So why are the old Fundamentalist mad at the young ones?

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by mcdirector:
Diggin,

You state your opinion as if it were fact. I'm SBC and bet that the liberal camp would argue with your statement. I see liberalism creeping in, but I don't think it's the majority.

I wrote at the BSSB for years with a gal who's husband was on staff at one of those "liberal" churches. We were both in Atlana at the time. One day I couldn't stand it anymore that she was a liberal! I called her and we got together for me to grill her on her beliefs. When we sat down and compared spiritual notes, I was surprised to find out that she and I shared the same fundamental beliefs. I haven't been so quick to label a church (or believe the label I heard) since then.

Bitsy

It is good to see that grace, love and dialogue can overcome stereotype and misinformation within the body of Christ. That is how the world will know that we are from God and the Jesus himself is from God.

NASB - John 13:34-35

A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.

NASB - John 17:20-21

I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.

 

[Diggin in da Word]

Having love for one another does not mean bring the worldly values into the church... i.e. Rock and Roll music, sensual dance, television, etc. the list goes on and on.

If you love your brother, you are going to want to bring him out of the worldly things, not entice him to go to church using worldly pleasures.

What you use to bring people into the church is what is going to keep them. If you offer worldly things, they will drop out if those worldly things are removed. We are to preach the Word of God and let the Spirit do the drawing, not draw them with promises of games and dinners and their worldly pleasures.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by Diggin in da Word:
Having love for one another does not mean bring the worldly values into the church... i.e. Rock and Roll music, sensual dance, television, etc. the list goes on and on.

Agreed. No one has stated otherwise.

 

[MikeinGhana]

A casual perusal of "church" history will bear out the fact that every movement, ie, orhodoxy, neo-orthodoxy, evangelicalism, neo-evangelicalism, fundamentalism, (dare I say neo-fundamentalism?) has progressed through a series of changes within its ranks. I have a theory, many will not like it. Many will criticize me for saying it. God has promised perpetuity to the church, not a movement, not a school, and certainly not any group and its man made preferences masquerading as convictions.

I thought the Baptists held tightly and lovingly to all the Baptist Distinctives! There is one we miserably fail to hold to, Soul Liberty.

I am a fundamental Baptist by conviction. I am not sure where I fit in to this post, ie., old or new. I know this, change is inevitable. We are nothing like the church at Ephesus or the church at Philadelphia, or any of those early churches in our manner of worship or the way we conduct our services. Times have changed.

I am in no way suggesting that our doctrine changes, God forbid. I eagerly and frequently particpated in a post that I started about the Seeker Sensitive movement some time back. I am not a proponent of CCM (as it applies to Rock and Roll, etc.) But not all CCM is of the devil. Our hymns were CCM at one point in history.

I guess what I am saying is that some change is inevitable. We are just going to have to deal with it.

 

[rbell]

Originally posted by Diggin in da Word:
The majority of SBC have taken a liberal stand.
The majority of Presbyterian have taken a liberal stand.
The majority of AoG have taken a liberal stand.
Pentecostals are losing many of their values.

Churches all over have backed down from their convictions over the last 35 - 40 years.

And, as PastorMark pointed out, it is slipping in the IFB churches as well.

Bless your heart, DITW, how do you get around to all those churches? I barely have time to go to my own...

 

[All about Grace]

Originally posted by Diggin in da Word:
The majority of SBC have taken a liberal stand.
The majority of Presbyterian have taken a liberal stand.
The majority of AoG have taken a liberal stand.
Pentecostals are losing many of their values.

Churches all over have backed down from their convictions over the last 35 - 40 years.

And, as PastorMark pointed out, it is slipping in the IFB churches as well.

Thankfully fundamentalism still has people like you to single out the rest of us liberals!

You need to dig a little deeper in the Word and see if you can find passages that affirm the nonsense you are spewing.

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by Diggin in da Word:
The majority of SBC have taken a liberal stand.
The majority of Presbyterian have taken a liberal stand.
The majority of AoG have taken a liberal stand.
Pentecostals are losing many of their values.

Churches all over have backed down from their convictions over the last 35 - 40 years.

And, as PastorMark pointed out, it is slipping in the IFB churches as well.

All those folks have to do is to do a cursory reading of their Bible. I think it was Spurgeon who spoke of a man who read a Bible out loud and it took him 79 hours. That is less than 15 min. each day! Any pastor knows that most Christians spend very little time reading their Bible and even less studying it.

 

[Mexdeaf]

Originally posted by C4K:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Plain Old Bill:
An example from my perspective would be:
No onlyism on BV's
No extra-Biblical legalism
I stand against these things.

I am OSAS,pre-mil,pre-trib,Bible cover to cover,KJB preferred.I prefer the old hymns and like selected newer songs some southern and some bluegrass gospel mainly.I am not into the chanting type of some of the contemporary music.

I am 60 years old. I hope that gives you a frame of reference.

You sound a lot like me - ten years from now

. </font>[/QUOTE]Me, too!

 

[Alcott]

Originally posted by standingfirminChrist:
Jeremiah 6:16 Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.
The old ways are the best ways.

If you want to try to be justified under the Old Testament, go ahead. But as for me...

2 Corinthians 5:17 -- Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

 

[John of Japan]

I just found this thread. Don't have time to read the whole thing. However, true words from MikeinGhana.

 

[Charles Meadows]

Churches all over have backed down from their convictions over the last 35 - 40 years.

From what convictions?


Convictions about men with hair over the collar?
Convictions about pants on women?
Convictions about drums in music?

Hopefully so!!

But not about Jesus being the divine Son of God, who died for sins and who alone can save.

You know, THOSE convictions, the ones that actually matter!!

 

[tinytim]

Amen, Charles.

Some people have opinions and call them convictions.

Now convictions are great as long as they are biblically based, but having a conviction for the sake of having one is horrible.

And wanting to do church the way it was done 50 yrs ago is not a conviction, but an opinion.

I thank God for allowing and gifting His people to update music, and to be able to reach out to this generation.

 

[exscentric]

"And wanting to do church the way it was done 50 yrs ago is not a conviction, but an opinion."

As is your opinion of their opinions, but remember to allow them their opinion while you express yours

 

[Diggin in da Word]

One need not go to all the churches, rbell. You see the members in the bars during the weekdays, you see newspapers, magazines, television, etc...

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Don't forget, Diggin, you see the websites like Saddleback's offering whatever you like to draw you in....

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Originally posted by MikeinGhana:


I thought the Baptists held tightly and lovingly to all the Baptist Distinctives! There is one we miserably fail to hold to, Soul Liberty.

Boy ain't that the truth?

That is one key principle that MANY fundamentalists refuse to accept. It is very much "my way or the highway" for so many.

 

[Bible-boy]

Originally posted by Diggin in da Word:
The majority of SBC have taken a liberal stand.

There's that broad brush again...

In fact I would argue that the above quote is a false statement. Granted many SBC churches fell prey to liberalism, but not all SBC churches did so. However, since the conservative resurgence (started in 1979) we have turned the huge SBC ship around. Those SBC churches that still hold to liberalism have now almost compeletly lined up with the CBF (and many no longer are SBC at all).

I can't speak regarding the other denom's you mention. However, I don't think anyone would be able to seriously claim that D. James Kenneday (PCA) is liberal in his theology.

 

[MikeinGhana]

Let's keep one thing in mind, while we Baptists can debate and discuss this topic among ourselves and be OK with it, it is when the argument spues over into the puiblic scene that it destroys our walk and testimony. Unfortunately we fundamentalists have a tendency to let this type of debate become public fodder in the secular world and it makes us look weak and unattractive. The charismatic movement is growing by leaps and bounds by drafting former fundamentalists who became disillusioned with the public bickering and destructive nature of our "movemnet."

Can we not debate/discuss without becomeing personal about it. Again I say, lets hold to the soul liberty doctrine and allow for differences.

I asked this question in another post but it may be appropriate here as well. What did Jesus mean when he told his disciples he had sheep that they did not know of? I realize he was probably talking about future believers but what if he was talking about another group of disciples current with the twelve? Boy wouldn't that perfectly describe fundamental Baptists today?

 

[mcdirector]

Mike, this is so very true -- and I want to always speak my mind and my understanding of the scripture without harming my testimony. I do think it is possible. I think it is possible without getting personal. I think it is possible for each of us to have that liberty without the legalism.

I stand by the fact that I have to be in the world and not of the world. I need to have, at the very least, acquaintances if not friends that are lost in order to witness to the lost.

I'm not talking about attending a church that has no accountability or doesn't preach the Word. I'm not talking about compromising biblical principals and commandments. I am talking about reaping and sowing. I'm talking about cultivating. I'm talking about sharing my heart and life with people who need Jesus. AND that won't happen if I never walk out the church doors -- churches that so many have legalistically (just as the pharasees) placed stringent rules and regulations around to keep us so separate that we reach no one for God.

 

[PastorMark]

I've noticed a couple of things that people say that I think are being misinterpreted.

First, legalism has nothing to do with placing Biblical rules for people to live by. Legalism is saying that something other than faith (and its associated components like repentance, etc.) is needed for salvation. An example would be Acts 15:1 "And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved."

Second, I don't find where Jesus reprimands the Pharisees for having rules. Jesus reprimanded them for being hypocrites. That means they had rules and NOT FOLLOWING them. Jesus said, "If ye love me, keep my commandments." This statement isn't legalistic, nor is it pharisaical.

It appears to me that having rules is fine as long as they don't become requirements for salvation, and as long as we don't become hypocrites by not following them. And that's really at the heart of this post. Are the young, so called, fundamentalists really LIVING what the Bible teaches?


Pastor Mark.