed great concern for himself, his children and
his grandchildren in facing these last-day conditions.
Now listen carefully to their conclusion-it is a good one! Dobson quotes Rogers as
follows: "There's several things we need to do: First, we need to practice
separation [and Dobson adds that Rogers is talking about separating from the kinds of
people described in 2 Timothy 3]. We need to be careful not to become so imbued with
being friends and associates of them that we take on their color so that we do what Dr.
Dobson has described that the Church has done." Dobson then added, "If you look
back at the literature at the time FOTF began, the big word in the Christian movement was
'relevance.' We want to be 'relevant.' Relevant meant coming alongside the culture and
absorbing the culture instead of being absorbed into the culture ... So we need to
practice separation."
The problem is that while both Dobson and Rogers recommend separation, neither one has
ever practiced it. On the contrary, the tenor of their ministries is consistently set upon
broadening their ministerial associations and those they are willing to work with rather
than identifying only with those who take a strong, biblical stand on the fundamentals of
the faith and the issues the church faces today. Their present affiliations and ministries
are not based on biblical separation but on unbiblical fellowships.
Summing up Rogers' additional recommendations, he said, "We need to practice
separation, we need to prepare for suffering, and we need to pursue the Scriptures. . .
because evil men will wax worse and worse, but we need to continue in the things we've
been assured of; to be the kind of people we want our kids and grand kids to remember as
people of faith, commitment and virtue. Turn to the Scriptures for endurance because we
surely will fall away without the Scriptures. Turn to the Scriptures for evangelizing-we
need to go about soul-winning. Separation does not mean we turn away from witnessing . . .
Be a soul winner. We are not going to save society, it will get worse and worse until
Jesus comes."
All of these statements are commendable and scriptural, but it should be noted that God
warns in 2 Timothy 3:13, "But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse,
deceiving and being deceived." Because neither Rogers nor Dobson have been warning
about the deceivers, both of them have themselves been deceived and are still deceiving
others. We pray that both of these talented communicators will change both their focus
and practices.
Earlier in this article, we mentioned that Dobson, in defining and describing godly
culture, referred to it as the Judeo-Christian culture. Many people mistakenly use that
term since the first assumption is likely to be that this refers to God's instructions to
Israel in the Old Testament and to the Church in the New Testament. Those in evangelical
and charismatic circles today are attempting to mollify the historic conflicts between the
Jews and Gentiles. Dobson is a member of the board of advisors for The Center For
Christian-Jewish Dialogue Colorado Springs. He has gone out of his way to promote this
unscriptural, ecumenical organization which was established by a prominent, well-known
Jewish Rabbi who often uses evangelical terminology to gain evangelical approval and
support.
However, a most revealing interview with Rabbi Howard Hirsch was carried in the Gazette
Telegraph of May 19, 1996. We quote, "Jews and Christians are bound together with
many core values," Hirsch said. "But ever since the first century we've taken
potshots at each other with disastrous consequences. The difference between Christianity
and Judaism comes in how each views Jesus Christ. Christians believe Jesus Christ is the
Son of God, and the Messiah. Christians believe that to enter the Kingdom of God, you must
accept Jesus your Savior. Jews look at Jesus-at the most-as a charismatic religious leader
and influential teacher. Jews adhere to the teachings of The Torah - the first five books
of the Bible-as the basis of their relationship with God." But what did Jesus
Christ say when He was here on earth? "...if ye believe not that I am He [God] ye
shall die in your sins" (John 8:24b). The Bible clearly teaches in 1John 4:1-3
that those who deny the deity of Jesus Christ have the spirit of anti-christ. How can
Dr. Dobson possibly justify his active participation in and support of Rabbi Hirsch and
his Center for Christian-Jewish Dialogue?
If Dr. Dobson's focus has really changed, how can he continue his support of the
Promise Keepers Movement which repudiates scriptural separation? How can he continue some
of his close ties and relationships with Roman Catholics? Will he now expose and warn
about the dangers of psychology on his broadcasts and in his publications? If he is
one of the two men God has raised up to help churches large and small (as the FOTF board
suggested), will he urge separation from the liberal or compromised denominations? Will
the rallies he and Colson plan to conduct in the future compete with the Promise Keepers
rallies or complement them?
As for Chuck Colson, does he plan to change the basis of his prison ministry
which is staffed by both Roman Catholics and members of evangelical and ecumenical
denominations? Will he repudiate the document called Evangelicals and Catholics
Together? He was one of the major drafters of this ECT document which has received
worldwide publicity and circulation. This document is a masterpiece of religious double
talk and some outright error. The following portion of its first page is given as one of
many examples of this fact: "We together, Evangelicals and Catholics, confess our
sins against the unity that Christ intends for all His disciples. The one Christ and one
mission includes many other Christians, notably the Eastern Orthodox and those Protestants
not commonly identified as Evangelical. All Christians are encompassed in the prayer, 'May
they all be one.' Our present statement attends to the specific problems and opportunities
in the relationship between Roman Catholics and Evangelicals."
We would rejoice if the focus of Dobson, Colson and Rogers would change from one of
compromise to complete biblical separation, and we pray to that end. However, until their
actions are brought into conformity with their recent words, we have to "reprove,
rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine" (2 Tim 4:1-5). May our dear Lord
keep all true, separated believers faithful to Him and to His Word until He returns! 1
Thessalonians 4:13-18.
FOUNDATION Magazine is available from the Fundamental Evangelistic Association. Click
here 
to go to the ordering form / price list.
Return to FOUNDATION
Magazine Index Page
