Kent Brandenburg's Assessment of Independent Baptists

From Part One:

”In my mind, there are two general types of independent Baptist churches: the revivalist and Bob Jones. Almost all independent Baptist churches are either revivalist or Bob Jones. I know that there is overlap or blurred edges sometimes between the two groups. Some churches are both revivalist and Bob Jones. Maybe those could make up a whole other third category, but still you can slot into the two general categories as to what primarily characterizes those independent Baptist churches.

The Bob Jones wing of independent Baptists probably wants to be known as historic fundamentalists, instead of the Bob Jones wing. This group has several splinters mainly associated with colleges and seminaries. For instance, you have the actual Bob Jones University graduates and then you have those who graduated from what I call orbiting schools, like Maranatha, Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary, the former Calvary Baptist in Lansdale, International Baptist College, Clearwater Christian College, Virginia Beach Theological Seminary, and Central Baptist Theological Seminary. Parallel to the aforementioned institutions is the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship (FBF), which declares itself to be only a fellowship of pastors and not churches.”

––––––––––––––––––––—

I think it’s ironic that one of the umbrellas/orbits that Brandenburg places many IFB churches under is “Bob Jones,” since BJU is not technically a Baptist institution, and has (at least to my observation or knowledge) never purported or represented itself to be. Fundamentalist: yes. Baptist: no. Do recall that it was founded by a Methodist. It is certainly “Baptistic.” But yet it has always had strong ties to fundamental Presbyterianism (among others) too.

I was intrigued by the first part, but the second seemed to fall to the level of rambling with no substance. Since I don’t know the author, his background, or presuppositions, I don’t really know where he is coming from. “Fundamentalism” has so many stripes anymore, I’m not sure how one can even wrap his mind around it (similar to “conservative evangelicalism”). I can see his basic point of “revivalist” vs BJU, but isn’t that even a little oversimplified? Revivalist/Hyles-Anderson/Sword/PCC I can see as a major category. But on the other side…BJU and “orbiting schools”? That seems like an oversimplification. I have a lot of Southern Baptist friends, and they would (rightly) insist that they are independent and autonomous. They agree to a doctrinal statement as part of the SBC convention, and the convention drafts motions that member churches are encouraged to adopt, but there is no requirement, and no oversight of the local church outside of the church itself. Do things like this open us up to the accusation of drawing lines that don’t really exist?

One thing is for certain: As soon as someone attempts to make any sort of categorization, there will be immediate disagreement. Remember “3 Lines in the Sand?” Even if a categorization is helpful, there will still be too many things that don’t fit.

that one of the meanings of the definition of “independent” in independent Baptist is “not a member of the SBC”, or one of the other Baptist denominations for that matter. That is the whole point.

In my neck of the woods there are many independent Baptist churches, but none would call themselves fundamentalist. They just mean they are not SBC, or American Baptist, etc.

….actual historic Fundamentalism based on, say, “The Fundamentals”? Honestly, Brandenburg’s commentary is some of the most depressing stuff I’ve read, Can’t we take a look at the doctrines of inerrancy of Scripture, virgin birth, substitutionary atonement, bodily resurrection, and second coming and have fellowship with others who also are baptistic in doctrine like the evangelical free churches? What are we really separating about here?

There are a lot of churches within “fundamentalism” that I really want nothing to do with (KJV-only, Hyles-Anderson, Sword, I guess most of the “revivalist” churches), but there are a lot of SBC and conservative evangelical churches that we have a great deal in common with. What does it even mean to “have fellowship with” another church anyway? We play Flag Football every Thanksgiving with a local SBC church and host a softball league with church teams from churches that I would technically be “separated” from (charismatic, baptismal regeneration). Does softball count as fellowship? There are some guys in the FBF who I respect, and others who I wouldn’t pay money to listen to (say at the annual FBF conference), so I go to T4G and actually watch guys open the Bible and exposit the text. I may not agree with every conclusion they come to, but what defines a “disobedient brother”? Ligon Duncan preaches the Old Testament like few fundamentalists I’ve ever seen (even on texts that don’t overtly involve his Presbyterianism). I spoke with a teacher at Maranatha recently who commented that he’s gotten asked if he has “separated” from John Piper. His response echoed my question, “what does that even mean…he is in Minnesota, I am in Wisconsin…I’ve never even met the guy.” So….I am slightly confused about this culture that I’ve wandered into…

Isn’t it ironic that in an article in which the author beats the drum for completely independent churches, he would feel a need to classify all the different independent churches into circles?

I am not sure why the author would call Virginia Beach Theological Seminary a school in orbit around BJU. This is nowhere near the truth. VBTS is it’s own entity-without any strong affiliation to any other ministry. If I had to describe it to someone, I would say its a baptist (small b) version of Masters Seminary. Not an exact comparison, but the closest I can think of. Certainly not BJU.

This isn’t an “assessment” as much as it is an autopsy. Brandenburg and his attitude and posturing is one of the reasons why I finally threw in the towel on what was left of the Independent Baptist “movement” and am now just “Independent”. Between people like him, Anderson of Arizona, Schaap, Phelps, the reputation of the “BJU Orbit” (whatever THAT is) and the like, why would anyone still WANT to identified with this? When you have to spend more time explaining who or what you aren’t than what you are, it’s really not worth it. The freedom with “moving on” has been immense for this 50+ year ex-IFB.

I love Paul’s assessment of Christians. Very applicable and absolutely reliable for the present time.

1 Corinthians 3:18–23 — 21 So let no one boast in men. For all things are yours, 22 whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future—all are yours, 23 and you are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s.