Bible, Theology & Philosophy

The past two weeks have brought an exponentially greater response than any previous Nick of Time essays. Whatever else it is, this response is certainly an indication that these essays have touched a nerve within fundamentalism. I’ve decided to share some of the emails that I have received.

Why?

First, in the interest of full disclosure. Those who read the essays have an interest in knowing how they were received. To be sure, some sense of this can be gathered from the weblogs. Bloggers, however, do not always represent the ranks and file. Their perspective can partly be balanced by paying attention to what people say in private. The responses below should provide a supplementary source of information that will illustrate how fundamentalists are viewing this controversy, and, indeed, the condition of the fundamentalist movement itself.

Second, because I believe in giving one’s opponents a hearing. Leadership that tries to control followers by restricting who gets a hearing is not ethical leadership. We cannot lead by trying to silence dissenters. Years ago I used to edit an occasional review known as Ruminations. My standing offer in that review was that I would give my opponents the final word in any discussion. For this series, I am doing the same thing. I have made a point of including words of opposition from both sides—and I will offer no rejoinder.

Third, because I affirm that all believers are indwelt and being sanctified by the Spirit of God. That being the case, I really do believe that all of us together possess more wisdom than any one of us alone. Granted, there is a time to stand alone against the world—but that time does not come until after other judgments have been heard and weighed. Under normal circumstances, the very best thing that we can do is to talk to one another. So I encourage you to listen to these voices and to hear what they have to say.

All of the following responses are from Christian leaders who are identified as fundamentalists. I have removed, not only their names, but any references that could be used (in my judgment) to identify them. I list them only by the positions of responsibility that they hold. No editing has been done that would change the meaning of the response. I have also tried to remove the responses that were simply “attaboys,” except in cases in which the respondent held some significant position of leadership within fundamentalism.

^{Note: This article is reprinted from The Faith Pulpit (March 2002), a publication of Faith Baptist Theological Seminary (Ankeny, IA). It appears here verbatim.}

Christian writers from Augustine to Dante picture the eternal destiny of the righteous as beatific vision. The idea is that in eternity, purified from our sins and glorified in our resurrection bodies, we shall behold God in the fullness of His glory. Transfixed with His beauty, our eyes shall gaze upon Him in a kind of everlasting stare. We shall neither want nor need anything other than to behold His presence and to enjoy His glory.

^{Note: This article is reprinted from The Faith Pulpit (November 2000), a publication of Faith Baptist Theological Seminary (Ankeny, IA). It appears here with some slight editing.}

^{Note: This article is reprinted from The Faith Pulpit (May/June 1999), a publication of Faith Baptist Theological Seminary (Ankeny, IA). It appears here with some slight editing.}