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?
Questions for Fundamentalists
Discussion in 'Fundamental Baptist Forum' started by Van, Nov 10, 2014.
Page 1 of 4
-
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
You are thinking wrong.
-
blessedwife318 Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
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.
-
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.) -
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? -
Marooncat79 Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
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". -
Marooncat79 Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
TO VAN-
I would also include the ESV -
The whole point (which seems to have gone over your head) is that they are ALL fundamentalists! -
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
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.) -
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
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? -
-
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.).
-
He doesn't have to. He's reporting what he believes to be the position of Baptist churches.
-
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. -
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)? -
Page 1 of 4