Questions for Fundamentalists

Discussion in 'Fundamental Baptist Forum' started by Van, Nov 10, 2014.

  1. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    1) I think every Baptist church teaches the deity of Christ. So that does not create much separation from all other Baptist churches.

    2) I think pretty much every Baptist church "claims" to believe in the verbal-plenary inspiration of the scriptures. But if a church teaches not from a bible that at least strives to present scripture translated by the word for word translation philosophy, such as the ESV, NIV, NLT and NET, they are only paying lib-service to the idea that God inspired the very words of scripture.

    3) Again, I think pretty much every Baptist church teaches the future imminent return of Christ. If I am mistaken, please show me the error of my ways.

    4) And I also think pretty much every Baptist church teaches substitutionary atonement, Christ dying for all mankind, not all baptist churches teach penal substitutionary atonement, Christ dying for the Elect only. Does the umbrella of Fundamentalism cover both views?
     
  2. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,332
    Likes Received:
    786
    You are thinking wrong.
     
  3. blessedwife318

    blessedwife318
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2014
    Messages:
    1,873
    Likes Received:
    326
    The distinction that Fundamentalist would see is that they practice 2nd and 3rd degree Separation where as most Baptist do not separate from others to the same degree.
     
  4. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,193
    Likes Received:
    1,315
    A fundamentalist is ANYONE who believes the fundamentals of the faith.

    Unfortunately all too many Baptists are too stupid to understand that and keep trying to add to the fundamentals to prove they, and they alone, are the REAL fundamentalists.

    What they don't seem to understand is that fundamentalism is divided into three fairly distinct groups:

    Militant fundamentalists who believe in naming, exposing, and denouncing those who do not believe the fundamentals of the faith.

    Moderate fundamentalists who believe the fundamentals but do not see a need to name, expose, and denounce those who don't.

    Modified fundamentalists who not only don't see a need to name, expose, and denounce those who deny the fundamentals, but will cooperate with them in social outreach and educational efforts.

    But all groups have one very important thing in common. They all believe the fundamentals of the faith.

    1. The inerrancy of scripture.
    2. The virgin birth and deity of Christ.
    3. The substitutionary atonement .
    4. The bodily resurrection of Christ.
    5. The return of Christ. (There was, and is, no universally held, specific eschatological view since the founders of the fundamentalist movement were from various denominations and held various views of the end times.)
     
  5. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    Lets see:

    1) The Revmitchell said I was wrong, but failed to say what was right. Nuff said. :)

    2) Blessedwife318 agreed with practicing separation from liberal churches, but did not weigh in on the questions concerning fundamental beliefs.

    3) TCassidy also sought to define fundamentalism according to their separation from other baptist churches, but did not specifically answer my questions.

    4) Inerrancy of scripture was added to the list of distinctives provided by JOJ, but left out whether the original autographs are in view or the currently available copies which are inconsistent.

    5) I see I skipped the virgin birth in the OP, but I believe all Baptist churches believe Jesus was born of a virgin, i.e. supernatural conception.

    6) And likewise, I believe all Baptist churches believe Jesus bodily arose from the dead, walked the earth was seen by many people, ate meals, and ascended into heaven.

    So I come back to my questions:

    1) Can a church be considered "fundamentalist" if it teaches from other than the KJV, NKJV, and NASB?

    2) And I also think pretty much every Baptist church teaches substitutionary atonement, Christ dying for all mankind, not all baptist churches teach penal substitutionary atonement, Christ dying for the Elect only. Does the umbrella of Fundamentalism cover both views?
     
  6. Marooncat79

    Marooncat79
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2014
    Messages:
    291
    Likes Received:
    12
    I can promise you that your premise is very wrong.

    I grew up in a Baptist Church that:

    1. Denied the Virgin Birth

    2. Denied the Resurrection

    3. Denied Sola Scriptura

    4. It was said from the Pulpit "Jesus Himself, not the Apostles ever understood Himself/Him to be the Son of God, and never proclaimed Himself the SOG".
     
  7. Marooncat79

    Marooncat79
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2014
    Messages:
    291
    Likes Received:
    12
    TO VAN-

    I would also include the ESV
     
  8. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,193
    Likes Received:
    1,315
    You might try reading what I actually wrote. How can you define fundamentalism according to their separation from other baptist churches when they who are being separated from are fundamentalist? Duh!

    The whole point (which seems to have gone over your head) is that they are ALL fundamentalists!
     
  9. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Not true. I reference the 1972 controversy between John R. Rice (who opposed secondary separation) and Bob Jones, Jr., who favored it (though he disliked the term).
     
  10. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    I see you like Dr. Dollar's taxonomy for this subject. However, good luck getting through on this to Van. (Now Van is going to point out that I have not interacted with him and answered his questions. He will be correct on that and will remain correct. :D)
     
  11. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,193
    Likes Received:
    1,315
    Exactly! And both were undeniably fundamentalists! :)
     
  12. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,126
    Likes Received:
    220
    I think there is some truth to this - part of the problem is that those practicing 2nd and 3rd, will contend those who do not fully agree (meaning 100%) will say we are NOT fundamentalists.
    Now, I am not saying all are like that, but many are.

    So the ultimate question is:
    who gets to determine the actual definition of a Fundamentalist.

    Ponder this:
    When I was in West VA (manager of a Christian Radio Station) I was talking to a Methodist pastor. He described himself as a somewhat liberal. Yet, when he took on a church, and told them, all you need to be saved is to be born again - he was called a Fundamentalist. Yet, he told me he was somewhat a liberal. But if the church wanted to call him fundy - that was fine with him.
    (wish I could remember his name - would love to contact him after some 20+ years.)
     
  13. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Indubitably! :type:
     
  14. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    So I come back to my questions:

    1) Can a church be considered "fundamentalist" if it teaches from other than the KJV, NKJV, and NASB?

    2) And I also think pretty much every Baptist church teaches substitutionary atonement, Christ dying for all mankind, not all baptist churches teach penal substitutionary atonement, Christ dying for the Elect only. Does the umbrella of Fundamentalism cover both views?
     
  15. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Make up your mind.
     
  16. robt.k.fall

    robt.k.fall
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2010
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
    In answer to both your questions yes and yes. At least if we are talking about historic Fundamentalism. In the last few years, many have majored on the minors, they moved matters that are at best Category 2 and more probably Category 3 into Category 1.
    Please see Categories of Truth. It is a sticky thread at the top of this forum.

    Remember, not only are there Fundamental Baptists there are also Fundamental Presbyterians (e.g. Ian Paisley) and Fundamental Methodists (e.g. Bob Jones, Sr.).
     
  17. robt.k.fall

    robt.k.fall
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2010
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
    He doesn't have to. He's reporting what he believes to be the position of Baptist churches.
     
  18. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Which is it? Either virtually every Baptist church teaches that Christ died for all mankind, or that not all Baptist churches teach that Christ died for the elect alone.

    If A) then 95% or more of churches teach that Christ died for all mankind.

    If B) then most Baptist churches teach that Christ died for only the elect.

    A and B are clearly not synonymous.
     
  19. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    Thanks Robert, for your very informative post, directly and clearly answering my questions.

    Speaking only about Baptist churches that claim to be "fundamentalist" can you identify a link to their website that claims both to be fundamentalist, and uses some other translation (other than NASB, KJV or NKJV)?
     
  20. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    And as for the issue of Bible translations, that would fall into category 3.
     

Share This Page

Loading...