<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Jim Curran<\/strong><\/a><\/a> 3\/5\/2020 The problem with fundamentalism is not necessarily that it had a Protestant origin. There were several parallel movements happening. Some were in Protestantism yes, but there were similar movements among the Northern and Southern Baptists. Fundamentalism arose as a reaction (or more precisely a holding to Biblical paths that had always been) to evolution and theological liberalism which attacked the Scripture and Biblical doctrine. These issues evolved in the Protestant denominations and among the Baptists in similar timing. The spread of theological liberalism was more rapid among the Protestants because of such things as unscriptural church government. Those with a false hierarchical church structure such as the Methodists would pair a liberal church with a conservative pastor and a liberal pastor with a conservative church thus driving everything liberal. The most pronounced drift to theological liberalism among Baptists was in the Northern Baptist Convention first then later the Southern Baptists. Here the tactic by the liberals was different- control the schools (example University of Chicago “divinity school”) and the publishing. As a reaction various groups either left or opposed the liberalism within such as the Baptist Bible Union and the Conservative Baptists. Others such as the GARBC, American Baptist Association, BBFI and others left. The problem was that some would ally themselves with the Protestant fundamentalists seeing a common cause. The other problem is that some things were left off- most notably Scriptural baptism. (of course the Baptist distinctives were left off) Another issue was the fountainhead of a lot of the liberal movement was not dealt with- the critical text behind the still emerging “modern versions” The men behind it were rank theological liberals (If you have a strong enough stomach skim Nestle’s book on textural criticism it can make you sick) I will note Feinberg who wrote the Fundamentals for today was Protestant and was on the NASB comittee. Of course RA Torey was Protestant too. The problem with fundamentalism is that it did not go far enough. You must be a Baptist in doctrine too.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n THE CLASSIC FUNDAMENTALIST MOVEMENT<\/p>\n\n\n\n As we have stated, Fundamentalism as a movement came from the efforts of many preachers and organizations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The movement can be generally seen as beginning with conservative Presbyterian theologians at Princeton Theological Seminary in the late 19th century. It soon spread to conservatives among the Baptists and other denominations around 1910-1920. Men such as Presbyterians R. A. Torrey, James H. Brookes, and G. Gresham Machen; Methodists such as Bob Jones Sr.; and Baptists such as John Roach Stratton and John R. Rice all defended the Bible. The movement\u2019s purpose was to reaffirm key theological tenets and zealously defend them against the challenges of liberal theology and Modernism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The term \u201cfundamentalism\u201d has its roots in the Niagara Bible Conferences (1878\u20131897) which defined those tenets it considered fundamental to Christian belief.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Fundamentalism as a classic movement was promoted greatly by the release of the twelve volume set of books called simply, \u201cThe Fundamentals,\u201d which was edited by R. A. Torrey, and published in 1910. Periodicals such as John R. Rice\u2019s, The Sword of the Lord, also contributed to the progress of the Fundamentalist movement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In my opinion, the Fundamentalist movement fulfilled its purpose to heighten awareness of the attack of modernism on the Bible, and to defend the inerrancy of the scriptures. For this we are grateful.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I was preaching in a Baptist history conference at a well known Baptist college. I gave details on the old Evangelical Alliance of the 19th century. After I had spoken in a morning session, a college professor questioned my thoughts on the Fundamentalist movement, because I taught there was no real reason for independent Baptists to be associated with the Fundamentalist movement any longer. This puzzled the teacher.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I said, \u201cCould you define the Fundamentalist movement as an effort of Bible-believers to rescue the old Evangelical Alliance from unbelief?\u201d He thought about it and answered in the affirmative. So I said, \u201cSo then, technically Fundamentalism as a movement no longer exists does it?\u201d He looked even more puzzled. I said, \u201cAre independent Baptists trying to rescue the Evangelical Alliance from unbelief? Are independent Baptists yoked with Methodists and Presbyterians in evangelistic campaigns?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The answer to these questions is of course, no. The classic Fundamentalist movement of the late 19th and early 20th century has come and gone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n TO BE CONTINUED<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thomas E. Kresal from: 21tnt.com<\/a> Essays by James R. Beller<\/p>\n\n\n\n Note from Tom: Brother Beller was the most prolific Baptist historian of our generation. I highly recommend his many books on Baptist history such as America in Crimson Red, Sacred Betrayal, The Collegiate Baptist History Workbook, Soul of St. Louis, etc. Please visit his book store at: prairiefirepress.com<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\nThomas E Kresal<\/strong><\/a><\/a> Baptist History, Heritage & Distinctives \u2013 March 8, 2019 – Fundamentalism as a Movement is Dead \u2013 PART SIX<\/strong> <\/h4>\n\n\n\n