fundamentalist?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Preacher Ron, Jan 4, 2004.

  1. Preacher Ron

    Preacher Ron
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    This may sound dumb, but I was woundering what is a Fundamental Baptist?

    I never heard of it before. :confused:

    Thanks and may God bless !
    Preacher Ron
     
  2. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    This'll be fun [​IMG] .

    There are as many views about what Fundamental Baptist are as there are Fundamental baptists!
     
  3. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    This site should explain some things.
    http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/fund.html

    "Name: Fundamentalism

    2. Founder: No one person can be credited with founding Fundamentalism. Nor does any single group comprise the history of the movement. The label `Fundamentalist' is used as both anadjective and a noun. Accordingly, trying to understand the phenomena requires more than knowing a few names and dates. Curtis Lee Laws, editor of a conservative publication entitled Watchman-Examiner is credited with coining the term "fundamentalism."

    3. Origin of the Concept: The term `fundamentalism' has its origin in a series of pamphlets published between 1910 and 1915. Entitled "The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth," these booklets were authored by leading evangelical churchmen and were circulated free of charge among clergymen and seminarians. By and large, fundamentalism was a response to the loss of influence traditional revivalism experienced in America during the early years of the twentieth century. This loss of influence, coupled with the liberalizing trends of German biblical criticism and the encroachment of Darwinian theories about the origin of the universe, prompted a response by conservative churchmen. The result was the pamphlets. In 1920, a journalist and Baptist layman named Curtis Lee Laws appropriated the term `fundamentalist' as a designation for those who were ready "to do battle royal for the Fundamentals."

    4. Date of Birth: Second decade of the 20th century

    5. Birth Place: The United States

    6. Year Founded: Concept coined in 1920

    7. Sacred or Revered Texts :

    The Bible is the sacred text of the Christian Fundamentalists. Indeed, if there is one single thing which binds Fundamentalists together, it is their insistence that the Bible is to be understood as literally true. Further, Fundamentalists see themselves as the guardians of the truth, usually to the exclusion of others' interpretation of the Bible. Fundamentalism in other faith traditions similarly proclaims guardianship of truth."

    A lot of the original Fundamentalist writings can be found here.
    http://www.xmission.com/~fidelis/
     
  4. Daniel David

    Daniel David
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Whatever I believe of course. ;)

    One thing we know for sure, fundies are not EVER KJVO.
     
  5. BillyMac

    BillyMac
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2003
    Messages:
    710
    Likes Received:
    0
    If the guidelines for defining Fundamentalism are correct as stated in the link provided by mioque, then Southern Baptists fall into this catagory whether by practice or by specific title. This fact I have known for years so it comes not as a surprise to me at all.

    Yet, what is the difference between a Fundamentalist Baptist and an Independent Baptist??? I would say that most all Baptists are fundamentalist as are some other ultra conservative denominations.
     
  6. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    There are three basic divisions within "Fundamentalism" today - all of whom believe the basic fundamentals from 1895

    (1) MILITANT FUNDAMENTALISM interprets the Bible literally and exposes all compromise and error. "Expound and expose." Hardline separation from ALL forms of sin and from tolerance of sin.

    (2) MODERATE FUNDAMENTALISM accepts all the doctrines of the Bible, but refuses to expose error, wrong attitudes, questionable habits and defection from biblical discipline. They are not hardline and avoid issues of personal separation. They reject the role of the soldier in a battle.

    (3) MODIFIED FUNDAMENTALISM affirms the basic Bible doctrine (evangelical) but bases everything on love and tolerance, dismissing doctrine as "divisive" and have absolutely no use for separation or militancy.

    Today we would call "fundamentalists" all "evangelical" in theology. But it would stop there. There are but few truly historic MILITANT fundamentalists still building and battling for truth and against error.

    [summarized from "History of Fundamentalism" by George Dollar, 1973]
     
  7. Preacher Ron

    Preacher Ron
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just a word of thanks to all of you that gave a reply to my ?

    Preacher Ron
     
  8. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    Years before I knew what a fundamentalist was I heard a preacher say, "You can be a fundamentalist but you don't have to act like one." I always wondered what he meant by that. I never understod what he meant until I went to seminary and took Baptist history. I then realized I had been in a fundamentalist church since I received Christ. But one thing that differed from so many was the fact that I told my wife one time that I believed that if anything happened to us the people in the church would take care of us. That church was serious about evangelism and discipleship. It was serious about taking care of people and not just helping them or giving them money. Whatever you needed they would help out. The church was staretd shortly after the depression. If someone came and needed anything they took up a collection during the service. One time in Sunday School one of the men was sharing about a coup,e struggling. I asked if we coiuld take up an ofering for that couple. I was shocked at how generous the people were. I knew of plenty of evidence of that kind of thing over the years. One lady in the church lost her mother and grandmother with just a few years. It was just her left and she was on her own. The church paid her entire college bill. We saw that over and over. When I was just getting started in carpentry I worked for one of the men in that church. One day he told me I should get out on my own and get a contractor's license. He not only encouraged me but also recommended me to people. He lost an employee and gave me more work and money. Any time I needed advice he would help me. He was the most trusted contractor in town. To get a recommendation was from him was the best one could get.

    They believed the entire Bible. They sent out about 20 missionaries each year. The church was about 1000 people in attendance each weeek. The church was started with four people with one thing in mind--outreach.

    You want to feel loved and excited at the same time then join a church that loves people and gives itself away. That was the church my wife and I were married in. We still long for that kind of love and intense dedication to God. It was fundamentalist in every way. It was fun and serious about loving people. When we needed work done there were usually about 20 to 60 men who would show up. Every church building was built by men who were contractors in the church. There was also a waiting list for leaders to lead. They didn't have to hoot and holler for leaders. I would tell my friends that it was the only church to go to. That church would baptize about 120 each year. The youth numbered about 400. It all started with one young lady in high school starting a Bible study on the high school campus and exploded from there. It wasn't long and there were Bible studies all over the campus. The pastors today are welcome to that same campus.

    If we claim we are fundamentalists and believe the Bible and worship a God who is alive and can be trusted with our entire being then we must totally give ourselves to Him in all we do and are.
     
  9. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Problem I see is that fundamentalism per se will slowly disappear IF there is not a strong core of MILITANT fundamentalists who will fight.

    The love everyone, outreach to the world, et al of the Moderate and Modified (we would say evangelical or new evangelical) Fundamentalist lacks the fidelity to doctrine that is needed.

    Add to that the extreme "only" group on the other end trying to use the name "fundamentalist" when they are not, and the attack on this historic movement is almost overwhelming.

    Since it is about 100-120 years old, maybe Militant Fundamentalism will die a slow death and be replaced by another movement.

    Dr. Bob
    "Earnestly contending for the faith"
     
  10. Refreshed

    Refreshed
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    901
    Likes Received:
    0
    What I find interesting is that the Fundamentalist movement was not originally Baptist-only. I have only seen two other churches that were not baptist in doctrine but were fundamentalist. Independent Fundamental Methodist in Southwest Missouri and an Independent Fundamental Wesleyan??? in the same part of the state. Baptists have made their stand better than the other denominations, but sometimes it seems like the Alamo.

    Jason
     
  11. IfbReformer

    IfbReformer
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2002
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pastor Bob,

    I would agree with you, but I would separate Militant Fundamentalism into two groups:

    These groups both share in common what you stated about Militant Fundamentalists but here are the differences between them:

    Legalist Militant Fundamentalists:

    Do not make distinctions between fundamentals
    of the faith and disputable leisure, astetic and social issues such
    as Music, clothing, TV and Movies and Dress.

    This kind of fundamentalist set standards on disputable issues(that are not fundmentals of the faith) and then judges and separates from all those(including other militant fundamentalists) who do not come to the same conclusions on those issues.

    Discerning Militant Fundamentalists:

    Discerning Fundamentalists believe and practice concepts taught in passages like Romans 14. They can see for the possiblity of believers to make different applications of Scriptural passages.

    They preach and defend the fundamentals of the faith with a militant furvor. They will separate from all who would question these fundamentals.

    But they make a clear and visible distinction between fundamentals of the faith, and their own applications and interpretations in other parts of the scriptures.

    The allow for their to be differences between brothers without it dividing them.

    In summary, the shortest way to summarize the difference between the legalist militant fundamentalist and the discerning militant fundamentalist is that one(the legalist) believes
    not only that the scriptures are inerrant, but that all their applications of it are as well. The other(discerning) while he believes the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God, does not believe his own applications of those Scriptures to be inerrant.

    IFBReformer
     
  12. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Hi ifb - Thanks for the suggestions. BTW, I'm "Dr. Bob". Pastor Bob is another moderator.

    We're twins, but I'm the good looking one. [​IMG]

    I do not believe we should allow the legalistic bunch to hijack the term fundamentalist.

    Wearing slacks is NOT a fundamental
    Believing only the KJV is inspired is NOT a fundamental
    etc
    etc
    etc

    These are at best "preferences" of some who use the name. I call them "psycho-fundamentalists" or, what they really are, "pseudo-fundamentalists".
     
  13. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just when I thought my prefernce of strawberry ice cream was my dedication in my walk with God, now to keep from being labeled, I have to start likng marcino cherry with marshmellows and banana chunks with sprinkles. [​IMG] (with rasberry ripple)
     
  14. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    But wouldn't this apply to all of us?

    I know what I believe, and what I believe you believe is that I don't believe what you believe, but what you believe is right just because you believe it? :D
     
  15. IfbReformer

    IfbReformer
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2002
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dr. Bob,

    I know where you are coming from and understand your(and my) feeling that they have hijacked our good name. But I feel that when we are explaining the issue of fundamentalists, especially to new fundamentalists or outsiders, we have to make this distinction loud and clear.

    IFBReformer
     
  16. IfbReformer

    IfbReformer
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2002
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    But wouldn't this apply to all of us?

    I know what I believe, and what I believe you believe is that I don't believe what you believe, but what you believe is right just because you believe it? :D
    </font>[/QUOTE]QuickeningSpirit,

    Try and say what you just wrote 5 times fast! Wow what a tongue tie!

    I think I know what you are asking. I believe we as Christians should read God's Word, study it, pray about it, and then apply it to our lives.

    But we each make different applications of God's Word.

    Let me give you an example when I read Pauls exhortation in the scriptures - "I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes,"(1 Timothy 2:9) I might apply that differently in family then you do in yours.

    You might interpret "dress modestly" as Christian women may not wear pants. You then implement that with your wife and daughters.
    You may have them wear dresses down to their ankles.
    That is your perogitive as a father and you are applying God's Word in the way you deem appropriate.

    I on the other hand, would apply that verse differently. I would apply "dress modestly" in this way: My wife and daughters may wear both pants, dresses or skirts and knee length shorts. However, when wearing pants or knee length shorts they should be pants or shorts that do not stick to them and should be loose fitting - they should be pants or shorts made for women.

    When wearing dresses or skirts, cleavage should not be shown and the dress should come to at least the knee length.

    I think as a church we may have stricter dress standards just to avoid problems. What I mean is that the Pastor may have "administrative" rules for church activities that ladies wear dresses.
    But when the Pastor steps out of his role as administor and overseer and then steps into my role as father and husband in my home he has overstepped his authority.

    This is the kind of the thing that is all to prevalent in many fundamentalist churches - sad to say.

    IFBReformer
     
  17. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    IFB,

    I understand what you understood, but I have to further understand what understanding there is concerning the understanding on the misunderstood issues concerning the understanding of what Paul understood through Holy Ghost inspiration which is more understanding than we are understood to deserve.

    Yes, I would have a problem with my pastor coming into my castle to dictate his standards, unless my standards line up with his, of course. But on the same note, what if his don't line up with mine? If I look at his "job" as being the pastor that I employ, then I may have a problem; the first being that I thought I employed, or had part in employing the pastor, the second, I would need to consider his calling to be the watchman on the wall warning, not dictating, to me as under his watchful eye.

    I need the devil preached out of me more than I would ever admit, (well, I just did that din't I?), but the reasoning is that what has worked for him, and is evident by his walk with God, to prove "his" standard will greatly improve my walk with God. Now mind you, I am not saying more spiritual, but a closer walk as my heart convicts me through his preaching, simply so I won't have as much as I had before to answer at the Judgement Seat.

    If you want to know my personal standard, well, maybe you don't really afterall.

    I preach standards, but I try my best to put them in the right perspective of not boasting them, or expecting everyone to line up with them. I compared it to having a bucket of squid and going around dumping them on everybody, the analogy being squid are good to "fish" with, and everybody who wants to catch fish should get a piece of squid at a time to try and catch soem more fish.

    Now I would never sit under a pastor who had a lesser mode of conduct or dress than I, simply for the reason not to deminish his ministry, but most of all, I would consider it comprimise on his behalf.

    I say this due to experience in the matter, I am no one's judge, but I won't let that dictate my standard either.

    I fully recognize the right one has to interpet scripture, but when they "wrest" at them, it's time for counsel, a multitude of counsellors at that.

    I'm a child of the Most High, not a member of some clic. The "clicish" type don't like me much for that, but I have the same standards as them, but I go one step further, I don't treat people the way so many of them do, it's just not like Christian character to malign a brother or sister who hasn't matured, not forgetting the "slime" they were pulled out of, to be where they are now. That could very easily and justifiably make them a hypocrite rather than the other.

    "Lord, please don't let me be the hypocrite the pharisee was when he judged the hypocrite, I know I am."
     
  18. micahaaron

    micahaaron
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    0
    What are the five fundalmentals?
     
  19. skanwmatos

    skanwmatos
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    There aren't five, there are seven. My "Modernism and Fundamentalism" syllabus lists them as:
    The Fundamentals were published as a result of the Niagara Bible Conferences were it was agreed that Theological Liberalism and Modernism had produced an environment of -

    1. declining post millennial evangelical optimism
    2. the Social gospel’s tendencies to despecify its message and merge with cultural institutions
    3. the rise of dogmatic Darwinism
    4. the development of German Higher Criticism
    5. the changing roles of women in culture and society
     
  20. micahaaron

    micahaaron
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Fundamentals were published as a result of the Niagara Bible Conferences were it was agreed that Theological Liberalism and Modernism had produced an environment of -

    1. declining post millennial evangelical optimism
    2. the Social gospel’s tendencies to despecify its message and merge with cultural institutions
    3. the rise of dogmatic Darwinism
    4. the development of German Higher Criticism
    5. the changing roles of women in culture and society [/QB][/QUOTE]


    Sounds like nothing has changed from 1850!
     

Share This Page

Loading...