The Fundamental Baptist Fellowship is No More!

* No source: “word comes to us” (from whom?)

* “is no more” (he corrects this in the next sentence but it’s in the headline and bolded)

* “because the term “fundamental” is no longer useful”. Is he quoting someone or is this his view?

Well, if you read carefully, I stated, apparently correctly, that the “Fundamental” Baptist Fellowship is no more … It was intended as a catchy title. I passed on information from a friend. John Vaughn, though not the source, is my friend, as are many men in the fellowship, some better than others. I made no judgment on the change. I actually think it may be helpful … Rebranding is a funny thing. I chose the word “useful” so as not to imply anything else. Maybe there is a better word. I wasn’t quoting anyone.

It went well for MBU. Hopefully, it will go well for the FBF

[Jim]

JohnBrian wrote:

if my memory serves, Bob Jones suggested using the word Foundation as a replacement for the word Fundamental. Does anyone else recall that, or was it just a vision I had upon my bed after eating too much pizza?

Has to start with an “F” or you have to hire a graphical artist to redo the logo!

[Jeff Straub]

Well, if you read carefully, I stated, apparently correctly, that the “Fundamental” Baptist Fellowship is no more … It was intended as a catchy title. I passed on information from a friend. John Vaughn, though not the source, is my friend, as are many men in the fellowship, some better than others. I made no judgment on the change. I actually think it may be helpful … Rebranding is a funny thing. I chose the word “useful” so as not to imply anything else. Maybe there is a better word. I wasn’t quoting anyone.

Did you pause to consider the questionable ethics of disclosing something revealed to you privately before Vaughn and friends could craft their press release and make it available through their channel?

Several concluding comments

1. Ben Franklin suggested that three men could keep a secret if two men were dead.
2. In a world with Twitter, Facebook Live, Snapchat, Blogs, Email, etc., secrets? Who has secrets? A cop who puts a beatdown on a suspect, warranted or otherwise, needs to know that it will be on the 6 o’clock news.
3. If you look at our blog, we are not exactly a news breaking place. For all I knew, the information was already known.
4. My friend did not tell me the information on the T. Q., so I broke no confidence.
5. Jim Peet, my friend, actually misquoted John Vaughn, also my friend, … What John actually said was “My friend Jeff Straub’s headline … ” a significant omission, IMO.
6. I find it odd that my friends at the FBF did not put this out right away themselves … How could this possibly be a private matter to be kept secret? Surely, there was no attempt at subterfuge on their part—to go by FBF but meaning something other than fundamental. Surely they intended to make this public … I cannot speak to why they waited, but they did.
7. If I am your counselor and you tell me your story and I gossip about it to my buddies, I might be unethical… . But to report on a very public decision. The FBF is not a private club of a few guys as members. It is supposed to be an international fellowship. Seriously, unethical? It is this kind of reasoning that generally keeps me away from SI.

From reading John Vaughn’s announcement on the other thread, it seems like there were no significant efforts at making this a super-secret deliberation. Apparently a significant portion of the Board (maybe all of it?) not only knew about the rebranding efforts but fully supported it. If they seriously thought that the discussions were supposed to be a secret, then they should have made it clear that it was supposed to remain that way. It doesn’t sound like that was the case.

If that many people know about it, then I’m not sure how Jeff could be ‘liable’ for gossip or whatever. It was a bit of an ‘open secret’ that the organization’s leadership was discussing it, so it should only come as a shock to those of us who are outside of the camp.

All in all, there’s no big surprise or story here. Time to move along.

Just a few thinking-out-loud questions and observations:

• Will the term “fundamentalist” (as a self-identification) die? Since the flagship organization of independent Baptist fundamentalism is semi-retiring the label, maybe it is on the way out. In my realm of experience, less and less people use it.
• Will anyone separate from the FBF over this? It sounds like from Dr. Vaughn’s post that some view this move as compromise.
• The view of the label “fundamentalist” is pretty much universally negative. Notice the Pope’s use of it in the Filings link: http://sharperiron.org/filings/022017/32933
• It is interesting that the Reformed group of Southern Baptists is called Founders and the distinctly non-Reformed organization of independent Baptists is now the Foundations Baptist Fellowship.
• It’s always better to be proactive rather than reactive in announcing something like this. Wherever the fault lies, it isn’t great PR.
• Is this a Foundationalism worth saving? :)

For some time now many have been dropping the term “fundamentalist” in describing themselves and they have often been viewed negatively for their action, even though their beliefs and practice did not change. A number of churches with which I’m familiar use terms similar to “foundational truths” to describe their beliefs, those truths being what we would call fundamental. They believe in the fundamental truths of Biblical Christianity and they separate from false teaching and apostasy yet, because they reject the term fundamentalist, they have been labeled “convergent” or some kind of new neo-evangelical. I also suspect that some of those who still retain the term fundamentalist will now go after the FBFI for its action.

[JohnBrian]

if my memory serves, Bob Jones suggested using the word Foundation as a replacement for the word Fundamental. Does anyone else recall that, or was it just a vision I had upon my bed after eating too much pizza?

You remember the event correctly, but not the name he chose. Here is what he posted (in 2002):

[Bob Jones III]

Until the late 1940s, the strongest Bible believing Christians distinguished themselves from religious liberals by the term “Evangelicals.” When the strongest Evangelical group of the day, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), slowly began a leftward turn, which has accelerated unto the present day, those who wished to be more steadfast and less ecumenical began identifying themselves as “Fundamentalists.” Bob Jones University is unashamedly Fundamentalist, but the term is beginning to carry an onerous connotation with the world at large because of the media’s penchant for lumping Christian Fundamentalists in the same heap as Islamic Fundamentalists. Instead of “Fundamentalism” defining us as steadfast Bible believers, the term now carries overtones of radicalism and terrorism. “Fundamentalist” evokes fear, suspicion, and other repulsive connotations in its current usage. Many of us who are separated unto Christ feel it is appropriate to find a new label that will define us more positively and appropriately.
It is too early in the process to know what term may ultimately be embraced by the majority, but I like “Preservationist.”

They believe in the fundamental truths of Biblical Christianity and they separate from false teaching and apostasy yet, because they reject the term fundamentalist, they have been labeled “convergent” or some kind of new neo-evangelical. I also suspect that some of those who still retain the term fundamentalist will now go after the FBFI for its action.

Well, between their self-identified ‘convergent’ foes on their left and the ‘Fundamentalists’ on the right that are upset with the FBFI for dropping the Fundamentalist moniker, it will certainly be interesting to watch the organization tap dance or try and thread the needle for sure.

I’ll make some more popcorn. Anyone want some?

I’ll take some of that popcorn, Jay! I know of at least two fundamentalist publications that are probably already sharpening their knives, preparing to attack the FBFI before their audience of between 5 and 10 million. (But probably closer to just 5 (not million)!)