1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

history of the fundamental baptists

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by andy, Dec 17, 2003.

  1. andy

    andy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you believe that the antichrist is going to rule over a one world church during a seven year tribulation period, I guess you would not be too interested in ecumenical relations!!!! I actually think I remember reading some fundamental baptist literature from the 1970's that said Graham was building the one world church of the antichrist because presbyterians were cooperating in his crusades!!!!!!In the 1970's if you went into a fundamental baptist church all the men had on blue suits they had short hair and the women had on prim and proper dresses from 1947.
     
  2. andy

    andy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    They were all carrying old scofield bibles from 1909. If you went into an evangelical free or southern baptist church you would see some guy like Keith Green playing folk music on a guitar. It was amazing the contrast in methodology. However, the doctrine was the same. Fundamental Baptists believed in hell, divinity of Christ etc but so did the evangelical free church. I guess if you were young the evangelical free church was a lot more fun!!! I remember one evangelical free church that had a dance for the teenagers!!!
     
  3. andy

    andy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    After the evangelical free teenagers were done dancing the youth pastor gave an invitaion to trust Christ as saviour. If the teenagers did not trust Christ they were warned that they would be cast into the lake of fire forever according to revelation 20 verse 15. So as you can see the evangelical free church was not liberal. You know sometimes you have different eras though. I remember reading that first baptist dallas had a dance for the teenagers a couple of years ago. It was the dance ever at first baptist. Poor old w a criswall he was over ninety years old, blind
     
  4. andy

    andy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    and in a wheelchair when the dance was going on.I think another example was curtis hutson. You know he was a good preacher as far as going to heaven was concerned. But you know what he did? He attacked another fundamental baptist, I think his name was tim lee. He said tim lee was not fundamental baptist enough. He attacked Tim Lee because Tim Lee spoke in a southern baptist church. HORRORS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I thought to myself, how can hutson attack a wonderful man who goes over to vietnam and comes back with no legs.
     
  5. andy

    andy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    One thing about that I think I remember reading that John R. Rice preached in Assembly of God churches. He also published sermons in the sword of the lord by walter a. maier. Do any of you know who he is? He was a famous Missouri Synod Lutheran preacher. Rice published his sermons on salvation. I also remember reading a writing by rice where he received a letter from a missouri synod lutheran. Rice considered the lutheran his brother in christ. True, as a baptist, rice would not sprinkle babies, believe in consubstantiation,
     
  6. andy

    andy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    or believe in other lutheran beliefs, but on the great issues of the faith (hell, the blood of christ etc), he considered the lutheran minister a fellow christian. So, evidently rice was not as separatist as hutson. In fact the book, Bob Jones U fundamentalism and the separatist movement says that there was a falling out between jones and rice. Bob Jones even eventually broke fellowship with old john r. rice!!!!!
     
  7. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    1
    Hello Andy,

    I appreciate the effort that you have gone to in making the above posts. However, in the future I think that you should consolidate your material into an individual larger post (or just a couple of posts). By posting short statements back to back you have created a two page thread and only three other posters have had the chance to make single replies. The message board is designed to be like a conversation. You say something, other posters respond, and then you reply, etc. Just a bit of BB etiquette. :D

    When I write a longer post I find it helpful to write it on my wordprocessor and then cut and paste it into a BB post.

    Yours in Christ,

    Bibleboy,

    BB Moderator
     
  8. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,371
    Likes Received:
    2,405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Andy, I must agree with Pastor Larry. By focusing on the descendents of the SBC, you have ignored a large segment of the Fundamental Baptist galaxy. Further, as it has been pointed out on other threads, up until the late 1940s Fundamentalism was a cross-denominational movement. So, there were Fundamental Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists and even at one point of time AoGs. Today the bulk of Fundamentalists are Baptists. But there are still though in much smaller numbers than in days gone by Fundamental Presbyterians and Methodists. I would be remiss at this point to leave out our brethren in the Bible Church movement.

    The latest growth in Fundamentalists in America comes from an unexpected quarter of the world. Out here on the West Coast, we are seeing a large number of brethren from the underground/unregistered Evangelical Christian Baptist churchs of the Former Soviet Union settleing in our region. Only God knows the impact these brethren will make out here.

    Now back to the segment you have ignored in your posts, you forget the North/South split that occured in the 1830s. By focusing on Norris, Hyles, Jones et al., men like R.V. Clearwaters, Wenigar brothers, B.M. Cedarholm, Robert Ketchem, Ernest Pickering et al. are left out of the panoramic picture. The men last mentioned were not at any time affiliated in any way with the SBC. They were Historic Northern Baptists. I suggest you find a copy of George Dollar's book The History of Fundamentalism in the United States or Pickering's book Biblical Separation for that segment of the picture.

    [ December 18, 2003, 01:05 PM: Message edited by: Squire Robertsson ]
     
  9. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Because it is very simplistic and to that degree inaccurate. You take a lot of complex issues, confuse them with other issues, and then post the history of fundamentalist Baptists in about 3 paragraphs. There was a lot more than greatly changes the picture. As I said, I would encourage you to do some reading and studying on this issue. It is a fascinating history, whether one agrees with fundamentalism or not.
     
  10. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I didn't say the first and I dispute the second. There was no "founder" of Fundamentalism. There were a great number of men involved as it emerged as a distinct group. J Gresham Machen, a Presbyterian, wrote one of the early defining works in "Christianity and Liberalism" when he argued (rightly) that there were only two groups. Later New Evangelicals formed a third. Read the Fundamentals and look at the variety of authors in it. WB Riley, another early leader was a Northern Baptist. Several of the men were Canadian as I recall.

    If you go back and look at what I said, you will see something a bit different than what you said here. I said, "In the early part of this century, fundamentalism was not strictly Baptist. And it really didn't have a whole lot of concern with the southern baptists in those days." NOtice I was referring to the "early part of this century" when fundamentalism separated itself from liberalism. "In those days," it was the NBC, not the SBC that was at issue.

    And that predates fundamentalisms issue with the SBC, at least as a public issue. The early fundamentalists were mostly northern men, from the NBC as well as some Presbyterians and Methodists.

    It certainly has.

    I don't agree with the "New Evangelical thing" either. I think they started with a bad philosophy. You last statement doesn't seem to make a lot of sense so I really don't know what you are trying to say.

    There is a large degree to which all Christians are either evangelical or fundamental (though the original evangelicals were the fundamentalists. It was the new evangelicals who split from the fundamentalists and coined their own name, The New Evangelicals). "Evangelical" means you hold to the gospel, the Evangel. If someone does not do that, then they are not saved, and thus they are not a Christian.
     
  11. andy

    andy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    dear pastor Larry, I think you missed the point of my posts. I was not trying to write about all of fundamentalism in twenty minutes. I could sit here all night talking about the different groups. I was just giving a quick tour of some of the famous leaders. I know that all of fundamentalism was not Baptist. Actually, you sound pretty close to my view of things if you have read Christianity and Liberalism by Machen.Actually, Machen did not like to be called a fundamentalist. He wanted to be called a Christian. He was a very erudite scholar. I have George W Dollar's book in my library and he draws
     
  12. andy

    andy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    comparison between Machen and Norris. Norris was weaping over sinners on the stage and Machen was a man of the library. Machen was a presbyterian. He was against premillenialism. In fact, in his book he says something to the effect that the reappearance of chillasm is a cause for concern.He drank alcoholic drinks. I think he also smoked a cigar. He was the greatest conservative Christian scholar of the 1930's. He went to a Billy Sunday meeting and he was happy that the Gospel was being preached. However, this mighty presbyterian theologian thought that sunday
     
  13. andy

    andy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    was a circus freak. It is funny you would bring Machen up, he is one of my heroes. Machen would not agree with these new evangelical labels of yours. His position was conservative but he certainly was not a bob jones type at all. Also, I think my point was when I said "fundamental baptists say that anyone who is not a fundamental baptist is a new evangelical" was that everyone but bob jones people are new evangelical. I have never even heard the word new evangelical ever used by any christians but fundamental baptists.
     
  14. andy

    andy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have been to many churches over the years and have never even heard the word new evangelical in these churches. Let's make a list of new evangelicals according to bob jones: Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell, Chuckie baby Swindoll, John Macarthur, Hal Lindsay, John F. Walvoord, Charlies C. Ryrie, Adrian Rogers, Paige Patterson,Josh Mcdowell,
     
  15. Scott J

    Scott J Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Is there a particular reason you are breaking your posts up like this? I would very much like to follow and interact with you on this topic but your method is distracting... and frankly, gives me a headache.
     
  16. andy

    andy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    How do you get the writing area larger?I go down to the bottom and there is no more room to write.
     
  17. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    New Evangelical was the name they called themselves. They first coined it. It was not a term that fundamentalists gave them. When they broke off from the fundamentalists, the "old evangelicals," they said they wanted to be a new kind of evangelical, hence, "new evangelical."

    As for Bob Jones, they do not define fundamentalism, though they stand solidly in the stream of historic fundamentalism. I don't they would call everyone unaffiliated with them "new evangelical." They never had "fourth degree separation." "Second degree separation" was what it was called, and it referred to separation from disobedient brothers, such as Paul commands in 2 Thess 3, Rom 16. It is also taught by John and Jude. Bottom line, there is really no such thing as "second (or fourth) degree separation." It is all first degree ... it is either from apostates or disobedient brothers.

    As far as hearing the term "new evangelical," now they just call themselves the "evangelicals." The problem is that in the first half of this century, the evangelicals were fundamentalists. And as I pointed out, they themselves chose to call themselves "new evangelicals" to distinguish themselves from the old evangelicals, otherwise known as the fundamentalists.

    We could go through each of the men you list and talk about them but that would not accomplish much.

    Hal Lindsey was one of the first to point out the problems that new evangelicalims faced in "The Battle for the Bible." The other names have various good points and bad points but they all share a disdain for fundamentalism and biblical separatism. Out of those that you list, Graham is decidedly more leftward than the others. MacArthur is very much closer to a fundamentalist than the others you list.

    To get a longer post, when you get to the bottom of the box, just keep typing. You will get more room. The screen will scroll down.
     
  18. Scott J

    Scott J Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Sorry. I thought you for some unknown reason were doing it on purpose.
     
  19. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,371
    Likes Received:
    2,405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Just keep on writing and the text will keep on flowing. When you first open a new post window, you will see two directional arrows that are greyed out. When you get to the bottom of the visible area
    .
    .
    .
    the arrows will turn black and a scroll bar will appear. The first text that you have entered will scroll up and out of sight. It's still there, just out of view.
     
  20. andy

    andy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    You are right pastor larry, I stand corrected, Harold John Ockenga coined the term new evanelical I think it was in the 1940s. However, I think the new evangelical controversy is no longer an issue. It was an isue in that era because graham, carl henry and ockenga made it one. If you went to a church tommorrow and ask the pastor if he was a new evangelical, he would not know what you are talking about unless he was a fundamental baptist. I also think that Jerry Falwell's new image fundamentalism is basically identical to graham's new evangelicalism of the 1940s. I am sure that is how the leaders of bob jones u would look at it. Jerry Falwell said around the late 1990s that "in 25 years that group (hard core fundamental baptists) will no longer exist or be very small."I think his words are prophetic because the Sword of the Lord etc is not as powerful as it was in the 1970's. I would not be surprised if Liberty puts Bob Jones University out of business some day. Jerry Falwell is very smart. He knew that if he started a Bible College called Liberty Baptist Bible College, that was King James Version Only, no slacks or shorts on women, no movies, no hair over the ears, no Amy Grant music etc---he would have a school with forty students.Instead, by mellowing over the years, he is able to draw students from the huge 15,000,000 southern baptist convention. Think about that for a moment, the SBC is the size of New York city. Liberty is growing by leaps and bounds. I think Jerry Falwells legacy will not be Liberty or the moral majority but the fact that he was able to offer a refreshing alternative to the funnymentalism or funDAMNmentalism of ministries like Bob Jones, Sword of the Lord, and David Cloud etc. Jerry Falwell brought independent baptists out of the cult like mentality that was really prevalent in the 1970's. Praise the Lord for Jerry Falwell!!!!I really respect that man.Jerry Falwell is not a kook a look like Jack Hyles. He is not a nutcase like the people that run Bob Jones University. Long live Jerry Falwell.If I ever have kids they are not going to be sent down to that CULT in Greenville, they are going to LIBERTY! I am now going to contiune my list of Christian leaders who are new evangelical according to the baptists at bob jones university: Howard Hendricks, W. A. Criswall, George Truett, BH Carroll, A T Robertson, E Y Mullins, D L Moody, A W Tozer, J Dwight Pentecost,Vernon Grounds, John Nelson Darby, George Mueller, Charles Spurgeon, Charles Macintosh, C I Scofield, James Brookes, Arno Gaebelein, Sir Robert Anderson,Arthur W. Pink, Alexander Whyte, James Stalker, George Matheson, George Macdonald, Machen, Ian Maclaren, T Diwitt Talmage, Thomas Hardy, F B Meyer, G Campbell Morgan, Jack Van Impe, John Henry Jowett, Phillips Brooks, Arthur T Pierson, A B Simpson, J Wilbur Chapman, William Edward Biederwolf, General William Booth, E M Bounds, Andrew Murray, D Martin Lloyd Jones, D James Kennedy, Oswald T Allis, BB Warfield, Charles Hodge, AA Hodge, Jonathan Edwards, A C Dixon, John Hagee, Oral Roberts, R G Lee, Wilbur Smith, Erwin Lutzer, Joseph Stowell, C S Lewis, Oswald Chambers, Watchman Nee, Clarence Macartney, Donald Grey Barnhouse, Jame Boice, Jack Hayford, Harold John Ockenga, T T Shields, Oswald J Smith, Franklin Graham, J Vernon Mcgee, Louis T. Talbot, Walter Wilson, John Wesley, Martin Luther, John Calvin, St. Augustine, John Chrystosym, George Whitefield, Charles Wesley, and any other Christian who is not a fundamental baptist. The true Fundamental Baptists are: Harold Sightler, Jack Hyles, Bob Jones famiy, John R. Rice, Dallas Billington, Robert Sumner, R L Hymers, Robert T Ketcham, B Myron Cederholm, W B. Riley, Dave Hyles, Fred Phelps, J Frank Norris, Bill Rice, Tom Malone, George Alquist, Hugh Pyle, Lee Roberson, Rodney Bell, Paul Chappell, Raymond Barber, Keith Gomez, Shelton Smith, Clarence Sexton.So as you can see the Christians outnumber the Fundamental Baptists.
     
Loading...