Don Johnson responds to Dr. Bauder's articles
At an oxgoad, eh? Don Johnson posted his critique of Dr. Bauder’s series so far.
Excerpt:
The summary follows:
Fundamentalists are not representatives of historic Christian doctrine.
Fundamentalists crave identity and significance.
Fundamentalists are badly misguided in thinking Kirsopp Lake’s famous quotation compliments them (including such men as Fred Moritz, Mark Sidwell, David Beale, the FBF as represented by Wayne Bley et al).
Fundamentalist theology is only a partial preservation of historic Christian doctrine (according to Lake and Bauder).
Fundamentalists are ignoramuses – they haven’t even read the ancient creeds, much less studied them.
Fundamentalists are naive in this respect: they assume their ideas (i.e., doctrine) are derived directly from Scripture [the horror!: without mediation [i.e., the intervention of tradition: .
Fundamentalists have little sense of history.
Fundamentalists have no sense of indebtedness to Christians of the past.
Fundamentalists do not value the richness of traditional Christian faith and practice.
Most fundamentalists have little or no awareness of history.
Fundamentalists are theologically shallow.
Fundamentalists have truncated the whole counsel of God.
Fundamentalists love the Bible as an object but detest studying the Bible in depth.
Fundamentalist thought compared to historic Christianity is like comparing a hamburger to a steak. [Hint: fundamentalist thought is the hamburger.:
Do you think his assessment is fair and accurate?
- 28 views
[Susan R] Do you think his assessment is fair and accurate?Let’s just say it’s partially fair and accurate… (-;
The truth hurts….and these observations made by Kevin come too close to home for some guys listening to this.
I might say other things, but I would start with this.
Straight Ahead!
Joel
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;
[Susan R] Do you think his assessment is fair and accurate?I am not sure whether you are asking about the original article or Don’s article, so I will answer both. :)
Kevin’s description is characteristic of much of fundamentalism that I have seen (though I will readily admit that he, like many others, have seen much more of it than I), so as to his article I would lean toward answering “yes.” Of course, that which characterizes the whole (of fundamentalism) does not necessarily characterize each individual part.
Don’s summary does not, to my reading, accurately summarize Kevin’s article, and thus I find it unhelpful and would, on the whole, answer “no.”
As the quantity of communication increases, so does its quality decline; and the most important sign of this is that it is no longer acceptable to say so.--RScruton
Pastor Mike Harding
Discussion