"Dr. Bauder has thrown Dr. Dollar, Dr. Beale, Dr. Moritz, Dr. Sidwell, and Dr. Pickering under the bus"

There’s no bus and no throwing… and unlike the blogger, I’ve read the entire article.

Same here, he is not understanding Kevin’s terms in the footnotes, so I am not holding my breath for his overall assessment of Bauder’s article.

Not impressed and the comments that are critical of Bauder’s speaking / writing style are just nasty!

I suspect that Hyles or Schapp would entertain them!

I think you guys are missing Brian’s point. Brian is a guy who believes that the only way to write about Fundamentalism is to lavish praise upon the movement, never mention anything negative, thank God every day for Pickering, and kiss the rings of the family heads. He is from the South Carolina family and just thinks that people should show the proper respect. The attempts by those in his comments to take out Bauder at the knees was not surprising. It is…who they are.

Well, one of the blogs he follows is “SI: In the Iron Skillet,” which tells me most of what I need to know.

[James K] I think you guys are missing Brian’s point. Brian is a guy who believes that the only way to write about Fundamentalism is to lavish praise upon the movement, never mention anything negative, thank God every day for Pickering, and kiss the rings of the family heads. He is from the South Carolina family and just thinks that people should show the proper respect. The attempts by those in his comments to take out Bauder at the knees was not surprising. It is…who they are.

So the best way to object to Brian’s alleged misrepresentation of Bauder is to misrepresent Brian through exaggeration?

Whether Bauder is insufferable to read or not is probably irrelevant to the consideration of whether or not he is being fair to Fundyism. I believe Bauder will ultimately be seen as providing some unique perspective which would come from anyone with his experiences and some historical data not offered elsewhere but the nature of his biases will undermine the desired perspicacity necessary for the best service in the matter.

Surely we recognize hyperbole when we see it (kissing rings, etc).

But I don’t think the all praise/no criticism charge is inaccurate. According to Pastor Ernsberger, to criticize fundamentalism is to hinder the cause of Christ.

Some of these bloggers would love for there to be an actual wedge between Kevin Bauder and BJU. Last time I checked these schools are in fellowship with each other and they even get together at least once a year - http://www.aaccs.info/members.asp.

Earlier this year, some could have gotten the impression that there was a wedge between Matt Olsen and BJU. After I spoke with leaders from both schools, I was assured that there was no wedge. The only wedges out there were the wedges between people who believed there should or should not be a wedge. :)

So, I do not interpret Bauder’s personally honest impression of Dr. Beale’s book as some attempt to throw Dr. Beale under the bus. What I see is a blogger hoping his words will result in wedge between Bauder and BJU. There are a few other bloggers out there who would love to see that wedge as well.

Brian is yet another example of the mentality that you never let those outside the family know what you are thinking. Vito scolded Santino for that.

As much as I try to offer this kind of thinking in hyperbole, they keep giving real time examples of it being true. Just look at the angry, bitter, exSI guys perform their drive-by shootings on his blog. Their own readership must be down.

Some even screech for Bauder and Doran to address this issue or that issue. However, here Bauder does address something and they just go straight for the kneecaps.

Alex,

So the best way to object to Brian’s alleged misrepresentation of Bauder is to misrepresent Brian through exaggeration?

What did you think was exaggeration? He laid out his allegiance to the South Carolina family. He felt that someone was threatening it. You never go against the family Alex.

DavidO,

But I don’t think the all praise/no criticism charge is inaccurate. According to Pastor Ernsberger, to criticize fundamentalism is to hinder the cause of Christ.

Nailed it. Some have posted that this site is antifundamentalist. Any examination of abuse or wrong doing at any level or of any doctrine (like BJU overt racism) is seen as hurting the cause of Christ. I always thought the truth set you free. They must think that that kind of talk is out of line and in need of correction.

May I interrupt this discussion with a bit of cheeriness …

I consider Pastor Ernsberger a friend.

I consider Dr. Bauder a friend.

I consider some at BJ as friends.

It is going to be great when we all gather together in heaven someday. Isn’t it?

[DavidO] Surely we recognize hyperbole when we see it (kissing rings, etc).

But I don’t think the all praise/no criticism charge is inaccurate. According to Pastor Ernsberger, to criticize fundamentalism is to hinder the cause of Christ.

It isn’t the recognition of it, it is the misuse of it that is the problem.

I do not believe this is a complaint about criticisms of fundamentalism in general but a certain alleged prejudicial criticism. I do not identify myself as a fundamentalist btw. And I am not so sure I agree with all of the article but I am amused by some of the reactions here that seem to be intolerant of any considerations that Bauder may, indeed, have certain biases toward that segment.

Of course Bauder has biases. And may even towards the segment he referred to. I just don’t see any real innacuracies in that paragraph and footnotes worth blowing nearly 1800 words about how they bode ill and reinforce the so-calledness of Bauder’s fundamentalism.

And Pastor E says I was picking nits.

[Todd Wood] May I interrupt this discussion with a bit of cheeriness …

I consider Pastor Ernsberger a friend.

I consider Dr. Bauder a friend.

I consider some at BJ as friends.

It is going to be great when we all gather together in heaven someday. Isn’t it?

It will be, but all this infighting over who is and who isn’t and whether or not they should be on the same platform or whatever really drags me down in the meantime.

First, hyper-fundamentalists often understand fundamentalism in terms of loyalty to an organization, movement, or even leader. They equate the defense of the faith with the prosperity of their organization or its leader. Someone who criticizes or contradicts it is subjected to censure or separation..

The tendency to assume that any criticism is an attack is a problem. Years (and I mean years) ago I had Dr. George Dollar in my home. He had just published his second book on fundamentalism and,as we talked, I naively mentioned that I thought his books “might” leave the impression that Baptists and BJU were the only true fundamentalists. Let’s just say that the rest of our time of fellowship was a bit tense.

Sometimes I get the impression that some fundamentalists only want their pictures taken at Glamour Shots instead of admitting they may have warts.