Are Fundamentalist Baptists Also reformed?

Jim,

There may need to be a definition of fundamentalism, but I would hold to Machen's critique of fundamentalism and would not call myself a fundamentalist.

 

I knew this about Henry. Didn't think he lined up in quite the same way as Machen. In other words, I don't believe he stood up against liberalism like Machen did. Henry, as one of the New Evangelicals, argued for infiltration of liberalism as a means to evangelism rather than the fundamentalist separation from liberalism.

How could he do this since fundamentalism didn't exist in 1909?

At any rate, thanks for this history lesson. Very interesting. It's obvious that you know much more than I do in this area of evangelical history.

 

His argument in 1909 was against the concept of fundamentalism, he approached the same issues that the fundy's were arguing. The 1920's saw a clearer articulation of fundamentalism, but what Machen argued in his book was an argument of the predecessors and concept of fundamentalism, which have their roots well prior to the 1920's.

 

I guess that depends on who you believe. If on fundamentalism's origen I followed Ernest Sandeen's thesis or my brother Andrew Himes in his book I would agree. But I tend toward George Dollar's view that it is a more recent development starting with the series of pamphlets edited by Torrey.

 

Correct. The difference is that Torrey and the other original fundamentalists believed in standing against theologies that opposed these teachings.