Bixby's take on Northland

[TylerR]

Yes, from what very little I know of the SBC, the consensus is that Al Mohler has achieved a remarkable thing.

I know Mohler having earned my Ph.D. from Southern 2000-04. A remarkable thing happened at SBTS in the 1990s with with Mohler at the helm. But you need to remember that he did not single-handedly slay 1000 liberals with the jaw bone of an ass (KJV). He was a part of a grand readjustment within the SBC that saw the reclamation or better yet the readjustment of a major denomination. They came back from the brink of theological collapse.

His presence on campus was enough to drive out some of the worst of the progressives. His actions led to the departure of others. I am not sure how many were actually fired but I think most left of their own accord when they saw which way the wind was blowing. To be sure, he paid a heavy personal price in the earliest days as he was severely opposed and bitterly assailed by his foes, verbally at least.

I want to be fair and give Al his due. But what happened at Southern would not have happened without a major changes at the denominational level from Adrian Rogers to James Merritt and a plethora of others.

Tyler,

Jeff is right. If you get some extra time (I know probably not until after seminary!), I would encourage you to read David Beale’s book, “S.B.C. House on the Sand” written in the 80’s, which paints a very accurate picture of our Southern Baptist Seminaries, Colleges and boards; and then in juxtaposition to that history read Paul Pressler’s, “A Hill on Which to Die: One Southern Baptist’s Journey.” Paul Pressler and Paige Patterson originally came up with the political grassroots strategy that came to be known as the Conservative Resurgence that eventually returned every Southern Baptist Convention Agency, Board and Seminary to theologically conservative roots. It is the reason that I had the incredible education I had at Southeastern Seminary, which was at one point, the most liberal Seminary in the SBC! God used these men and thousands of local Southern Baptist pastors all across the United States to fight to restore to Biblical foundations to the largest Protestant denomination in the United States. Even if they don’t consider themselves fundamentalists, they risked much more personally and professionally than any fundamentalist in the last 50 years fighting over music, and today I get to reap the benefits of their militant stand for the truth.

Blessings,

Ben

God used these men and thousands of local Southern Baptist pastors all across the United States to fight to restore to Biblical foundations to the largest Protestant denomination in the United States.

Apparently Al Mohler and his predecessors have achieved something that so many of the early fundamentalists could not. I’ll pick the book up when I have a chance. I truly appreciate it!

[PhilKnight]

[Don Johnson]

Fundamentalism at its heart is a commitment to militancy for Biblical truth which sometimes results in separation.

Albert Mohler’s courageous purge of liberalism from Southern Baptist Theological seminary demonstrated that he has a Christian belief system that, “at its heart is a commitment to militancy for Biblical truth which sometimes results in separation.” (Calling out liberal professors and forcing them to either resign or face a heresy trial is quite militant.) Mohler, however, would not consider himself to be a fundamentalist, and neither would the overwhelming majority of fundamentalists.

I’m not trying to be argumentative. Just pointing out that militancy leading to biblical separation is not exclusive to fundamentalists. More definition is needed. (And I’ve read enough of your correspondence here to know you already know that.)

first, I am thinking of Curtis Laws original statement where he coined the term in making my statement.

Second, I agree that neither I nor Al Mohler would define Al Mohler as a fundamentalist though he is militant to a point, at least. To that extent my simple definition is too simple.

Third, my point, however, is that fundamentalism isn’t simply defined by “separation”. It is the militant mood as opposed to the cooperative mood. Mohler, for example, maintains the cooperative mood as evidenced by several incidents since the recovery of the seminary. Perhaps we could say he was selectively militant… But not in the way a Fundamentalist would be.

[Don Johnson] Perhaps we could say he was selectively militant… But not in the way a Fundamentalist would be.

Don,

So is this an admission that Fundamentalists are “selectively militant”? This is one of the many inconsistencies that ex-fundies or historic fundies have a problem with—Fundamentalists separate from minor things and/or don’t separate from error…

iK

Third, my point, however, is that fundamentalism isn’t simply defined by “separation”. It is the militant mood as opposed to the cooperative mood. Mohler, for example, maintains the cooperative mood as evidenced by several incidents since the recovery of the seminary. Perhaps we could say he was selectively militant… But not in the way a Fundamentalist would be.

So what exactly does ‘Fundamentalism as a movement’ militate against currently? The battles of the 20’s and 30’s are over. What are we known as being militant against now, and how does that show up?

Please don’t give me boilerplate like we’re opposed to modernism, charismaticism, materialism, etc. The reason why I ask is because it seems like Conservative Evangelicals do the same thing, yet Fundamentalism militates against them. So there must be something different there other than were we decide to draw the lines of when to be militant. Please give me specifics, if possible, because I really don’t know what Movement Fundamentalism is standing against anymore.

For the record, I do still consider myself as a Fundamentalist and not as a Conservative Evangelical. I’m sure some would disagree and drop me into the C/E camp.

[iKuyper]

Don,

So is this an admission that Fundamentalists are “selectively militant”? This is one of the many inconsistencies that ex-fundies or historic fundies have a problem with—Fundamentalists separate from minor things and/or don’t separate from error…

iK

So what else is new? But then so am I! And so is Al Mohler and Mark Dever. Now I do not wish to bash either man who I respect. They are both men of accomplishment. Despite the fact that Al is a 5 pointer, he co-chaired the BGEA meeting in Louisville, in 2002. Sounds inconsistent to me. I heard Mark’s say that he likes the SBC cooperative program because it works in sending missionaries to the field. Sounded very pragmatic and utterly inconsistent with Mark commitment to a robust theology.

Who among us is consistently consistent? We are all inconsistent at many levels.

Evangelicals are consistently inconsistent. Some claim to major on the majors and not separate over minor issues, but when is the last time you saw a dispensationalist on the Gospel Coalition page?

John Piper wanted to pastor a Baptist church that did not require immersion for membership. Sounds pretty inconsistent to me.

Bruce Ware will separate from Clark Pinnock (does this make him a militant separatist?) He even tried to rally the ETS to kick Pinnock out. But Ware disavows fundamentalist separatism. Sounds inconsistent to me.

In fact I only know of one consistent man … my wife’s husband. He is consistently inconsistent. What a jerk!

So hammer Don again because he is inconsistent! While you are at it, hammer me too!

Before you do, though ponder the text John 8:7. Might not be in the text … but pretend it is.

Let’s ask for someone who is consistently consistent to post the next post. On second thought …

Tyler,

I was in Mohler’s office a few years ago. He has a large oil painting of Spurgeon hanging on the wall and it looks exactly like Jeff Straub. In fact, it is Jeff Straub!! I commend Mohler for cleaning up Southern. He did so at great personal sacrifice. I also commend Mohler for retracting his signature on the Mahattan Declaration. Mohler humbly admits that what a big mistake. Mohler would not want to be called a fundamentalist, however. They still have monuments on campus to folks like
Billy Graham et. al.

Jeff - OK that was funny.

Before I post - please I’m not claiming the mantle of “consistency.”

I remember when I was about 27 and serving as senior pastor in my first lead pastor “gig” I spoke to Dr. Singleton (my mentor) about some item. I remember complaining to him that “so-in-so” was very inconsistent with “this” or “that.” Dr. Singleton - smiled, placed his hand on my shoulder and said with that grin of his, “Joel - no one is consistent!” I don’t think I appreciated that at the time. I laugh out loud today when I remember that.

Fantastic reminder!

Straight Ahead!

jt

And Tyler……

While some militant evangelical types have monuments to men like Graham……..some fundamentalists have monuments to men like
Finney and Hyles and ……. worse.

Straight Ahead!

jt

Phil„

Thanks for your comment and kinds words.

Jeff,

My point is this: When evangelicals are inconsistent, fundamentalists cry out “anathema!” But when Fundamentalists fail to apply their own principles, it’s “Oh well, we can extend grace.”

So then, since you’re recognizing that both “sides” fail to apply separatistic principles, let’s remove “separation” from the debate… Which side, then, majors on the majors, especially in light of all the music talk?

iK

[Joel Tetreau]

And Tyler……

While some militant evangelical types have monuments to men like Graham……..some fundamentalists have monuments to men like
Finney and Hyles and ……. worse.

Straight Ahead!

jt

who’s worse than Finney and Hyles? In jest, but serious!

Joel,

I think you secretly have Paterno’s miniature statue in your office. It’s time to let it go. Let’s not use bad behavior to justify more bad behavior. I have to leave for New York.

Straight up!

Mike,

The only statue I have on my desk is a small Greek statue of Achilles - it’s a reminder that eventually…..”everyone limps.”

Fair winds my friend…….Straight Ahead!

jt