Kevin Bauder, a self-identified fundamentalist, hits a home run with “Let’s Get Clear on This.”

Some excerpts:

• Conservative evangelicals are different from Fundamentalists, but they are not new evangelicals.
• Conservative evangelicals have majored on the centrality of the gospel and the exaltation of God.
• Nevertheless, some Fundamentalists have managed to convince themselves that conservative evangelicals are the enemy.
• [Some fundamentalist leaders are] recognizing that the Fundamentalist label is no guarantee of doctrinal fidelity. They are aware that historic, mainstream Fundamentalism has more in common with conservative evangelicals than it does with many who wear the Fundamentalist label.
• Conservative evangelicals are not our enemies. They are not our opponents. Conservative evangelicals have proven themselves to be allies and even leaders in the defense of the faith.
• If we attack conservative evangelicals, then we attack the defense of the faith.

The version of this essay that appeared in my inbox this afternoon concludes with these two paragraphs:

If we believe that we must respond to conservative evangelicalism, then let us begin by addressing the areas in which they have exposed our weakness. Let us refocus our attention upon the exaltation of God. Let us exalt, apply, and defend the gospel in all its fullness. If we were more like what we ought to be, perhaps we would feel less threatened by those whose exploits attract the attention of our followers.

Whatever our differences, I thank God for John Piper. I thank God for Mark Dever. I thank God for John MacArthur. I thank God for D. A. Carson. I thank God for a coalition of Christian leaders who have directed our focus to the centrality of the gospel and the exaltation of God. May their defense of the biblical faith prosper.

Read the whole thing: PDF | HTML.

Update:

1. Dave Doran responds to Kevin Bauder.
2. Chris Anderson responds to both Bauder and Doran.
3. Dave Doran responds again.

“Comparing Fundamentalist faith and practice to the faith and practice of historic Christianity is like comparing a hamburger to a filet mignon. The two obviously have something in common, but it would be misleading to say that everything in the steak is also in the hamburger.”

–Kevin Bauder, “Fundamentalism: Whence? Where? Whither? Part 2: Fundamentalism and History”

“Fundamentalism: Whence? Where? Whither? Part 1: Things Have Changed”

Some excerpts:

• In 1986 [i.e., when "the last sustained history of fundamentalism" was "published by a fundamentalist"], neither Dave Doran nor Tim Jordan held the pastorates that have come to be associated with their names. Dan Davey and Mark Minnick were associate pastors in Virginia Beach and Greenville, respectively. Matt Olson was just a few years into the planting of Tri-City Baptist Church near Denver. John Hartog III was a college student, and Stephen Jones was still in high school.
• In 1986, clear fissures were already evident within the fundamentalist movement.
• Things have changed for fundamentalism. Indeed, they still are. Rapidly. For a generation there has been no comprehensive attempt to summarize the changes and directions within fundamentalism, to link them to the past, and to draw out the trajectories along which they may carry fundamentalist churches and institutions in the future.
• These essays will neither defend nor denounce fundamentalism.
• I do not intend to try to persuade anyone—least of all young leaders—that they must remain in the fundamentalist movement. I love the idea of fundamentalism, and I would like to persuade people of its beauty and utility. The fundamentalist movement, however, is at best an imperfect embodiment of the idea. Those who can find a better incarnation of the idea ought to pursue it. Ideas ought to command our allegiance, not party or institutional loyalties.
• One underlying thesis of this series is that the fundamentalist movement no longer exists. The unraveling of the movement began in the 1960s and has continued virtually without interruption. At the present, little coherence remains among self-identified fundamentalists. The result is that no one can choose to be a fundamentalist simpliciter. In order to be a fundamentalist at all, one must choose among fundamentalist influences and institutions. The inevitable result is that all contemporary fundamentalists are modified fundamentalists, in the sense that they all require some modifier or qualifier to be attached to the name.

Note: Central Seminary emails Kevin Bauder‘s essays every Friday afternoon. You can join the mailing list (as well as access the archives) here.

John Piper commends Kevin Bauder’s “A Time to Speak Up“:

I would like to encourage all fundamentalists and former fundamentalists to feel a good breeze from the fevered landscape of controversy.

Read the whole thing.

“Time to Speak Up” is a bold, timely, provocative, sane word from Kevin Bauder that accomplishes at least three goals:

1. refutes Danny Sweatt’s recent diatribe (cf. “An Example of a Fundamentalism Not Worth Saving“)
2. assures young fundamentalists that “Sweatt does not represent historic, mainstream fundamentalism”
3. challenges fundamentalist leaders (esp. in the FBF) to face this Calvinism-phobia (of which Sweatt’s diatribe is symptomatic) directly and promptly

Update:

1. John Piper comments on Bauder’s article: “Good Breeze from a Fundamentalist Neighbor“
2. Justin Taylor in “Fundamentalism 101“: “Slandering fundamentalists is something of an acceptable pastime for evangelicals (not to mention the wider Christian commnunity and culture). But since slander is sin, we’re better off showing respect (even when we critique) and seeking to learn what we can.”

Kevin Bauder argues in “Liberal Education” that colleges and seminaries should train pastors to think precisely, namely, to deploy “the skills of grammar, logic, and rhetoric.” Why?

A pastor’s main task is to do the work of the mind. His calling requires him to interpret texts and bring them to bear upon the issues of life. In other words, a pastor is constantly confronting ideas. He stands as a bridge between the ideas in the world of the Bible and the ideas with which his congregation is, or ought to be, wrestling. In short, a pastor’s main work is to think.

Note: Central Seminary emails these essays every Friday afternoon. You can join the mailing list (as well as access the archives) here.