Fundamentalist

[FriendofSpurgeon]

Too many generalizations here, friend. Fundamentalism is a lot bigger and less defined than you appear to think.


Actually, virtually all fundamentalist groups focus on the Gospel very strongly. That is why among evangelical missions, the only group increasing annually in the number of missionaries being sent out. (I can prove this for Japan by the JEMA missionary directory, if not the rest of the world.) And again, the great majority of books being published on personal evangelism nowadays are written by fundamentalists. Check out the Sword of the Lord Publ. catalog sometime--book after book on evangelism.

Exactly. People who call themselves evangelical now believe in such heresies as annihilationism, open theism, etc.

P. S. I call Spurgeon the prototype fundamentalist. Are you aware of the Downgrade Controversy?

John, thank you for your comments. My comments are based upon my experience with IFB churches in the south. I do hope you are correct that it is larger and less defined than what I have experienced.
The IFB churches with which I am familiar are very involved in missionary work and for that I am thankful. However (again in my own experiences), there is also the focus on so many additional items – the look, the talk, the songs, even the type of Bible one uses. You can even add in the "right" politics. To me, that is sad and takes the focus away from the Gospel.
Lastly, I am aware of the controversy - though definitely not a scholar. Perhaps that would be a good topic for a new post.

 

[Ed Edwards]

A warning about straying from the Christian
Fundamentals dearly head by many
true Fundamentalists:

The fundamentals of traditional fundamentalism:

1. the inspiration and infallibility of scripture
2. the deity of Christ (including His virgin birth)
3. the substitutionary atonement of Christ's death
4. the literal resurrection of Christ from the dead
5. the literal return of Christ in the Second Advent

Note the first one is about the Written Word of God,
the Holy Bible (AKA: Holy Scripture).
Note that #2 to #5 (the last four) are about
the Living Word of God, Messiah Jesus.
Notice that a person (even if He is a spiritual person)
is NOT the same as a Book (even if it is the
best book in the world).

To equate the Written Word of God and the Living
Word of God is a step away from the Fundamentals
of Christianity. To equate the Written Word of God
and the Living Word of God is a step toward
a NEW AGE belief.

The next step toward the NEW AGE belief concerning
the Holy Scripture is to use the Divine Bible
(third person of the Holy Trinity) as a divination device
and a fortune telling tool: i.e. using
some 'Bible Code' on the King James Version 1769
Edition ONLY.

The Bible Codes are a direct violation of the ETERNAL
LAW OF GOD (Bible Code offenses are bolded).
We are to communicate with God (pray) NOT with
spirits neither of the angels, demons, nor those
who have died.

Deu 18:10-12 (KJV1611 Edition):
There shall not be found among you any one
that maketh his sonne, or his daughter
to passe thorow the fire,
or that vseth diuination,
or an obseruer of times,
or an inchanter,
or a witch,
11 Or a charmer,
or a consulter with familiar spirits,
or a wyzard,
or a Necromancer.
12 For all that do these things,
are an abomination vnto the Lord:

'Abomination' is something really
offensive done to somebody. So
the Lord is really offended by these
things which aught NOT to be done.

in verse 10 where it says:
// or an inchanter //
the Geneva Bible says:
// a marker of the flying of foules //
This is the literal meaning of the Hebrew term
being translated. These people (both witch/female/
and wizard /male/ would observe the flight of
chickens to determine what a person should do
in the future. Sorry, one aught to cousel with trusted
Christians & privately in prayer & do what the Holy Spirit tells you
so do - not through spiritual quacks, no matter what wierd
place they get their 'message from elsewhere':
tarot cards, consulting boards, head bumps, Bible codes,
etc. etc.

 

[Ed Edwards]

JJ, You are so correct in all of your above posts and I personally want to thank God for your reasoned dissemination of fundamental faith. Your posts have calmed down the spirit of wrath that was building in my heart toward the attacks of the foundational faith where with I came to know Christ as my Savior,

1. Hearing of the Word of God through the KJV
2. Response to the Word by repentance.
3. Believing in the death, burial and resurrection of the Son of God, Jesus of Nazareth for remission of my sins.
4. Obeying the call of the Holy Spirit to go into the world preaching the Gospel to all creatures.
5. God's Grace, that helps me understand that even though folks may look different and respond unlike I have, may experience this wonderful Grace through Jesus Christ our Lord as well.

How can anyone attack what can not be broken?

Amen, on the John of Japan statement!

Amen on //Your posts have calmed down the spirit of wrath
that was building in my heart toward the attacks
of the foundational faith where with I came
to know Christ as my Savior, ... //

You know I keep getting CHARGED with attacking the
Fundamentals of Fundamentalism.
I joined a Fundamentalist Denomination in 1952
(when saved, by baptism). It took Millions of
uy working together some 40 years
(AD1952-1992) to sway that Denomination (Southern
Baptist Convention /SBC/) toward the Fundamental.

 

[John of Japan]

JJ, You are so correct in all of your above posts and I personally want to thank God for your reasoned dissemination of fundamental faith. Your posts have calmed down the spirit of wrath that was building in my heart toward the attacks of the foundational faith where with I came to know Christ as my Savior,

1. Hearing of the Word of God through the KJV
2. Response to the Word by repentance.
3. Believing in the death, burial and resurrection of the Son of God, Jesus of Nazareth for remission of my sins.
4. Obeying the call of the Holy Spirit to go into the world preaching the Gospel to all creatures.
5. God's Grace, that helps me understand that even though folks may look different and respond unlike I have, may experience this wonderful Grace through Jesus Christ our Lord as well.

How can anyone attack what can not be broken?

Simple facts can dispel the fog. :wavey: But fundamentalism will always be attacked. I'm content with that, since the alternative is an increasingly weaker evangelicalism that refuses to denounce anything.

 

[John of Japan]

John, thank you for your comments. My comments are based upon my experience with IFB churches in the south. I do hope you are correct that it is larger and less defined than what I have experienced.

The fundamentalism that came out of the Northern Baptists (GARB) and then the Conservative Baptists (FBF) because of their compromise in the area of missions is quite different from what you know. Also, the BJU crowd of fundamentalists is quite different.

The IFB churches with which I am familiar are very involved in missionary work and for that I am thankful. However (again in my own experiences), there is also the focus on so many additional items – the look, the talk, the songs, even the type of Bible one uses. You can even add in the "right" politics. To me, that is sad and takes the focus away from the Gospel.

I do know that, sadly, there is a crowd of radical IFB fundamentalists that give our movement a bad name. I don't know much about that since I've been in Japan since 1981. But to me the alternative is an evangelicalism or so-called "mainline Protestantism" that takes a stand against very little in the way of false doctrine. So the Evangelical Theological Society pats the open theism crowd on the back and says, "Hey, we hope we didn't offend you by disagreeing with you on the nature of God," and everyone goes home happy. That's why I'm still a fundamentalist. I believe in taking a stand against false doctrine.

Lastly, I am aware of the controversy - though definitely not a scholar. Perhaps that would be a good topic for a new post.

The Down Grade Movement was a group, actually the majority, in the Baptist Union of Britain that among other things approved of the anti-biblical higher criticism and universalism. Spurgeon started writing against it in the Sword and Trowel of March, 1887, and continued until he died five years later. He withdrew from the Baptist Union in the process, terribly disappointed at the minimal support he received from other Baptists in the fight. This mirrors what the fundamentalists did in the major denominations in the 1920's and 1930's. My grandfather was blackballed by the Texas Baptist Convention in the 1930s for opposing evolution being taught at his alma mater, Baylor U.

John R. Rice's definition of fundamentalism: "So as we define fundamentalism it means a vigorous defense of the faith, active soul winning, great New Testament-type local churches going abroad to win multitudes, having fervent love for all of God's people and earnestly avoiding compromise in doctrine or yoking up with unbelievers" (I Am a Fundamentalist, by John R. Rice, p. 10).

 

[Ed Edwards]

John R. Rice's definition of fundamentalism:
"So as we define fundamentalism it means
1. a vigorous defense of the faith,
2. active soul winning,
3. great New Testament-type local churches going abroad to win multitudes,
4. having fervent love for all of God's people
5. and earnestly avoiding compromise in doctrine or yoking up with unbelievers"
(I Am a Fundamentalist, by John R. Rice, p. 10).

Thank you John of Japan for sharing this wonderful
quote from Brother John R. Rice -- he is so RIGHT ON! :thumbs:

 

[John of Japan]

Thank you John of Japan for sharing this wonderful
quote from Brother John R. Rice -- he is so RIGHT ON! :thumbs:

Brother Ed, I think you'll agree that sometimes the missing element in modern fundamentalism is that one, "having fervent love for all of God's people."

He used to sometimes preach and often quote Psalm 119:63--"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." If we fundamentalists would heed that verse, our stand for righteousness would be properly tempered with compassion and humility.

 

[trustitl]

Fundamentalism

My problem with fundamentalism is my concen with any other "movement": it becomes what defines people or groups. I agree with all the fundamentals but that does not make me a "fundamentalist". It just means that I believe what the Bible teaches. I would not want to be known as anything other that Christ's. When you take on any other name, it becomes part of what you are known for. It has been acknowledged that the name of this "movement" has bad connotations. I would say be a "fundamentalist" is you want, just don't call yourself one or be known as one. If peole call me one it is either because I am acting in a way that they associate with fundamentalists or they have a bad attitude toward the truth.

I would say the same thing about Baptist, Reformed, Methodist, etc. I am constantly having people ask questions that want to put me in a box. I refuse to let it happen. It alienates me from many people, but I would only have fellowship with them to the degree that the things in "my box" align with theirs. It is sad, but it is the way it is. I just don't want to contribute to it.

JOJ
I do know that, sadly, there is a crowd of radical IFB fundamentalists that give our movement a bad name. I don't know much about that since I've been in Japan since 1981. But to me the alternative is an evangelicalism or so-called "mainline Protestantism" that takes a stand against very little in the way of false doctrine.

"Our' movement is interpreted to be divisive even if it is not meant to.

JOJ
That's why I'm still a fundamentalist. I believe in taking a stand against false doctrine.

Hopefully you and I take a stand because of the Spirit within.

JOJ
I'm content with that, since the alternative is an increasingly weaker evangelicalism that refuses to denounce anything.

Another alternative is to be known by our love.
I John 3:18 My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. 19 And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.

Palatka
Your posts have calmed down the spirit of wrath that was building in my heart toward the attacks of the foundational faith where with I came to know Christ as my Savior,

You didn't come to know Christ in the fundamentalist movement. You came to know Him in by His grace. Let your loyalties be to Him only.

God bless you both (and anybody else reading this). These words are not meant to be a rebuke, rather they are an admonition to "consider yourself" (Gal. 6:1) and see where your loyalties lay. May we all be "found in Him".

 

[John of Japan]

My problem with fundamentalism is my concen with any other "movement": it becomes what defines people or groups. I agree with all the fundamentals but that does not make me a "fundamentalist". It just means that I believe what the Bible teaches. I would not want to be known as anything other that Christ's. When you take on any other name, it becomes part of what you are known for. It has been acknowledged that the name of this "movement" has bad connotations. I would say be a "fundamentalist" is you want, just don't call yourself one or be known as one. If peole call me one it is either because I am acting in a way that they associate with fundamentalists or they have a bad attitude toward the truth.

I can't agree. If the Bible told me what you are telling me I would agree, but it never says we should totally avoid labels. Are you afraid of being called an American? That's a label less meaningful to me than "fundamentalist," though I thank God I'm an American. Do you identify yourself with whereever you work, as in "I work at GE"? That's a label. Our lives are full of labels. I say make sure they are the right ones.

Hopefully you and I take a stand because of the Spirit within.

I take a stand because the Word of God as interpreted in my heart by the Spirit of God tells me to.

Another alternative is to be known by our love.
I John 3:18 My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. 19 And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.

It is not a matter of alternatives. Both standing and loving are necessary. It is necessary to take a stand against evil doctrine because "God is holy." It is necessary to love because "God is love." If we emphasize God's holiness over His love we become harsh. If we emphasize God's love over His holiness we become too tolerant of evil.

 

[Palatka51]

Palatka
Your posts have calmed down the spirit of wrath that was building in my heart toward the attacks of the foundational faith where with I came to know Christ as my Savior,

You didn't come to know Christ in the fundamentalist movement. You came to know Him in by His grace. Let your loyalties be to Him only.

God bless you both (and anybody else reading this). These words are not meant to be a rebuke, rather they are an admonition to "consider yourself" (Gal. 6:1) and see where your loyalties lay. May we all be "found in Him".

You are right that I did not come to know Christ in the fundamentalist movement and this is not what I said.

foundational faith where with I came to know Christ as my Savior]

I in fact laid out the fundamental steps that form the foundation of Grace that called me to Christ.

Let your loyalties be to Him only.

And to whom have I attributed other loyalties to?

These words are not meant to be a rebuke, rather they are an admonition to "consider yourself" (Gal. 6:1) and see where your loyalties lay.

Galatians 6:1-10
1Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

To what do I need restoration? Surly you do not infer that I should be restored to the life I had before Christ called me to repent.

3For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.

Do you think that I have promoted myself in the testimony I have given?
God forbid it. Again I have given account of the response to the Holy Spirit for the salvation of my soul. How can you admonish me of this?

4But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.
5For every man shall bear his own burden.

I have posted these scriptures for I have considered myself and have found that my loyalty is well placed and I am at peace with God in regards to my salvation. I pray that I might be at peace with you as your admonition is misplaced.

6Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.

If we could teach each other then we could be at peace. I sought to teach what foundation my salvation was of. Now instead of rebuke/admonition please find a way to teach me what is Biblically wrong with my confession of faith.

7Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
8For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
9And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.

We must be careful of our tongs as we seek to learn for we are sowing the seed of discord here. This ought not to be among the brethren.

10As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.

Paul, was a very wise man who gave himself to the wisdom of the Holy Spirit and we would do well to follow his "fundamentally sound" counsel. :thumbs:

Galatians 6:1-10
1Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.
2Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
3For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.
4But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.
5For every man shall bear his own burden.
6Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.
7Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
8For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
9And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.
10As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.

 

[Jillian]

Most fundamentalist groups have their own wardrobe, lingo, and music. I know this is a generalization and that is my very point.

I agree. What started as a statement of faith - holding to the fundamentals of the faith as stated in the OP - has turned into a Christian sub-culture. There is a certain dress code, certain Bibles are deemed appropriate (KJV preferred if not only) and only certain songs are used in worship (conservative hymns only). There are certain lifestyle issues too.

So instead of focusing on the Gospel (or even finely-tuned doctrinal issues), we get to focus on important things like "Is it OK for women to wear jeans?" or "How long is long hair for men?" or "Is it OK to go to the movies?"

As stated before, I think that's why a lot of churches moved away from "fundamental" to "evangelical" though that term is so broad it can now mean almost anything.

Some Christians can err falling into legalisms such as when rules come before a person being led by God. There is a point that Christians have to be careful of here.

However....

I can understrand fundamentalism being seen as a seperate sub-culture. Really if Christians are to be living differently from the rest of the world wouldnt this be a natural outcome? Christians are to be "peculiar people". We will dress differently, act differently and spend our time doing different things. In my old church we did sing conservative hymns, many folks homeschooled, we dressed more conservative--my church wasnt legalistic--women wore modest pants etc, and lived an entirely different lifestyle.

To be frank with you all being away from my old fundie church and in a town where I seem to be the only person that is a fundamentalist Christian here, I feel like a fish out of water, I did witness to the lost where I used to be, and did not bar myself from the rest of the world...but its hard being away from other Bible Christians.

A lot of these churches now the bad ones Ive seen here, they all want to desperately be like the world, but the creepiest thing is they have all seen to have chosen the lowest common denominator of YOUTH CULTURE to be the one to follow, loud rock music, jeans and tight shirts and most are also focusing on appealing to one socioeconomic class of people usually young wealthy suburbanites Ive noticed around here. I have noticed one weird thing some of the megachurches, where are all the OLD PEOPLE?

John of Japan, I like your posts

 

[trustitl]

Palatka51,

Sorry for misunderstanding the foundation of your faith. I didn't mean to imply that you were saved because you became a fundamentalist but I can see how you took it that way.

I didn't say you need restoration and the verse I quoted didn't either. What it says, and what I was trying to say was just make sure that you are not being a fundamentalist, rather that you just have faith in the stated fundamentals. John of Japan disagrees with me but I don't think it is wise nor bears good fruit to be called by this label. I am not saying anything about what they stand for on paper, rather what they have become known to represent. You need to judge for yourself if God is pleased with it. I have a lot of friends who go by the name and don't hold it against them.

Paul is saying here that we we need to consider oursevles before we try to restore someone found in a fault. It is like Jesus' words about judging. Most people say we are not to judge. But Jesus says we only can do it before the plank is out of our eye so we can see clearly and judge rightly. You are to judge yourself, that is all I was saying. I don't know the intents of your heart in relation to the issue being discussed here.

You were not promoting yourself in anyway as far as I could see. Hope I didn't say you were.

I speak out of concern for the way Christians are perceived. Sad to say I have seen "Fundies" bring shame to the name of Christ because of a "zeal not according to knowledge". I will admit I was one of them. I stand up for truth even more than I used to, but now it is tempered by love (I hope).

Thanks for responding and giving me a chance to clear things up. The admonition still stands to "consider yourself". I think it is an ongoing one.

God bless.

 

[Palatka51]

Thanks and I agree that if we don't have an introspective of ourselves then we will never be able to live as brothers in Christ.

 

[trustitl]

Brother Ed, I think you'll agree that sometimes the missing element in modern fundamentalism is that one, "having fervent love for all of God's people."

He used to sometimes preach and often quote Psalm 119:63--"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." If we fundamentalists would heed that verse, our stand for righteousness would be properly tempered with compassion and humility.

I know I am not going to get a "fundamentalist" to change his mind :thumbs: , but I just want to encourage you to not underestimate the power in the accusation that YOU made against those who go by the above name. Being a fundamentalist of fundamentalist, of the tribe of John Rice, concerning zeal ... ,you may not be able to see how this label is perceived.

I have a heart for those outside of the "churchy" world and know how sensitive they are to the things attached to "fundies". These types of standards are keeping people away from finding fellowship. I am not saying these things are true about you for I don't even know you. I am just saying "consider yourself".

I know we can't avoid being labled, but we can avoid labeling ourselves.

 

[Palatka51]

I didn't say you need restoration and the verse I quoted didn't either. What it says, and what I was trying to say was just make sure that you are not being a fundamentalist, rather that you just have faith in the stated fundamentals.

I do have faith in what I have stated. Those statements are of my heart. I can not speak them for anyone else and no one can speak them for me. If it is a fundamentalists statement then I am a fundamentalist, if that is what others want to label me. After all, it is by what words we spout and what lives we live that people will ascribe labels for.
Acts 11:26
26And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

These were not labels that the Apostles wore on their lapels, these are labels the unbeliever gave to them.
Look, I live in Red Neck Country and folks from other parts will associate me with that group because I live and work amongst Red Necks. I might even have many characteristics of that group but there are many aspects to that label that I do not identify with. However I am proud to be in Red Neck Country and will not deny that fact.

Acts 26:28
28Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.
I am not almost a Christian no more than I am almost a Fundamentalist. I am what I am and unabashedly so. If being a Christian is what I have stated in my previous post then I am a Christian. If these are the fundamental requirements to faith in Christ then I'll wear that mantle.

I speak out of concern for the way Christians are perceived. Sad to say I have seen "Fundies" bring shame to the name of Christ because of a "zeal not according to knowledge". I will admit I was one of them. I stand up for truth even more than I used to, but now it is tempered by love (I hope).

Romans 10
1Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.
2For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.
3For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

Trustitl,
I do not understand why you would choose verse 2 as a rebuke to Fundamentalists? It is clear that Paul was referring to Israel and that his kinsmen had rejected Christ and that their righteousness was of their own and ignorant of God's. It has nothing to do with a Christian believer whether they wear the label of Fundamentalist or Evangelical.

 

[trustitl]

Palatka51 wrote:
Trustitl,
I do not understand why you would choose verse 2 as a rebuke to Fundamentalists? It is clear that Paul was referring to Israel and that his kinsmen had rejected Christ and that their righteousness was of their own and ignorant of God's. It has nothing to do with a Christian believer whether they wear the label of Fundamentalist or Evangelical.


These were my words:
I speak out of concern for the way Christians are perceived. Sad to say I have seen "Fundies" bring shame to the name of Christ because of a "zeal not according to knowledge". I will admit I was one of them. I stand up for truth even more than I used to, but now it is tempered by love (I hope).

Even though Paul was clearly speaking about the Jews these words apply to anybody. I am not saying that anybody wearing the label of fundamentalist is guilty of establishing their own righteousness. Listen closely: I am saying that some of them do it. That they do it has nothing to do with the fundamentals. However, this movement, like it or not, has become associated with certain behaviors and attitudes. John of Japan even acknowledged it in an earlier post.

In Philippians Paul is addressing the Jews that were preaching circumcision. To say that only Jews can be called "enemies of the cross of Christ" (Phil 3:18) because Paul was talking about Jews when he wrote it is ludicrous. I have seen multitudes of Gentiles have a zeal not according to knowledge that have become enemies of the croos of Christ. Some are even trying to be Jews: my sister is one of them. Others adding to the gospel are ultra-conservative "non-conformists" that are adding to the Gospel all the time. They will tell you how to dress, what music to listen to, how to teach your children...

In Romans 11 Paul tells the Gentile believers in Rome to not think that they cannot be cut off like the Jews were. They needed to stand by faith. In the context of Romans 10-11 it is clear thay they were to rest in grace and not go back into works. In other words, don't go and set up your own righteousness.

I have not told anybody to not be a "fundamentalist". Most people would probably say I am one, but I am not going to call myself one and am encouraging people to consider the cost in doing it themselves. You and John of Japan might not understand it, but I felt compelled to speak my mind. No offense was intended.

 

[Palatka51]

I have not told anybody to not be a "fundamentalist". Most people would probably say I am one, but I am not going to call myself one and am encouraging people to consider the cost in doing it themselves. You and John of Japan might not understand it, but I felt compelled to speak my mind. No offense was intended.

And with your reasoned words none is taken and likewise I hope that none has been given in part by me. I think that we see very much eye to eye. Like as you have said I do not boast of any particular label, however it may not be easy to shake labels that others might desire to pin on us. Even so it is not for us to run from labels but to defend what we believe or those that will pervert the Gospel be they Evangelicals or Fundamentalist. This is why I responded with the personal fundamental steps of my faith in Christ. It is fundamental to me and unshakable as it is a grounded Biblical statement.

 

[FriendofSpurgeon]

I can't agree. If the Bible told me what you are telling me I would agree, but it never says we should totally avoid labels. Are you afraid of being called an American? That's a label less meaningful to me than "fundamentalist," though I thank God I'm an American. Do you identify yourself with whereever you work, as in "I work at GE"? That's a label. Our lives are full of labels. I say make sure they are the right ones.

John, I agree. Here in the states, you see a lot removing of labels and I think that can be a problem. Many churches are removing their denomination from their church name in order to be more seeker friendly.

Personally, I prefer when people are just upfront about who they are and what they believe. There are some true doctrinal differences between various denominations - so they should just be honest about it.

Back to the OP, both my personal (and denominational) beliefs hold to the fundamentals of the faith, but am hardly considered fundamentalist. And I like the term "evangelical" less and less these days. I'm not sure what the answer is.

 

[FriendofSpurgeon]

It took Millions of
uy working together some 40 years
(AD1952-1992) to sway that Denomination (Southern
Baptist Convention /SBC/) toward the Fundamental.

I think it was a miracle that that happened.

 

[John of Japan]

I can understrand fundamentalism being seen as a seperate sub-culture. Really if Christians are to be living differently from the rest of the world wouldnt this be a natural outcome? Christians are to be "peculiar people". We will dress differently, act differently and spend our time doing different things. In my old church we did sing conservative hymns, many folks homeschooled, we dressed more conservative--my church wasnt legalistic--women wore modest pants etc, and lived an entirely different lifestyle.

To be frank with you all being away from my old fundie church and in a town where I seem to be the only person that is a fundamentalist Christian here, I feel like a fish out of water, I did witness to the lost where I used to be, and did not bar myself from the rest of the world...but its hard being away from other Bible Christians.

A lot of these churches now the bad ones Ive seen here, they all want to desperately be like the world, but the creepiest thing is they have all seen to have chosen the lowest common denominator of YOUTH CULTURE to be the one to follow, loud rock music, jeans and tight shirts and most are also focusing on appealing to one socioeconomic class of people usually young wealthy suburbanites Ive noticed around here. I have noticed one weird thing some of the megachurches, where are all the OLD PEOPLE?

John of Japan, I like your posts

Thank you kindly. And keep on keeping on for the Lord Jesus in that town. Be faithful. :thumbs: