Warren vs Fundamentalism

Discussion in 'Fundamental Baptist Forum' started by SolaSaint, Apr 19, 2010.

  1. SolaSaint

    SolaSaint
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,824
    Likes Received:
    25
    I read a quote from Rick Warren on Lighthouse Trails website:

    "Today there really aren't that many Fundamentalists left; I don't know if you know that or not, but they are such a minority; there aren't that many Fundamentalists left in America ... Now the word 'fundamentalist' actually comes from a document in the 1920s called the Five Fundamentals of the Faith. And it is a very legalistic, narrow view of Christianity." Quote by Rick Warren, May 2005.

    I'll gladly be in that minority if you take out the word legalistic from his quote. My view of fundamentalism is a little different that what Warren believes. Look at what the five fundamentals are:

    * Inerrancy of the Scriptures
    * The virgin birth and the deity of Jesus (Isaiah 7:14)
    * The doctrine of substitutionary atonement by God's grace and through human faith (Hebrews 9)
    * The bodily resurrection of Jesus (Matthew 28)
    * The authenticity of Christ's miracles (or, alternatively, his pre-millennial second coming), e.g. healing,[6] deliverance,[7] and second coming[8]

    I copied this from Wikipedia. For those here who defend Warren, please tell me which of the five fundamentals are legalistic.
     
  2. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,332
    Likes Received:
    786
    As usual he didn't know what he was talking about
     
  3. Steven2006

    Steven2006
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Messages:
    2,065
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am not a fan of Warren's at all. However I suspect that quote is not entirely accurate and not in context. I believe he was saying that many of today's fundamentalist are legalistic, not that the five fundamentals are legalistic.
     
  4. Bob Alkire

    Bob Alkire
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2001
    Messages:
    3,134
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm with you brother. Never been a legalistic or less you call it that if I say a person who does not agree with the five fundamentals you have listed below are wrong.

    I agree with all of these.
     
  5. SolaSaint

    SolaSaint
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,824
    Likes Received:
    25
    Steven2006,

    You could be right about his statement, but I wonder if he stands in favor of the inerrant word?
     
  6. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why not ask him? Gossip is sin, you know.
     
  7. Trotter

    Trotter
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    I went looking for the entire quote as I hate to be misquoted myself. Here's what I found:
    Seems that Warren was speaking about current day "fundamentalists" and not about the Five Fundamentals of the Faith. I don't agree with Warren on a lot of things, but I'm not one to stand by while another is accused of something they did not do or say.

    Warren is correct. "Fundamentalists" today have become a fringe element that have added their own legalistic views and opinions to the bible. While I hold to the Fundamentals I would not classify myself as a fundy for that single reason.
     
  8. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    Agreed..as seen on the church membership thread.
     
  9. SolaSaint

    SolaSaint
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,824
    Likes Received:
    25
    All I'm saying is that I consider myself a fundamentalist Christian when it comes down to doctrine. Mr. Warren on the other hand feels like calling anyone or anything that is classified as fundamental as fringe or legalistic. I know where he's coming from on this for I too am offended by legalistic Christians, but to label fundamentalists as fringe?

    If you don't consider yourself a Christian who holds to the fundamentals of Christianity, then what kind of label does Warren put on that?

    And Webdog, I have tried to contact Warren in the past about his liberal views of scripture and he never replied.
     
  10. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amazing...you are called out that the OP is false yet still feel the need to slander and defend you doing so. His staff is good at answering questions, btw.
     
  11. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76

    Where has the OP been proven false? Just because you and someone else don't agree with the OP doesn't make it false.

    The quote:

    Is very clear. I've read it in the larger context and it still reads the same. Warren believes that fundamentalism, as defined by the Five Fundamentals of the Faith, is legalistic. I completely disagree with that statement. I attend a church that can be described as Fundamentalist and many there will tell you it is Fundamentalist. We are not legalists.
     
  12. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    I see you did not even read the source Trotter supplied :rolleyes: It clearly is a secondhand source, not in context in it's entirety.

    The "direct quote" was from reformedrundamentalist.com NOT RW, and I have yet to see that direct quote from him in context.
     
    #12 webdog, Apr 20, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 20, 2010
  13. jaigner

    jaigner
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,274
    Likes Received:
    0
    There are those who would refer to themselves as "fundamentalists" based on the original criteria, the Five Fundamentals. Most of the time, though, "fundamentalist" is used as a pejorative term by other evangelicals or mainline Christians to describe those who are generally legalistic and anti-intellectual. Technically, this isn't correct, but the term has taken on this meaning today more strongly than the original intent of the term.

    For the record, I sometimes use "fundamentalist" to describe that camp because of its strong connotations, but prefer to describe more specifically with terms like "legalist."

    The same can be said of "liberals." Technically, a "liberal" is one who denied the "supernatural" content of Scripture, beginning with miracles and then incorporating the other four from the list. But everyone throws that word around in a pejorative sense today, so that we don't know who a liberal is anymore. It could be a political or social liberal. It could be someone who preaches about social justice. Or, it could be egalitarians. I even heard some "fundie" preacher recently call Calvinists "liberals." I was like...uh...no.

    Personally, I think Warren is Christianity light and full of fluff and pragmatism, but it doesn't appear and I would seriously doubt that he would define the "Five Fundamentals" to be "legalistic." That doesn't add up. He must be talking about the more general use of the term "fun...." today.
     
  14. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76
    Yes..I did read the source that Trotter supplied. Obviously you did not, or you would have seen the footnote that links you to the direct source of interview in which the quote comes from. I still stand by my statement. I read the quote in context and he clearly says that fundamentalism, as defined by the Five Fundamentals of the Faith, is legalistic.
     
  15. Ivon Denosovich

    Ivon Denosovich
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    In the spirit of Clinton's, "It depends on what is is," I submit, "It depends on what IT is." Specifically, this "it":

    (Bolding mine.) The fact that he used a pronoun immediately after a reference to single thing is the point of contention. If he was saying that fundamentalism as defined by the pamphlet he was discussing is legalistic then he's wrong. But he very well could have changed topics (or "it"s if you prefer) and meant something like, And fundamentalism as understood today is a very legalistic, narrow view of Christianity. If this is what he meant then his comment on fundamentalism should be viewed as 1) etymology of the word; 2) evolution of the word. Otherwise, and in a problematic sense, his comments become 1) definition of a term; 2) his dissent with the term.

    So which IT is it? Was he jawing about the word or the doctrines?
     
  16. Steven2006

    Steven2006
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Messages:
    2,065
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here is the actual source.

    http://pewforum.org/events/index.php?EventID=80


    I really believe he is talking about today's fundamentalist. Yes in his answer he gives the background to where the word came from but if you read the entire interview I believe he is clearly separating himself from the fundamentalist movement of today. He could have chosen his words much better, and probably should have done so.

    PS: I attend a independent fundamental baptist church; I don't care for Warren, but I really don't believe he was describing the five fundamentals, but only mentioned them to better explain and add background to the word.

    Now there are other things that he has said that I do have problems with, but I don't think this is a big deal.
     
  17. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    It is like the saying, "You can be a fundamentalist but you don't have to act like one."
     
  18. IronWill

    IronWill
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2006
    Messages:
    233
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, that is the source. It's footnoted in my blog post that is being referenced here. If one reads the entire quote in it's context, it's quite clear that that Warren is referring to modern-day Fundamentalists, not those who simply hold to the five Fundamentals. How on earth did my blog get brought up anyway?
     
  19. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    It appears Warren is not referring to the "Fundamentals" but fundamentalism in a negative light. I'd agree. It's no longer a badge of honor to be called a fundamentalist because most fundamentalists jettison the old fundamentals as they embrace new ones

    I have no links, but Warren's Bibliology appears orthodox from what I've read. And I'm no Warren fan. But I'm no fan of slander, either.
     
  20. PastorGreg

    PastorGreg
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2000
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yup, us fundimentilists is jist a bunch o' ignerent leegleists.

    Interesting that the perjoratives and generalizations are only acceptable when directed toward Fundys and KJV defenders.
     

Share This Page

Loading...