sifilings Fri, 04/11/2014 - 1:20pm
Tags:
Spectrum of Protestant beliefs
And the fundamentalist? Some compromiser from the IFCA or the left wing of the GARBC? No, the fundamentalist is Bob Jones—to be specific, Bob Jones, Jr. The publication date of the book is 1968. Yes, that’s what Bob Jones was doing forty-six years ago. He was contributing to a book for a Catholic editor, with coauthors who included a neoevangelical, a Confessional Protestant, a prominent liberal, and a radical Death-of-God theologian. He did it unabashedly, even proudly. Evidently, he did it without a word of reproof from other fundamentalists.
Response to ACCC
For those who lost track, answers the ridiculous ACCC charge ACCC warns on the "Danger of Neo-fundamentalism," Kevin Bauder
Note: The ACCC website has changed since the previous filing. New link
And the resolution has been revised as well.
Sharper Iron still "honorably mentioned"
For Ralph Colas if you read this: Explains why I quit sending the ACCC an annual donation!
Information on Jim
Seriously ... the ACCC has lost all credibility!
Seriously ... the ACCC has lost all credibility! They as as dead as their old domain name. Into the dustbin of history go you.
One must put brain in a jar on a shelf to get their logic.
The ACCC is living up to the charge that "Fundamentalism is neither fun, nor mental"
Information on Jim
Jim
Tell us how you really feel. Also, please tell me how to attach an image to this new SI - I'm too stupid to figure it out.
Now, to real commentary:
I think this was a wonderful article. This is the kind of fundamentalism that is worth saving; one that forcefully and unapologetically engages in the marketplace of theological ideas instead of retreating to the backyard to sulk alone.
For example, I haven't seen any fundamentalist leader say anything about the "Jesus' Wife" fragment. Why not? It's culturally relevant, and it is (or was) trending near the top in FaceBook. People are interested in it. Why haven't fundamentalist leaders written anything in response to it? No, it falls to that dastardly compromiser, Al Mohler, to cover it in his podcast this morning. He did a very good job. I hope nobody separates from me now . . .
TylerR is a former Pastor. He lives with his family in Olympia, WA. He blogs here.
wife fragment...
Here is an excellent discussion of this fragment:
http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/
ACCC vs. FBFI
I just got off the road after a hard days traveling and was joyfully refreshed by this article.
There are some things that intrigue me:
Why are some fundamentalists are more concerned about taking a stand against those they consider disobedient brethren than anything else. Two cases in point: 1) That fundamentalists must be separate from evangelicals (without any mention of a qualifier and 2) that the FBFI is superior to the ACCC because it's Baptist and the ACCC is inclusive.
Bauder's mention of the historical perspective made me wonder: What would today's fundamentalists do with Bob Jones Sr. when he was trying to take a stand inside an apostate denomination, with Bob Jones Jr. when he was trying to do the same in the National Association of Evangelicals, or Bob Ketcham in his early days in the Northern Baptist Convention? . And are they ever going to say anything positive about what Al Mohler did at Southern?
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
Darrell
Thanks for the link. This is the best part:
TylerR is a former Pastor. He lives with his family in Olympia, WA. He blogs here.
Moderator Note
Moderator Note: The Jesus "wife" comments ... please refrain from this thread and use this thread. Further Jesus "wife" comments on this thread will be deleted.
Information on Jim
No "leader"
We currently have no leader. If someone is a self appointed leader or for that matter just speaks out, arrows come from all directions. Who needs that? Who has time to write a treaties about a book that is 40 years old and the person involved in writing it died 16 years ago? We are better off not rehashing history but rather build a better future.
@Ken ... you missed the point
You missed the point! The book published in 1968 matters because: Bauder was accused of neo-fundamentalism (whatever that even means (but basically "neo-" prefix means "very bad" not "new") for being 1/4 of Four Views on the Spectrum of Evangelicalism by non-other than the ACCC. Bauder's reference of the '68 book of which Bob Jones Jr is 1/5 demonstrates that he (Bauder) is mainstream historic fundamentalism! And that the ACCC resolution represents revisionist fundamentalism.
Information on Jim
On "no leader"
We don't need A Leader. Fundamentalism (and conservative evangelicalism for that matter) needs many leaders.
Information on Jim
Jim wrote:
Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?
There are leaders and organization
While claiming independency and autonomy, there still is a form of leadership and organization in fundamentalism. When a mission agency hires someone with contacts within conservative evangelicalism and fundamental churches are encouraged by one or two leaders (?) to stop supporting said agency------there's leadership and organization. When a missionary get help on the field associates with Southern Baptists and finds that the fundamental churches that support him are being encouraged to stop supporting him----there's leadership and organization.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
We have a leader - Jesus
Hang on. As Baptists - we believe in the priesthood of every believer. Should we not be seeking to see Jesus increase and our 'profile' decrease? Remember when 'Israel' sought an earthly King, God gave it to them but also warned them of the rod they were creating for their own back.
That's the Ideal!
I agree whole heartedly! This is the ideal. Sadly, in too many cases, it's not the reality.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
JC wrote:
JC, what do you do with 1 Cor. 11:1? "Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ."
Is there no place for human leadership?
With All Due Respect
Jim,
While I appreciate the fact that you have defended me, I have to say that I do not share your assessment of the ACCC. I believe that the organization still has an important mission and is worthy of support.
As far as I know, the ACCC is the only multi-denominational organization that is in a position to help fundamentalist Christians in a number of areas. For example, they are a snowplow organization for a number of small church groups in matters like endorsing military chaplains. These groups simply would not be able to get chaplains into the military if not for the work of the ACCC.
Also, as far as I know, the ACCC is the only fundamentalist organization that provides news coverage of the principal evangelical and ecumenical organizations such as the NAE, the NCC, and the WCC. Normally an ACCC official will attend the major meetings with press credentials and will release a full report. These reports include information that simply cannot be found elsewhere. They have proven invaluable for many years.
As for the leadership, they are men of principle whose character and position I respect. I was once an assistant pastor with Ralph Colas’ successor at South Holly Baptist Church. In that position, I saw first-hand the kind of ministry that he built. It was a good one. Furthermore, I pray that God allows me to serve him as faithfully and as long as Dr. Colas, who is now nearing the end of his race. He is a man whom I genuinely admire.
Officers include John McKnight, who once identified himself to me as a “Whitefieldian Methodist,” and David Mook of the Free Presbyterian Church. I love the kind of fellowship that these men represent. I want to see it increase.
The secretary of the ACCC is Kevin Hobi, pastor of New Boston Baptist Church in New Boston, New Hampshire. While I do not know Pastor Hobi well, people whose judgment I trust tell me that he is a good pastor whose ministry God is using to produce in His people the character of His Son. While Pastor Hobi and I disagree about a few things, our agreements are far greater than our differences, and far greater than my agreements with any of the conservative evangelical crowd. We are not enemies, we are friends and co-laborers. I do not want to weaken his hand in the important work that God has given him to do.
Yes, the ACCC took the liberty of disagreeing with me about a few things. I think that those disagreements were based largely upon a misunderstanding. The fact that the resolution has been revised probably indicates that the ACCC is trying to bring its utterances into line with the actual situation. Whether or not that is so, disagreements—even when publicly expressed—do not have to make us enemies. I value the ACCC, its people, and its ministry far too highly to be shaken by a little difference of opinion.
All of us are wrong sometimes. I have been plenty of times, and I will be again. If we just destroy each other every time one of us is wrong, then pretty soon none of us will be left. In fact, that’s one of the things that has hurt fundamentalism—the Young Left no less than the Old Right.
Anyway, the ACCC has my full support. I would encourage fundamentalists to attend its conferences and to consider joining as individual members. Come to think of it, I probably ought to drop them a check this week.
pvawter wrote:
Yes, I don't want to swing the pendulum too far and say that human leadership is intrinsically wrong. A case can be made for a limited and low profile leadership in Christian organisations. And often leaders are sought by the masses, not the leaders themselves. Yet, true Christian leadership will not seek status or fame for itself.
It is worth considering whether CEO brand, human leadership is even necessary for Christian organisations. The elder-rule, brethren church model has some good safe-guards against today's celebrity, twitter-verse leadership culture.
JC wrote:
Yes, I don't want to swing the pendulum too far and say that human leadership is intrinsically wrong. A case can be made for a limited and low profile leadership in Christian organisations. And often leaders are sought by the masses, not the leaders themselves. Yet, true Christian leadership will not seek status or fame for itself.
It is worth considering whether CEO brand, human leadership is even necessary for Christian organisations. The elder-rule, brethren church model has some good safe-guards against today's celebrity, twitter-verse leadership culture.
Regarding Paul: Yes, he instructed others to imitate him (with the caveat of following Christ). Paul was an apostle. I am wary of any 'Christian' making apostolic leadership claims today.
For the record!
Friends.....one and all,
I have been a member of the FBF. I am a member of the IFCA. My family came from the GARBC and then later a combination of the Sword/BBF and then BJ world. While I don't agree with everything written in the mentioned ACCC article, I'm with Kevin about the good the ACCC has done past and present. I think maybe I'll secretly join all the groups and then just take over the historic fundamentalist world.
Yep - it's time........ to combine!
Worry not everyone - help is on the way!
Straight Ahead!
jt
ps - I'm just joking friends......
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;
For the Record (Side B)
I have always appreciated Kevin's grace under criticism and while I considered Dr. Colas' initial response unfortunate, it reminded me at the time of the "sniping" at good brethren that is a blemish on fundamentalism.
I always admired the good things about the ACCC but it was intimated to me by a number of brethren that, were I to join the ACCC, it would not be looked upon well by some of my acquaintances because the ACCC was not exclusively Baptist. As I look back at those days the groups with which I was familiar (GARBC, FBF, NRBFC, ACCC, IFCA) were independent and distanced themselves from each other and only a favored few could enjoy fellowship with more than one and nobody could be welcome in them all. Is it still that way?
(Note: The NRBFC is the Northeast Regular Baptist Fellowship of Churches)
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
JC wrote:
JC,
I don't think Paul was claiming apostolic authority in making that statement. Nevertheless, it is not the only such statement in Scripture. Consider 1 Thessalonians 1:6-8 where Paul commends the Thessalonian believers for being an example to the believers in Philippi and Corinth. And, of course, Paul instructed Timothy to be an example to those under his pastoral care in 1 Timothy 4:12. Peter gave specific instruction for pastors to lead by example in 1 Peter 5:2-4.
I think there is ample evidence in the NT that apostolic authority is not necessary for pastors to say to their flock, "Imitate me, even as I imitate Christ." This doesn't mean blind follow-ship, but the wise use of discretion and judgment to follow a man insofar as he follows Christ. I consider my role as an example to the flock to be quite treacherous, because I know that some will follow without discernment and will be led into error if I, myself, do not follow Christ. I do not fear for myself but for those who would follow my example, and so I pray for God's grace to overcome my own weakness.
Kevin T. Bauder wrote:
I am surprised by this statement. I neither endorse nor condemn the ACCC, but I am puzzled by this statement. Do we really feel that the ACCC is so critical to God's work and His plan that He has no other way to get a chaplain into the military but through a parachurch organization? I continue to be befuddled as a Christian as to the fascination, discussion, arguments over all of these organizations. They just come and go and we continue to argue and debate over these same things in relation to the organization.
I have no desire to join organizations that come and go. They sprout from one debate/or division, do some good, deviate and go a different way and then everyone must separate again and another offshoot is formed. I am glad that my confidence resides in the fact that God can and will accomplish His entire plan through His Church.
I actually was defending myself
I am defending myself (and Sharper Iron) over this charge (from their resolution) : "The neo-fundamentalist call to the convergence of fundamentalists and evangelicals rang loud and clear from the Zondervan publication Four Views on the Spectrum of Evangelicalism (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011), a book promoted by the managers of the Sharper Iron website."
Aaron responded to that charge here: "The resolution says we "promoted" the four views book. ... but it's four views. Which view did we promote? Clearly, somebody is not clear on the concept of a multi-view book or on what makes books valuable in general. There does not need to be any agreement with a book at all to find it valuable or to recommend it. But certainly a multi-view book is a study of themes and positions and not an endorsement of any one of them. I should be past surprise by now, but--I still find it amazing to see people identify open discussion of opposing ideas as some kind of compromise."
The ACCC resolution is illogical (represented in the image above of pickled brains in jars). I'm in the position where I no longer need to be politically correct. They lost me and they lost my support. I did communicate with Ralph Colas about my views back then.
Information on Jim
On the dissolution of the term "Fundamentalist"
On the dissolution of the term "Fundamentalist". And I write this because the ACCC resolution cited "neo-fundamentalist".
There are more "Fundamentalist-sub-types" than Linux Distros
It seems that many Fundamentalists look at the other kinds and says in essence "You are not a true Fundamentalist"
I documented some of that here. There are (apparently):
Fundamentalists are more adept at creating prefixes than writing theologies. Here's what I've learned from working 20 years in the secular world (after 16 years of vocational ministry). The term "fundamentalist" does not convey much (if anything) positively where I live and work. Where I worship ... it means something. Where I live and work ... nada. Here's my contribution to prefixes: That ACCC resolution was written by and approved by half-shell fundamentalists.
Information on Jim
dgszweda
You wrote:
The only way to be a chaplain in the military is to receive an endorsement from a DoD-approved parachurch organization such as the FBFI or ACCC (among lots of others).
TylerR is a former Pastor. He lives with his family in Olympia, WA. He blogs here.
Also the GARBC or many more
Also the GARBC. There would still be chaplains without the ACCC. And actually the ACCC is very minor player in fundamentalism anymore. Wiki has a list of member groups. Probably any of those member organizations (such as the FFBC) could sponsor chaplains.
Information on Jim
Honestly Kevin, I'm surprised you don't take offense at ...
Honestly Kevin, I'm surprised you don't take offense at the resolution:
http://www.accc4truth.org/images/Resolution_on_Neo-Fundamentalism_-_Fall...
... Because they seem to be mentioning you (and me): "from among ourselves that men may arise speaking perverse things and drawing others after them"
Update: A very uncharitable kick-em-while-they-are-down to friends at Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary! (in resolution)
Information on Jim
TylerR wrote:
That is not true. They must receive an endorsement from a Religious Organization that meets the requirements in DOD 1304.28. One of which it must be a tax exempt "church" as listed in E3.1.3.1. While it may be a bit tougher for a church to obtain this it is not impossible and nowhere does the DoD requirements state it needs to be a parachurch organization. This is the fallacy that many get into. We need an organization to get chaplains approved, we need an organization to have missionaries, we need to have an organization for camps, for schools, for colleges.... And then once we spend all of this energy creating the organization to fit exactly what we are looking for, people come into it and ruin the whole thing eventually and then we need to split from that group to now create another one that addresses what these people have done to the one that we have loved for so long. With all of that aside, do we really feel that God's plan is derailed because of a DoD approved document.
I emailed Kevin Hobi, Secretary of the ACCC today
Does the ACCC regard Sharper Iron a neo-fundamentalist organization / website for posting a review of Four Views on the Spectrum of Evangelicalism ? I ask because we are mentioned in the ACCC resolution On the Dangers of NeoFundamentalism
Thanks
Sent from my iPhone
----------------------
I'll report back
Information on Jim
dgszweda
You're right. I read the entire instruction. From what I see from the Armed Forces Chaplain Board Endorsements, the endorsing bodies seem to be denominations or organizations. You are right to say that a single independent church can submit a request to be an endorser, though I'm not so sure it would ever be approved. I stand corrected
TylerR is a former Pastor. He lives with his family in Olympia, WA. He blogs here.
I received a nice response
------------
Information on Jim
TylerR wrote:
it would be harder, but not impossible. It would be the same as someone saying that a church needs a para church mission board to get things done. But churches like Morningside in Greenville created their own local church mission board (Open Door Baptist Missions). It just takes some work and some churches are content in writing a check to a board than to have the hassle in setting up a mission board.
What else Bob Jones Jr was doing 40-50 years ago
Awarding honorary doctorates to prominent segregationists:
America's most prominent fundamentalist ... was also a prominent segregationist.
I know some will take offense of my mentioning this ... but it's an important part of fundamentalist history that should not be white-washed
Information on Jim
Jim!
Whitewashing is a honorable and venerable part of any institutional heritage. How dare you step out of bounds . . .
TylerR is a former Pastor. He lives with his family in Olympia, WA. He blogs here.
"Doctor" Maddox greeting a potential customer:
Here's "Doctor" Maddox (with revolver in hand) greeting a potential customer at his restaurant: http://www.atlantatimemachine.com/misc/maddox10.htm
The picture is wicked and
The picture is wicked and disgusting. But praise the Lord, The new leadership of my alma matter, has admitted that behavior was wrong and sinful.
Roger Carlson, Pastor
Berean Baptist Church
Ken Woodard wrote:
Really? Why do you draw this contrast? And how do you propose to build a better future without studying and learning from history?
In considering this, I recalled something that I had read in the past, along the lines of "Who knows only his own generation remains always a child." In running this down I found that it comes loosely from a statement of Cicero:
Nescire autem quid ante quam natus sis acciderit, id est semper esse puerum.
It is translated roughly as follows:
Not to know what happened before you were born is to remain always a child.
Worth pondering.
Things That Matter
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
From the book - on "Racial Integration"
Jones [p.68]: "intermarriage .. is rebellion against God" ... will lead to "a mongrel race"
Information on Jim
Jones on Vietnam - p 99
"If it is necessary to drop an atomic bomb on Hanoi in order to end the war and save the lives of our American boys, we should do that"
I share this and the previous to demonstrate how Jones Jr really did not effectively represent Fundamentalism on these two points
Information on Jim
Really?
You don't think he did? I would wonder if, at least with the "mongrel race" quote, if he didn't represent not only a fair percentage of people in Fundamentalist churches, but even that of larger society of the time. As the child of an inter-ethnic and inter-cultural marriage, I know that my parents got comments inside and outside of church when I was growing up, and I even got comments occasionally. I know for a fact my father's mother was very uncomfortable with the marriage (my father's father, who had served in the Philippines during WWII, was absolute gold from the get go, on the other hand). As late as the early 1990s, Ron Bean (my pastor at the time) called down to BJU and confirmed that if I were to enroll as a student, I would have to pre-determine if I were either "white" or "asian" for dating purposes. I've moved past it, but for a long time I really resented BJU and its policies in that area, and the similar influence I found articulated by individuals in churches growing up.
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
I would wonder . . . if he
Maranatha had the same rule until the late 80's or very early 90's (when BJ lost its tax exempt status?). Then they dropped the prohibition, allowing it with parental permission.
So add the Cedarholm swath to the BJ swath. A fairly large, if not the main, stream.
Carl Henry on "Racial Integration" p 68-ff
John Warwick Montgomery on same:
Information on Jim
It would be a mistake to not
It would be a mistake to not acknowledge the fact that while the church as a whole struggled with race, the BJU subculture and maybe other fundamentalists subcultures were some of the last to get on board with racial progress. Bob Jones was a decade at least behind the secular schools in the south in allowing blacks to enroll in the college. Consider that while the Bob Jones' were busy being bigoted, Billy Graham was actively fighting for racial equality and segregation at his crusades.
Timeline on the end of segregation
My own observations on Christianity and racism:
Information on Jim
Fairness
To be completely correct, it was *nearly* a decade after both Clemson and USC had been forced by court order to enroll black students that BJU also finally allowed entrollment (Clemson, USC - 1963, BJU - 1971). So while it's fair to say that some fundamentalist subcultures were in support of separate but equal, so was the southern culture at large. Integration in the south was brought about by the courts and other government action, not by majority opinion. This wasn't just a "fundamental Christian" issue.
I agree with what you are implying -- rather than bringing up the rear, BJU should have been at the forefront of opposing this view of racial separation. However, that's more than 40 years in the past. For better or worse, the Jones' were products of their time. That doesn't make it right, but given the culture, it's unlikely that many of us would have been better had we been born into that culture back then. Personally, I think it's better to note that they have changed, and that the current BJU leadership is not trying to stand on those poor positions of the past. It's taken them a while to get to this point, but just as many other schools and organizations have had to learn and change, BJU has had to do so as well. It would be interesting to note that they have made so many changes that a number of people in fundamentalism think they are going liberal. I've met and spoken to some of those people myself.
I think it would be good to note that they are not perfect, and that no matter what they do, they won't please everyone. You can make your own choice whether you support them or not, but don't do so based on something that doesn't represent the school now and was so long ago that many (most?) of us here don't really remember it even if we were alive then. Remember, having been brought up in the Catholic church, it took even Martin Luther a while to recognize the errors of his subculture and do something about it. Now, most remember him for what he accomplished afterward, not for the positions he originally held.
Dave Barnhart
dcbii wrote:
FWIW, In 1971 BJU began to offer enrollment only to married black students. Unmarried black students were not accepted until 1975. (See Section "B": http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=461&invol=574 )
What happened to the OP?
So because of BJU's policies on race, fundamentalists shouldn't be involved with books that express radically different views on religious subjects?
(Being 1/16 black, I spent my time there in fear of being discovered............just kidding....about the fear part.)
I read "Four Views on the Millennium" when I was forming my eschatology and found it very helpful. Friends of mine were appalled that I would read a book that had anything but the "right" view expressed.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
BJU and racial views
True, and they were wrong on their views of miscegenation into the year 2000. But even that is now 14 years gone (though it certainly affected my generation while I was there) and they are changing for the better. However, though those old views will be remembered and continually brought up by some, they will not be what defines them going forward. To use Martin Luther again, I don't know if he ever gave up his wrong view about the Jews, but that position is not the one he is known and remembered for. Also consider Senator Byrd, not only with wrong views on racial separation, but a one-time member of the KKK. He renounced those views, and though it will be remembered that he held them, it's not what defined him at the end of his life, and he is fondly remembered by many Democrats (and some Republicans).
It's almost as though people not only (rightly) hold BJU more responsible for such views, since they claimed the Bible as authority for their position, but also (in my view, wrongly) are much less willing to forgive them for the past than they do pretty much anyone else.
Dave Barnhart
Forgiveness and Regaining Trust
As we furiously pursue the rabbit down the trail (sorry, Ron!)...
I wish to counter that on two fronts.
I have no axe to grind with BJU. Truth be told, it's been one of the schools I've been encouraging my high school daughters to become familiar with. But the public response referred to as a "lack of forgiveness" is a consequence of previous choices, and frankly, complaining about it accomplishes nothing more than a whining 5 year old does when he complains something isn't fair. The institution and its supporters need to resolve to be different, establish a new reputation that will leave the old one in the shadows, and be willing to have the patience enough to realize that task may not be complete in their personal life spans.
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
▴ Top of page