The Battle against Biblical Fundamentalism’s Personal Separation

Introduction

Fundamentalism has its rifts and debates.  It always has and always will.  There are several concurrent debates within Fundamentalism. While some of these remain a constant, others are growing.  Some of what occurs is ignorable as it is inconsequential.  Other matters must not be ignored or downplayed as they represent bold challenges against the foundations of the movement.

One such growing rift is between what some have termed the “them” of cultural-Fundamentalism and the “us” of theological-Fundamentalism.  The distinction between the two is in the realm of theological based stances to cultural issues.  However, do not let the names fool you into which side accepts what.  It is actually the theological-labeled element that is more accepting of current cultural norms in our churches.

There have already been several articles which have documented the serious shortcomings of the so-called ideal Fundamentalism which is touted as the Fundamentalism worth saving.  (I personally believe that historic, Biblical Fundamentalism is still worth defending.)  This widely proclaimed new Fundamentalism, which is not Fundamentalism at all but a re-packaged New Evangelicalism, attempts to chip away at all aspects of Biblical Fundamentalism.  Sometimes it does so by casually changing previously accepted terms, meanings, and definitions.  At other times it does so by openly advocating fresh perspectives to replace the old, worn out, static positions of the past.  Examples of this are beginning to multiply especially in the area of Fundamentalism’s militancy and its ecclesiastical separation.  However, Fundamentalism’s personal separation has not been immune from these current deft but deliberate shifts either.  Though the spotlight has been on its militancy and its ecclesiastical separation, Biblical Fundamentalists need to rise to the occasion in defending the necessity of a personal separation for the believer in a time of increasing  acceptance of worldly culture within our churches.  Because the “theological” versus the “cultural” debate is the arena where the battles for and against Fundamentalism’s personal separation is occurring, it is a debate that must not be ignored.

Incompatible Gospels: The Misfit of Lordship Salvation and Gospel-Centric Fellowship

There may not be any problem more common among men, even good men, than their being inconsistent.  All men say one thing and then fail to always live by what they have professed.  It is a problem of a different kind when men try for whatever reason to join together two things that are not compatible.  While in this life inconsistency in itself is unavoidable, attempts to force a conjoining of incompatible properties or principles is not necessary.

In Fundamental circles there are two growing trends.  The first trend is for a man to begin to espouse a Gospel message that curiously has the same tints and shadows cast from one of Dr. John MacArthur’s The Gospel According to . . . books.  The second trend is

Simple Bible Truths Series, Part Thirteen

Man–the Deceitfulness of Sin

The worst thing about deception is that we usually do not see it happening to us until after its damage is done.  “Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me” may be an old saying, but in reality people get fooled all the time and mostly by the same old things.  Now most of us would have nothing more to do with any individual or organization that deceived us just once, but every day we believe sin’s sales pitch that if we practice its craft we can have pleasure, fulfillment, or success.

Simple Bible Truths Series, Part Twelve

Man–Sin and Death

It is one of the undeniable facts of life–death.  From our perspective we can rightly discern its universality though we rarely think about its eventual claim upon our own earthly existence.  Scientists spend time and money on theories of man’s origins, but how many have any scientific theories about his end?  Unlike science, God has not left us to face the inevitable in ignorance.

According to the Scriptures death operates in two realms–the physical and the spiritual.  A man is physically dead when his spirit departs his body.  James 2:26, “For as the body without the spirit is dead. . .” and Ecclesiastes 8:8, “There is no man that hath power over the spirit to retain the spirit; neither hath he power in the day of his death. . .”

A man is spiritually dead when he is separated from God because of his sin.  Ephesians 2:1, “And you hath he quickened [made alive], who were dead in trespasses and sins.”  Death, then, is a state of separation and not a state of annihilation; therefore, it is a beginning and not just an end.

Simple Bible Truths Series, Part Eleven

Man–Why There Is Sin

Many people have often wondered or even verbalized the question as to why everything is so messed up if God really exists and created the world and mankind.

Genesis 1:31, “And God saw that everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. . .”

To understand why things are so different now from the way that God created them in the Beginning, we need to examine the matter of sin and how it entered into the world bringing with it fear, sorrow, destruction, and death.

Could God have created a world without the possibility of sin and thereby kept its consequences from wrecking havoc?  Yes, He could have; however, without the possibility of evil there can exist no possibility for good either.  God wanted good and its great blessings for His creation, but the blessing of obedience follows only a genuine not a pretense obedience.  If the opportunity for disobedience does not exist, does obedience exist either?  This principle is seen in Isaiah 45:7,

“I [God] form the light, and create darkness: I make peace and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.”

Simple Bible Truths Series, Part Ten

Man-His Creation and Purpose

Origins are an oft-debated subject in scientific, educational, political, and even theological circles.  While it is the “science” or “faith” of origins that gets all the press and the focus in the debates, the consequences of origins must not be overlooked.  “And what are the consequences of origins?” one might ask.  They are whether man has a purpose in his existence and whether he has any accountability concerning the way he lives.

Simple Bible Truths Series, Part Nine

The Bible–Its Trustworthiness

Numbers 23:19, “God is not a man that he should lie, neither the son of man that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?”  We all no doubt have suffered the great disappointment of unfulfilled promises.  Someone promised us something, but for whatever reason they did not follow through on their word.  As we have considered the importance of the Bible’s inspiration, preservation, and authority, we still need to consider the Bible’s trustworthiness.  We cannot independently verify God’s accounts of the existence of Heaven, Hell or other like things recorded for us in the Bible nevertheless we know that they are true because of faith.  However, there are a multitude of events that God foretold would occur that are now a part of recorded human history.  In fact one reason why God foretold the unfolding of certain events was to attest to the veracity and, thereby, the trustworthiness of His Word.  Isaiah 46:10, “Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure. 11 Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it.” 

Interlude

Two factors have been keeping my blogging activities to a minimum of late.  The most important of these factors is that we are in the process of

In Honor-Captain Dale Goetz, United States Army Chaplain

Just last night through a national news program I learned that Captain Dale Goetz, a US Army Chaplain, had been killed by a roadside bomb in Afghanistan.  You can learn more about him here.  From that MBBC article I noticed this statement:

The ‘Old Axe’ of Fundamentalism at Central Baptist Theological Seminary

In my evangelistic travels I have always enjoyed the opportunity to meet and visit with people and to hear about life in the communities where they live.  Strange stories about how some people think have always caught my attention and stayed with me.  One man related to me that he knew a man in his community that had a prized axe that had been in the family for many years.  The man viewed it as an heirloom.  It was said that as the old man reminisces about the axe, he includes a story about how he had to replace its handle after it had broken.  Then there is also the story about how years ago during the time his father used it the axe head itself had been lost and replaced.  The implication and significance of those two merely incidental replacements were lost upon the old man because in his thinking he had the axe his family had always used.

When the present presidential leadership of Central Baptist Theological Seminary speaks of continuing the heritage and vision of that institution, he can only do so in the same way that the above old man did of his “family’s” axe.  There was nothing original left of the old axe, but since the individual parts had been changed out separately with much time elapsing between the events it was possible to think that the axe was something that it no longer was.  So is the case with CBTS.