A Report Card on Baptist Fundamentalism in 2018
Image
In this short article, I’ll briefly present an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of Baptist fundamentalism in 2018. This assessment is entirely my own, and it reflects my own particular experiences and education. Of course, my observations are limited by my own context — just as yours are.
The Spectrum of Fundamentalism
Any movement has different flavors, and Baptist fundamentalism is no different. Over the years, several prominent Baptist fundamentalists have offered their own taxonomies of the movement. Here is my own simplified chart which broadly outlines the lay of the land as I see it today:
My remarks are meant to be broad, and certainly don’t represent every person who is a part of a particular spectrum. For example, the GARBC that exists in the Mid-West is not the same association you’ll find in the Pacific Northwest. They may share the same name and be part of the same spectrum of the fundamentalist movement, but make no mistake – they are different animals. There is also a good deal of cross-pollination, and it’d be a mistake to assume a strict delineation between the camps. But, those caveats aside, I believe the chart broadly captures the different aspects of fundamentalism. In short, fundamentalists cannot be pigeon-holed – there is a spectrum.
My own analysis is this:
- The Movement Fundamentalists are dying. The major para-church organizations are in serious decline. Some older leadership is reluctant to hand the reigns to the younger generation. A significant minority of the membership is reactive and defensive. Its educational institutions generally straddle the fence on the common flash-points in an attempt to appeal across intra-party lines. However, I believe the movement’s base is drying up and, in the future, I suspect these institutions will have to find a way to tip-toe more towards the Calvinistic or Fundigelical camp without alienating constituents. I don’t envy them. Their educational institutions are first-rate; especially MBU!
- The KJVO group seems to be holding steady. Its “Village-like” atmosphere and isolationist sub-culture help ensure it isn’t hemorrhaging members like the Movement Fundamentalists are. It’s generally characterized by a militant KJVO-stance (in various flavors), a passionate anti-Calvinism, a Keswick-ish sanctification, different flavors of Landmarkism, shallow doctrine, and some trend toward conspiracy theories.
- The Fundigelicals and the Calvinistic groups are gaining members, and a good deal of this is transfer growth from the other two camps. These transfer constituents are often either fleeing from some perceived (or actual) legalism into the arms of the Fundigelicals, or running from doctrinal vacuousness into the loving embrace of the Calvinistic Fundamentalists.
High Marks of Baptist Fundamentalism
Baptist fundamentalism has some outstanding qualities that set it apart from all other Christian movements in North America. These marks, in isolation, can be found among many other groups. But, it is well-nigh impossible to find them combined in one theological movement the way Baptist fundamentalism has. These marks are as follows:
- Systematic Doctrine. Fundamentalism generally does an excellent job teaching systematic doctrine. Evangelical institutions are notorious for de-emphasizing doctrine (intentionally or otherwise) in favor of a “Gospel center.” The best fundamentalist institutions strive for a balanced education, where the student explores doctrine and is encouraged to ask questions and be challenged out of his comfort zone. Fundamentalist institutions provide a world-class education, and those who have graduate training from quality institutions (e.g. Faith, BBS, MBS, Central, Detroit, etc.) are generally much better prepared than their evangelical counterparts. KJVO fundamentalism is (often) one exception to this otherwise worthy record.
- Separation. Fundamentalism puts proper focus on ecclesiastical and personal separation. This is a doctrine all but ignored by evangelicals. God’s people should want to avoid ungodly activities, and should encourage others to do the same. In addition, we ought to do the same in a corporate context, in our churches. Fundamentalists push holy living, and Christians across this land are the better for it.
- Ecclesiology. Polity is an oft-neglected doctrine today. In a world of confusion, skinny jeans, strobe lights, fog machines and sappy FaceBook Live videos, Baptist polity comes to the rescue. Fundamentalist institutions put right and proper emphasis on polity, and how we ought to “do church.” Fundamentalists want to do God’s work, God’s way.
- Commitment to the Bible. Fundamentalists are people of the Book. No matter where you go in this movement (with the exception of Cultic Fundamentalists), you will likely hear the Bible opened and proclaimed with accuracy and passion.
- Strong men. Fundamentalists aren’t wilting flowers. They generally produce strong men, who know what they believe and why they believe it. Fundamentalists are anxious to defend the faith, and aren’t shy about standing for the truth of the Gospel. This is increasingly uncommon in an age where popular culture encourages laziness and idleness, shames young men who want to act like men, and promotes a weak and effeminate model of manhood, character and leadership.
Low Marks of Baptist Fundamentalism
The movement has some significant handicaps, none of which are new.
- Echo Chamber. Historically, fundamentalists have trended towards a more imperialstyle of leadership, which always tends to shut out constructive criticism and encourage sycophants. To an unusual degree, some fundamentalist institutions and para-church organizations are hampered by an echo chamber atmosphere, and leadership may have lost touch with the real world that Christians operate in every day. Thus, their strategic decisions may make little sense to outsiders (or, perhaps, to anybody else); especially to fundamentalists outside their particular camp.
- Critical Spirit. Fundamentalists have always struggled with how to balance love with a passion for the truth. Some fundamentalists, particularly those in the Movement and KJVO camps, continue to struggle to an unusual degree with this problem. In this respect, the echo chamber context can coalesce with a critical spirit and produce disaster. In some cases, the leadership will not understand why “outsiders” (both within and without fundamentalism) are outraged by some of their more inappropriate criticisms.
- Indoctrination, not Education. This observation may seem arbitrary; didn’t I just praise fundamentalism for the superior education it produces!? My response is this; it depends on your church and where you went to school. Some churches don’t encourage systematic doctrine or deep Bible study. Members may understand they “shouldn’t ask questions.” Hobby horses may be regularly trumpeted. Questionable theological positions may be uncritically accepted as “Gospel truth,” even if they’re simplistic or wrong. To the extent an educational institution employs these tactics (which are often found in KJVO fundamentalism), it is not worthy of the name.
- Imbalanced. Fundamentalism can be a very imbalanced movement. Some flavors of the movement spend an inordinate amount of time discussing music, dress, alcohol, Bible versions, Calvinism, evangelicals, and dispensational eschatology.
- A lost sense of mission. There is a very real danger that fundamentalism has lost its original sense of mission. The movement began (in a formal sense) as a protest action against theological liberalism and revisionism in the late 19th century. There is plenty of this around in 2018, so fundamentalists have a “targetrich environment,” so to speak. However, today many fundamentalists focus their energies and efforts combatting the errors of “neo-evangelicals (an anachronistic term) from 70 years ago. In many quarters, the enemy is not theological liberalism and revisionism; it’s conservative evangelicals. To the extent fundamentalist churches, institutions and para-church organizations make this mistake, they have lost their sense of mission and are adrift without purpose or destination.
The Future
The strengths of Baptist fundamentalism far outweigh its weaknesses. Every movement has weaknesses, and many of those I’ve listed aren’t unique to Baptist fundamentalism. In fact, the very characteristic of “strong men” that has done so much good for the movement is also a contributing factor for some of the weaknesses:
- Strong leaders are often very certain about what they believe, and have very settled ideas about where an organization or movement needs to go. Thus, an echo chamber can result, where weaker men often just tell the leaders what they want to hear, or are reluctant to push back on bad decisions.
- Strong men are often impatient with the perceived shortcomings and follies of others, and may have trouble holding back some of these criticisms. Thus, you have the charge of a “critical spirit.”
- Strong leaders have definite ideas about doctrine, often forged through personal trials and intensive theological study. This desire to help younger men avoid error can produce an educational climate, in churches and universities, more akin to indoctrination than education.
For the future, I see the continued collapse of Movement Fundamentalism into either the Fundigelical or Calvinistic camps. Its institutions will slowly ease their way towards one camp or the other as the years go by, and the end draws nigh. The Fundigelicals may eventually be completely absorbed into conservative evangelicalism and not be recognizable as “fundamentalists” any longer. In some quarters, this transformation is complete in the Pacific Northwest. The Calvinistic folks will continue to produce perhaps the best trained and best equipped fundamentalists, who will have a profound influence on the movement in the decades to come. The KJVO group will never go away, and will largely maintain its status quo.
Baptist fundamentalism, in its healthiest forms, offers a Biblical and substantive vision of the Christian life. Its best churches emphasize systematic doctrine, expository preaching, evangelism and progressive growth in Christ. Its best educational institutions, such as MBU, BJU, Detroit, Central, Faith and BBS, train men and women to think deeply, and provide a solid and sure foundation for the Christian life. Its ministers with graduate training are the best trained and equipped Pastors in America.
The movement deserves to continue, but its future may be imbibed in a philosophy of ministry, instead of a formal “movement.” I pray the Lord raises up younger men who have the vision, force of personality, and leadership abilities to take the whole movement (well, almost all the movement) forward to accomplish great things for His Name.
Tyler Robbins 2016 v2
Tyler Robbins is a bi-vocational pastor at Sleater Kinney Road Baptist Church, in Olympia WA. He also works in State government. He blogs as the Eccentric Fundamentalist.
… but, my chart is better than all the others. Heh, heh.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
You can label the one group “KJVO” or “cultic”, but for those who have gotten out of KJVO churches, “KJVO” basically means the same thing. The trick is that, even more than elsewhere in our society, “proving” a KJVO case requires the generous use of abusive genetic fallacies like guilt by association and ad hominem attacks. Put gently, it’s hard to read Ephesians 4:31-32 and Jude 9-11 and reconcile that with any KJVO argument I’ve ever read.
(the trick is that there are no contemporary sources which argue that Origen, or anyone else, deliberately changed the Alexandrian or other texts….so the argument must be that difference equals malice, which can only be sustained with genetic fallacies)
And having grown up in Chesterton, Indiana, I am well acquainted with Fairhaven, and yes, the general consensus outside that church is that it has strong cultish tendencies. Those damaged include some of my relatives, and I am glad to say that they’re now currently safe in SBC churches.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
[TylerR]Do any of ya’ll suggest a different label for “Cultic Fundamentalists?” I’ve received some negative feedback (e.g. it’s not nice, we’re not cultic, etc.). Not sure if I should change the title. It seems to fit. I see little need to pull punches with that group, but I’m open to some correction. I’m particularly thinking of Hyles, Providence Baptist Bible College, Steven Anderson, Sword of the Lord, etc - you get the idea.
I’ve received some pushback from Fairhaven that I’m considering; I lumped them in with that camp. Was I wrong?
I’m open to ideas. I’ll likely edit the chart again tonight or tomorrow.
Having grown up in the Hyles vein of the Cultic Branch, I would say that Fairhaven, unless it has changed dramatically, would definitely belong in that Cultic Branch. While Voeglin separated from Hyles during the morality scandals around Hyles, they were still of the same cloth and ways, more so than Hyles. However, things change and it’s been 30 years since I was in that mess.
……I notice that one of the roads is labeled “King James Way.”
That tells me all I need to know.
I’ve been in 4 or 5 GARBC churches and pastored in 2.
- It was a long time ago
- And one was in NJ … other in Colorado
- I found (find) them very conservative with a strong ecclesiology
It depends. I know some churches out here that are conservative, with no ecclesiology. Best summary of the GARBC I’ve seen: “There is no one GARBC; there are many GARBCs.” And, remember, the “fundigelical” category doesn’t necessarily mean just the GARBC. It means I placed the GARBC generally in that camp.
The point is that camp is closer to conservative evangelicals (e.g. Dever, MacArthur, DeYoung, TGC, T4G, etc.) than to the FBFI. Example, the ACCC (which is largely the same flavor of fundamentalism as the FBFI) released a “special report” and review of TGC 2017. It reads as though they put on a spacesuit and visited a strange, alien planet, and returned to tell the tale. The fundigelicals wouldn’t act like that; they’re very sympathetic to T4G and TGC (with some reservations). That’s the distinction I’m going for.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
Like others I’ve been deeply involved in the segment labeled cultic. From my personal experience the ter, while blunt, is accurate.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
You’re probably right about this: “There is no one GARBC; there are many GARBCs.”
Am I really the only one thinking this?
KJOFs/Cultic Baptists/Landmarkers/etc. are largely Heretical Baptists. Many (most?) of them are Galatians 1:8,9 churches. They add to the gospel. Let them be accursed. Yes, I do personally know of some churches that have some leftover elements of HBism but have successfully put off enough of which made them formerly heretical and continue to grow into right-minded churches. Those churches-formerly-known-as-cults are no longer in that category. They have successfully morphed either into Fundagelical, Movement or Calvinish churches. I would rather send my children to a secular college than Fairhaven, West Coast, PCC, Ambassador, Crown, Hyles, and the rest. These institutions only serve to perpetuate heresy. Some merely do it in a more polished (that is, subtle) manner than others.
The really sad (well, really good, actually) thing is that when churches and church leaders grow out of that mindset you often see church splits. Those who are in love with their cult will find another cult like what they want - because the cult in which they were developed successfully indoctrinated them into the cult. It is very difficult to reprogram the mind of someone successfully cult-ized. I have personally seen two highly successful HB churches (several hundred-sized congregations) come out of their heresy of adding things to the Gospel - and both have lost significant (much more than half) quantities of their membership from people who are convinced of the various heresies proclaimed by their cults. Some leave because they believe the only true American Christians are those who were saved from a KJV. Others leave because only hell-bound people would dare sing a song that isn’t in the Majesty Hymnal or Great Hymns of the Faith. Projected or flat-panel TV presentations, a woman of some significance showing up in anything other than a skirt/dress/culottes, or not seeing a fellow member getting re-saved multiple times because they just didn’t say the prayer right the previous time, or because they begin to see church leadership growing mustaches or, during an illustration, uttering a phrase like “follow the yellow brick road” from the pulpit. Any church that is more interested in a cultic adherence to forms than in spiritual growth is already so totally missing the point that it is not worth a second look. Run away.
Of the three others, each has strengths and weaknesses, but I don’t believe there is any need for any one of them to think they are better than the other (I Cor 3?). All of them will tend to draw different personality types and different demographics, and I think that’s one of the awesome things about how God’s church works.
The beatings may now commence. ;)
Ashamed of Jesus! of that Friend On whom for heaven my hopes depend! It must not be! be this my shame, That I no more revere His name. -Joseph Grigg (1720-1768)
Tyler - great job.
So I tried to do something similar with Type A, B and C more than a decade ago.
I’m not sure how this fits into your grid but a few observations.
1. Frankly good luck trying to peg one guy into one category. So a part of me is warmed toward the fundagelical group…. but another part of me is still connected to the Calvinist Fundamentalist group. I’m in both groups - at the same time. I’m also enjoying great connections with other groups, at the same time.
2. good luck trying to peg one association/group into one category. Honestly - the group I belong too (which you left out by the way) - The IFCA has a sizable Baptist and Bible Church contingent and we are probably a third Type A fundamentalists (that will be a shock to the readership - but it’s true), a third Type B fundamentalists and a third Type C fundamentalists - all in the same group. The good news is we don’t fight about it. We talk to each other. It’s wonderful.
3. What makes this also tough is you will have different men holding different views in the same ministry. You also have different men holding different positions based on who they are talking to. To one person they are “this kind of a guy.” To another person they are “a different kind of a guy.” Makes it hard.
Well…. Straight Ahead bro! I love your courage and if you get discouraged (don’t by the way) text me…..
jt
Dr. Joel Tetreau serves as Senior Pastor, Southeast Valley Bible Church (sevbc.org); Regional Coordinator for IBL West (iblministry.com), Board Member & friend for several different ministries;
I’ve had literally no contact with the IFCA, in any form, so I didn’t feel comfortable putting them anywhere on the chart!
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
Tyler…..
One more thought - it’s interesting you have men who are a combination of “movement fundamentalists” and “Calvinist fundamentalists” who have some increased ministry cooperation with “conservative evangelicals” because they have a close connection with ministry style, worship preference…. and reformed soteriology. Some of these men are Southern Baptists…. John MacArthur types…..etc…..
The days when this group is clearly only this group….. is over. I actually and thrilled……that day is here….
Straight Ahead!
jt
Dr. Joel Tetreau serves as Senior Pastor, Southeast Valley Bible Church (sevbc.org); Regional Coordinator for IBL West (iblministry.com), Board Member & friend for several different ministries;
Tyler -
no problem bro…. It’s better to only comment on what you know. You are safe that way. Well - not really. I suppose you are safer….maybe….a little.
cheering for you my man.
So Tyler - let’s figure a way to get you to an IFCA meeting. Call me!
jt
Dr. Joel Tetreau serves as Senior Pastor, Southeast Valley Bible Church (sevbc.org); Regional Coordinator for IBL West (iblministry.com), Board Member & friend for several different ministries;
[Joel Tetreau]Tyler -
no problem bro…. It’s better to only comment on what you know. You are safe that way. Well - not really. I suppose you are safer….maybe….a little.
cheering for you my man.
So Tyler - let’s figure a way to get you to an IFCA meeting. Call me!
jt
Joel, I was hoping you would chime in. Your system of categorization always impressed me. Things are changing, and some things for the better!
"The Midrash Detective"
It’s getting to the point where a normal chart won’t do. Someone suggest a Venn diagram for a revision, because there’s so much overlap. Not a bad idea …
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
PPS - So one attraction to Fundagelical is the real possibility of taking the best of conservative evangelicalism and merging that with the best of careful fundamentalism.
My guess is, that’s now happened…. or happening.
It’s a good day.
Straight Ahead!
jt
Dr. Joel Tetreau serves as Senior Pastor, Southeast Valley Bible Church (sevbc.org); Regional Coordinator for IBL West (iblministry.com), Board Member & friend for several different ministries;
Joel, you wrote, “So one attraction to Fundagelical is the real possibility of taking the best of conservative evangelicalism and merging that with the best of careful fundamentalism.”
Out of curiosity (and this may require its own article and/or thread), but what’s stopping those who would say “Amen” to your quote from simply laying claim to the tag “conservative evangelical?”
I ask as someone who considers himself a fundamentalist and a CE. I read Tyler’s article, examined his chart, and thought, mostly tongue-in-cheek, “But where’s my category?” :)
I think a good portion of the GARBC, in certain regions, doesn’t even identify as fundamentalist. That’s certainly true for a good portion of the PNW.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
Tyler, looking at your taxonomy, I don’t believe that I fit under “Fundigelical” (GARBC). I humbly submit my own category that may be best described as “Reformed Conservative Baptist,” with the understanding that I am naturally biased as to the awesomeness of my “camp.”
Central Characteristic – Oddly enough, more independently minded in terms of the local church than the IFB movement that I grew up in. A strong Biblical theology that leads to well-defined Systematic Theology.
Leadership and style – Multiple Elders yet solidly congregationalist.
Some Representative Organizations – IX Marks, Founders Movement
Some Representative Theologians/Leaders – Mark Dever, Al Mohler, Thomas Schreiner, Peter Gentry, and Stephen Wellum
Education – Southern Seminary, and whatever RTS that’s closest with the understanding that we argue loudly and fervently in class whenever the error of paedobaptism is taught.
Ecclesiology – Strong emphasis on the local church with historic Baptist polity.
Soteriology – Strongly Calvinistic.
Separation – This one is difficult since we’re the guys that some Fundamentalists separate from. We are big fans of Shai Linne and Timothy Brindle (who are part of our “camp”) but have to resist the urge to make gagging sounds whenever Hillsong is mentioned.
Central Concern – The Church’s (by extension the membership’s) central role in the Great Commission and the building up of the Saints through the ministry of the Word.
Sanctification – Reformed
Preaching – Almost exclusively expositional. By way of example, in the five years I’ve been a member of my current church, every single sermon has been expositional. At least 50% of our Sunday School classes are expositional teachings of the Bible.
I had you pegged as an SBC Founders guy. Am I wrong?
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
Are you wrong? Maybe. I don’t really think of myself as an SBC guy or even a Founders guy. While I appreciate what I’ve read on the Founders’ website and agree (I think) with their theology, I actually don’t know a whole lot about them as an organization. If I had to publicly align myself with a parachurch organization for classification purposes, it would be IX Marks. I think I’ve stated this in another thread, but my church is a revitalization that was sent out by CHBC.
As I stated above, the irony is that I am much more independently minded in my ecclesiology than many of the churches in the IFB movement in which I was raised.
Edit: I definitely don’t identify as an SBC guy. My church just happens to contribute to the cooperative fund. The SBC is the least scary boogeyman ever. They have and exert zero control over my church.
And my church is listed in Founders Ministry’s church search. How it got there, I don’t know. But I definitely don’t have a problem with it being listed.
Understood. I thought you were SBC, and I know you’re Reformed, so I immediately thought you were an SBC Founders guy. Apparently SBC Founders thinks so, too! Ha, ha!
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
… an SBC Founders guy. I texted our Senior Pastor and am waiting to hear back. But that actually brings me to one of the things that I find fascinating about these type of discussions. I continue to assert that my SBC church is more independent than many independent fundamentalist churches.
While I’m sure that guys like Tyler have no problem bringing my classification under the fundamentalist umbrella, I’m curious about other’s response. And don’t worry about offending me, but why do you reject my claim to be a fundamentalist (assuming you do)? Why should my classification above be excluded from Tyler’s chart?
JohnE:
This is a very good point. I actually consider Mohler, Dever, MacArthur, Sproul, Lawson, James White (et al) to be fundamentalists, in the historic sense of the term. I’d consider you one, too. I believe most of the folks who wouldn’t consider you to be a fundamentalist would be from the “movement” camp. I initially had a descriptor for that category which explained their central characteristic was “Baptist fundamentalism as a confessional, pseudo-denomination.” Perhaps I should put it back!
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
John E, Tyler and others.,…..
Sure the tag Conservative evangelical works…. because I’m conservative….. and evangelical. But I’m also a historic fundamentalist but I don’t use that tag often because those are the people who blow up busses and such……
I am almost exhausted and even “irritated” about the tag discussion. Of course I have been as guilty as anyone on the tag thing - for more than a decade friends and others would say - Tetreau what’s my letter? That’s now painful when I hear it.
I Know there can be a benefit of a label. Like I have a group of friends who really care about the particulars of hymnody - they care much more than I do - I call them the “Beethoven Group.” There are actually differences between those guys but in the main they think very similar about music. So it’s cool…..
In a sense - who in the world cares what your label is! God surely doesn’t.
The deal is theologically I am a moderate - Calvinist, historic fundamentalist who is dispensational and yet reformed theologically…. but because I have great koinonia with those that believe almost exactly like me …. and yet belong to other groups I’ve come to the conclusion - if you believe the gospel are committed to an orthodox expression of the gospel …. and discipleship…. and believe in Biblical authority…..and a healthy view of sanctification and worship…. I think you are a fundamentalist - well at least the biblical kind.
So like I’m almost sure….. it doesn’t matter……
New Article - No lines in the sand…… JT
“I can hear the Type A’s already…. see - knew he’d end up there!”
Straight Ahead!
Dr. Joel Tetreau serves as Senior Pastor, Southeast Valley Bible Church (sevbc.org); Regional Coordinator for IBL West (iblministry.com), Board Member & friend for several different ministries;
Discussion