Young Fundamentalist Survey Results now available

Interesting,

 

252 Pages of interesting. Have only begun to digest the information. Very fascinating demographic data there. And the Individual responses to the questions are absolutely mind-boggling.

Do some of the older fundamentalists (35+) realize what they have done to their kids? Some of the responses almost brought tears to my eyes. Plus, you will have to filter out many that are simply indocrinated uninformed yung'ns who simply parroted what they have been told to say about particular issues.

 

That's for sure.

Old fundies are driving their own kids away from their brand of fundamentalism with their excessive legalism and/or nonessentials. Their kids know that conservative evangelicals are carrying the real torch of historic fundamentalism.

I'm 43, but I was driven out of fundamentalism by BJU at the age of 21 when I wanted to attend DTS.

 

Did you ever get to go to DTS?

 

Ironically, no. I graduated from Grace College after being denied reenrollment for my last semester at BJU.

I then attended TEDS and studied under the authors of the books we used at BJU and NBBC!

What irony! And, of course, I was now labeled a New Evangelical.

But one by one I have watched my cousins and college friends leave the BJU/NBBC orbit for sanity.

 

Love the way you phrased that!

 

No surprises in the survey. The answers merely reflect what I would expect based on the study target. I am just thankful this group is a small minority within the broader scope of evangelicalism.

 

No surprises?

I was SHOCKED.

 

What were you shocked by?

 

Anyone notice in the survey how many have not been discipled by someone?

 

I observed two things.

The lack of discipleship.

The parroting of 18-21 year olds.

 

I would question whether or not a movement should be judged by those who "left it" to keep their "sanity." With due respect to Paul (and I mean no ill will by this), he is not a good standard by which to judge fundamentalism. He has left it, willingly and repudiated much of what it stands for. That fine, Paul ... again, I mean nothing untowards by that. I am simply pointing out that you are not one of the ones targeted by the survey ... an 18-35 year old self-identified fundamentalist. I am not even one of those.

Fundamentalism certainly has its whackos, as Paul would testify to. There have been those who have exercised unjust judgement, harsh criticism, unloving responses, hateful speech, hypocritical lifestyle, and the like. Truth be told, evangelicalism has just as much as fundamentalism does. But in fundamentalism, there are plenty who would stand in biblical holiness and love, not in the hypocrisy and legalism with which Paul would like to judge the whole idea of fundamentalism.

Paul was not "driven out of fundamentalism by BJU." BJU has no power to drive anyone out of fundamentalism. They represent one segment of the idea of fundamentalism. Paul felt (whether rightly or wrongly) that he was being mistreated by some in fundamentalism with respect to his choice of school. He left of his own accord. There is no heirarchy in fundamentalism with the power to drive anyone out, or admit anyone. Fundamentalism is an idea ... you either subscribe to it, or you don't.

What this survey seems to show is that there are a lot of young fundamentalists who do not buy the arguments of the older generation in various ways, some good and some bad. In younger fundamentalism, there is a strong desire for thinking (sometimes misguided thinking). They want to see arguments made from Scripture, or from scriptural principle. They are not accepting blindly, or parroting the positions of the past. The survey shows a wide range on non-fundamental issues such as music, versions, etc.

There is a great lack of discipleship, which is probably true across the board. I would be willing to bet that that the percentage of people on this board who were individually discipled is no greater than the percentage of the survey. Individual discipleship has never been popular. Most of it has taken place in a group setting.

But this is a survey about what younger people believe and think. It isn't without flaws in methodology since no survey is perfect. Nor is it the "be all and end all" of fundamentalist thought. Don't read it for more than it is ... a reflection of what 1100 or so self-identified fundamentalists believe at a particular point in time.

 

And ridiculous amounts of false guilt, exactly what one would expect from that age group in the institutions that were targeted for the sample.

I didn't know anyone still believed some of that stuff.

 

What do you mean false guilt?

 

This is where Larry is wrong. I have not left fundamentalism. BJU left me. But BJU is not necessarily the standard of fundamentalism.

The survey shows that there are alot of "young fundamentalists" who believe just like I do. So the truth of the matter is, I identify with many and am one of the many who are called "young fundamentalists."

Denominations like the EFCA, CBA, and BGC, and individuals like Jerry Falwell are more in tune with historic fundamentalists than the lunatic fringe of BJU and NBBC.

Witn no disrespect to Pastor Larry, he only represents a shrinking and dying section of "fundamentalism." Thank God that many of the younger guys have seen the light and are identifying with conservative evangelicals. The question they are asking is, "Why are we supposed to be separated from Piper, MacArthur, etc."

To God be the Glory!

 

Hi Larry,

When BJU denies reenrollment, they have shut the door on that person.

Attending TEDS and being taught by professors whose books are used at BJU, NBBC, MBBC, etc doesn't make one a non-fundamentalist despite what the leaders of NBBC, BJU, and MBBC say.

But to suggest that there is no gatekeeper to fundamentalism is highly misleading. Every sub-orbit of fundamentalism knows exactly who is in and who is out, who is acceptable and who isn't.

That's why the survey was done. The younger guys aren't buying what they are being sold.

 

No disrespect Paul, but I think you are painting with to narrow a brush. Fundamentalism IMHO is pretty broad. There line that determines who is "in" and who is "out" is not that fine, at least according to many self identified fundamentalists.

Ture there are some that are what I call "hyper-fundamentalists", that would be quick to narrow the field of who they consider to be fundamentalist.

The line between those that are conservative evangelicals and younger fundamentalists IMO are becoming rather muddled.

 

4His,

We agree. That was my point to Larry. Larry is quick to claim that I, and others like me, aren't true fundamentalists. I beg to differ and I think the survey bears that out.

Depending on the subgroup of older fundamentalists we are discussing, I submit that they do know who is in and who is out. That's why the younger fundamentalists are reacting the way that they are. They don't buy the line that is being drawn.

Younger fundamentalists are conservative evangelicals because conservative evangelical structures represent true fundamentalism for the younger generation.

 

I didn't say BJU was the standard. You claimed they ran you out of fundamentalism. That is inaccurate, Paul. BJU has no power or authority to run anyone out of fundamentalism. You are the one who left BJU. You left their ideals and their principles. That wasn't their fault. And I am not saying you were wrong. I am not passing judgment on that at all. I am merely saying that they didn't go anywhere. If anything, in recent years, they have come more your direction then away from it.

Here, you want to use "fundamentalism" broadly, and claim it. Before (here and other threads), you claimed you were out of it. In fact, on page 1, you said you were driven out of it. You gotta make up your mind, it seems to me.

First, "lunatic fringe" is a perjorative term that adds nothing to the debate except your own opinion. You declare them the lunatic fringe. Fine. That doesn't make it so. Your bitterness and resentment has been documented here before stemming from teh way you were allegedly treated by BJU, as well as your family, if I recall. Your comments on the first page indicate a residual problem between you and BJU.

Second, the groups you mention are not within historic fundamentalism as it has developed. We probably don't need to rehash the history of fundamentalism here, but you should not rewrite it to make your own position seem different than it was.

I am not sure that you know enough about me to know what I represent. Secondly, I don't think you have enough connections in fundamentalism to know what is dying and what is gaining strength. (I don't either ... and I don't think it matters.)

Yes and no. Some are ... some are not.

And those questions are being answered.

We can agree on that.

What do you mean by "shut the door"? I don't think you have used that term before. There are a number of reasons why BJU might deny reenrollment, some good and some not so good. But the fact that BJU denies reenrollment signifies nothing about fundamentalism.

Obviously not. It may indicate that one is not a fundamentalist, but it doesn't make one a non-fundamentalist. As a matter of fact, some of the professors at the fundamentalist colleges have degrees from TEDS, Dallas, and The Master's. So clearly, attending those schools does not make one a non-fundamentalist.

I think those in fundamentalism would disagree. Who is this gatekeeper? As a fundamentalist who would identify with much of what the so called young fundamentalists hold to, I know of no gatekeeper that I have to answer to, and I probably know more people in it than you do. Among the leaders of fundamentalism, there is no agreement on whether or not there is even a fundamentalist movement, much less whether there is a gatekeeper for it. The borders of fundamentalism are rather foggy and blurry.

I am not sure what the antecedent of "why" is, as in the reason for the survey. It was done in conjunction with teh National Leaderhip Conference at Calvary.

But again, I think you are reading too much into it. And I think you have a misunderstanding of what is going on in fundamentalism. Honestly, in all your posts here, I have seen nothing of the fundamentalism that I am a part of. I don't think you have said much, if anything, that reflects what I and many of the fundamentalists I know hold to. You have made no secret of your disdain for fundamentalism and that is fine ... But you can't at the same time hold yourself up as an authority on the "ins and outs" of fundamentalism. That simply isn't accurate.

There is no distinct fundamentalist line. There is no board of approval. There is no license to apply for to use the term. But historically, the term has meant something and we can't just go out and redefine it in order to fit ourselves under it. MacArthur and Piper repudiated fundamantalism for a reason. They separated from it. That is fine ... But don't come back and pretend to be a part of it.