Featured Has Fundamentalism Died?

I'm glad you posted on here because you always add good information but here was the original question:

So I was just throwing out what I felt it has become and how it was different from other Baptists. The things I mentioned were things I saw personally and were involved in, but it certainly isn't an exhaustive explanation.

 

@John of Japan . And I have to ask. Do you have pot luck dinners in Japan?

 

Simply stated, liberalism is a modernist belief that the supernatural does not exist. That means it rejects fundamental doctrines such as the virgin birth, the deity of Christ, the bodily resurrection of Christ, etc.

We oppose liberalism because it does great damage to the cause of Christ, and thus we are commanded in many passages to separate from such (Amos 3:3, Ps. 1:1, 2 Thess. 3:6, etc.).

 

You bet! We were there 33 years, and ate tons of good stuff, even fried chicken pieces called karaage! Yum!

 

I acknowledge your point and thank you for the kind words!

But again, fundamentalism is now a world-wide movement due to the fact that we are a missionary sending movement, and there are now fundamentalists all over the world which do not fit all of your points. Our Bible college currently has six men or couples on deputation, and they will all take our positions with them to Cameroon, Canada, Africa, etc. And several of your points don't exactly fit us!

 

The difference us how the two deal/t with Modernism/Liberalism.

 

Evangelicalism nowadays is not the classic evangelicalism up to the 1950s, but a new version based on the New Evangelicalism of Graham and others. Harold Ockenga claimed to have invented the term, and certainly provided some of the theology behind the movement.

The split occurred in 1957 with Graham's New York Crusade, for which miracle denying liberals (see the definition above) were included in the crusade committee. The New Evangelical believed in cooperation with liberals rather than separation from them. And so in 1957 a clear split occurred in evangelicalism between the fundamentalists (traditional seperatistic evangelicalism) and the New Evangelicals (exhorting cooperation with liberals).

Another major difference between the two movements is the issue of personal separation. Fundamentalists believe in having standards which keep us separate from worldly practices, while New Evangelicals (and thus most who call themselves "evangelical" today) believe in interacting with the culture around us and accommodating Christianity to it.

Granted, many fundamentalists go too far and preach against some harmless things (wire rimmed glasses and the like), but on the other hand many evangelicals have accommodated themselves to wickedness. As one example, some time ago I read a movie review in Christianity Today (the mouthpiece of New Evangelicalism from the start) which said that there was swearing, nudity, and love scenes in a certain movie--but Christians still ought to watch it! Unbelievable.

"Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you" (2 Cor. 6:17).

 

According to Church Works (2009), by Paul Chappell and Clayton Reed, a survey was commissioned to discover the state of the Independent Baptist (IB) movement. At that time there were 13,719 IFB churches in the US (p. 15). From 1990-2008, 2744 IB churches were started (p. 28), and this church planting movement continues around the US, though perhaps not as robustly.

Significantly, IB churches were supporting 4,876 missionaries (including me!) at that time (p. 30). Compare this to the SBC's 3898 missionaries, less that IB churches, though the SBC had up to 3 times the number of churches!

The IB movement, primarily church planting as opposed to education or charity work, has been planting churches around the world ever since the GARBC started BMM, ABWE, etc., back in the 1930's after they split from the NBC. This means that, although figures are not available, there must be tens of thousands of IB churches all around the world! In many nations, the nationals are now planting more churches than the missionaries!

So you see, fundamentalism is a worldwide movement, still going strong as ever around the world--whatever the situation in the US!

 

I see one major difference between traditional fundamentalism and the 21st century model, and that is in the area of education. The old non-local church Bible colleges are gone or going. Pillsbury closed, Northland closed, Tennessee Temple closed. (Some would argue that TTU was a local church school since it was under Highland Park BC, but you were not required to join or serve God in HPBC.) BJU is still around, but hemorrhaging students because they have relaxed their standards big time.

Non-local church schools left in the fray include Maranatha Baptist U., Central Baptist Theological Seminary, and Detroit Baptist Seminary.

However, true local church colleges have proliferated, including where I teach (college & seminary). They may have anywhere from 50 to 100 students, and they run the gamut from Ruckmanism to nominal use of the KJV, and I do know of IB churches using the NKJV or NASB who, nevertheless, call themselves fundamental and take a stand.

 

If anyone wants to study further (to find out if my posts are accurate?? ), here are some suggestions:

On separatism: Be Ye Holy (BJU Press, 1994), by my friend Fred Moritz; Biblical Separation: The Struggle for a Pure Church (Regular Baptist Press, 1979), by my friend Ernest Pickering (now in Heaven).

On original fundamentalism up through the 1950's: Kevin Bauder and Robert Delaney, One in Hope and Doctrine (Regular Baptist Press, 2014).

On New Evangelicalism (I'm holding myself back and giving only a couple of recent works): Rolland McCune, Promise Unfulfilled (Ambassador International, 2004); Paul Smith, New Evangelicalism (Calvary Chapel, 2011).

Smith is not IB, but he gets a whole lot right, and definitely claims fundamentalism and separatism.

 

Road rage is being rude.

Making up false accusations is still lying.