Andy Naselli

Thoughts on Theology

fundamentalism

“Fundamentalist baggage”

by

Here are a couple of interesting paragraphs from Greg Beale‘s latest book, The Erosion of Inerrancy in Evangelicalism: Responding to New Challenges to Biblical Authority (Wheaton: Crossway, 2008).

In fact, there is an increasingly popular attitude that the Chicago Statement and the term inerrancy carry significant “fundamentalist baggage,” with all the negative associations that go with the word fundamentalism (e.g., narrow, obscurantist, anti-scholarly, unsophisticated). I have found that this perspective is also shared by some more conservative biblical and theological scholars. This is not the place to discuss the origins of the word fundamentalism and the development of the use of the word. Suffice it to say that what appears to be “fundamentalist” is in the eye of the beholder.

J. I. Packer in his “Fundamentalism” and the Word of God has given a nice, brief discussion of the origins of fundamentalism and how the word has come to be used. Though that was written in the late 1950s, his basic points still hold. There he distinguishes a fundamentalist view of Scripture from an  evangelical view, the latter of which he subsequently identified with the Chicago Statement on inerrancy since he himself was one of the more well known among its signatories in 1978 (p. 21).

Kevin Bauder on the Dissolution of Pillsbury

by

Earlier this week Pillsbury Baptist Bible College, a fundamentalist college in Owatonna, Minnesota, published this announcement:

The Pillsbury Baptist Bible College Board of Trustees has announced that the college will cease academic activities on December 31, 2008. National economic conditions combined with deficits caused by declining enrollment have exhausted Pillsbury’s financial reserves, leaving the college without funds to complete the school year.

[Read more…] about Kevin Bauder on the Dissolution of Pillsbury

Kevin Bauder on Biblical Separation

by

Kevin Bauder recently presented a ten-part seminar on “Biblical Separation” at International Bible College in Tempe, Arizona.

    1. Images of Christian Unity: The Flock and the New Humanity (9.16.2008)
    2. Images of Christian Unity: Body (9.16.2008)
    3. The Basis of Christian Unity and Jesus’ High-Priestly Prayer — Part 1 (9.16.2008)
    4. The Basis of Christian Unity and Jesus’ High-Priestly Prayer — Part 2 (9.16.2008)
    5. The Nature of the Gospel (9.17.2008)
    6. The Notion of Fundamentals and Levels of Doctrine (9.17.2008)
    7. Departures from the Gospel and Basic Separation (9.17.2008)
    8. The Whole Counsel and Levels of Christian Fellowship (9.18.2008)
    9. Discipline Offenses in the Church and Beyond (9.18.2008)
    10. The Problem of Indifferentism (9.18.2008)

      I have not listened to the MP3s yet (they are downloading as I type), but I would be surprised if this seminar is not a thoughtful, reasonable, respectful, logical argument for separation as held by historic fundamentalists. Kevin Bauder is a sharp thinker and gifted theologian. If you don’t have much exposure to fundamentalism or if the exposure you’ve had to it has been disappointing, you may be pleasantly surprised with Bauder. (Some of his writings are available here.)

      D. A. Carson on Evangelicalism (and Fundamentalism)

      by

      The following two (lengthy) MP3s by D. A. Carson are penetrating:

      This afternoon I listened to the more recent one (“What is Evangelicalism?”), and I was encouraged by Carson’s 4.5-minute analysis of the current state of fundamentalism. It is not particularly constructive when evangelicals and fundamentalists broad-brush and launch grenades at each other. Contrast Carson’s conciliatory attitude here: listen from 42:10 to 46:30.

      Update: A transcript of the 4.5-minute analysis is available here.

      Kevin Bauder: “Fundamentalism and Scholarship”

      by

      Kevin BauderBauder has finished another thoughtful series of short essays: “Fundamentalism and Scholarship.”

      I’ve combined all 12 short essays into one PDF.

      1. Not Me (January 4, 2008)
      2. What Is a Scholar? (January 11, 2008)
      3. Hazards of Scholarship (January 18, 2008)
      4. Does Fundamentalism Need Scholars? (January 25, 2008)
      5. Does Fundamentalism Have Scholars? (February 1, 2008)
      6. How Do We Get Scholars? (February 8, 2008)
      7. To Make a Scholar (February 15, 2008)
      8. The Scholarly Life (February 22, 2008)
      9. Models of Scholarship (February 29, 2008)
      10. Scholarship and Separatism (March 14, 2008)
      11. The Dual Responsibility of a Christian Scholar (March 21, 2008)
      12. The Christian Scholar’s Christian Responsibility (March 28, 2008)

      Note: Central Seminary emails these essays every Friday afternoon. You can access the archives here.

      John Piper’s Fundamentalist Father

      by

      John Piper just posted an article entitled “A Birthday Gift to My Father on His 89th Birthday.” The second section of this brief article—which quotes his father quoting Bob Jones Sr.—opens with this:

      “My father was a card-carrying fundamentalist, with a twist. He was irrepressibly happy in the grace of God. I suspect there are a lot of fundamentalists out there like that. For all I know, I may be one. So here is a taste of what I grew up with, which may be why abstaining from dancing, smoking, drinking, movie-going, and card-playing never felt like big sacrifice.”

      On a similar note, Piper dedicates The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright to his father:

      “This is the year (2007) that my father died. Who can estimate the debt we owe our fathers? Bill Piper preached the gospel of grace for over seventy years, if you count the songs and testimonies at the nursing home. He was an evangelist—the old southern, independent, fundamentalist sort, without the attitude. He remains in my memory the happiest man I ever knew” (p. 9).