You are here: Home / Archives for Issues / Fundamentalism
by on 6.27.08

when I wish you could have been here

“Here” is the annual meeting of the Western Canada Baptist Fellowship, a group of good men with whom I join in hearty fellowship… but haven’t officially joined the organization! One these days…

The speaker for our conference this year was Mark Minnick, pastor of Mount Calvary Baptist Church in Greenville, SC, my former homiletics professor and my preaching model for my own ministry.

The meeting was timely in light of recent events and personal correspondence. But I have to say that the meeting was also an especial blessing and encouragement for me in the ministry as well as for all those who attended.

Besides the content of the meetings, I am tremendously encouraged by the presence of so many solid fundamentalist ministries here in Alberta and across Western Canada. I grew up here. I was ordained here. Thirty years ago you could count all of the fundamentalists in Alberta on one hand, practically. Now there is a growing fellowship of increasingly strong churches. The Lord truly is blessing, though the growth is nowhere near as rapid as we would like. But when I compare the 30 year span, the growth is REAL.

Now, why would I wish you could have been here.

One: for pastor Minnick’s two evening messages covering Ephesians. I have never heard a more encouraging set of messages for men in ministries of any size, but especially in the small ministries we have here in Western Canada. What a privilege it is to serve the King, and to bring glory to His name … and to the Father’s name as well.

Hopefully I will be able to post copies of the messages or at least links soon. Stay tuned.

Two: for the open discussion of current issues facing fundamentalism we held this afternoon. Our session ran about two hours, no one was bored (contrary to predictions of some!!) and I think a good deal was accomplished. A few notes [more may follow later]…

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues, New Evangelicalism, Separation
by on 6.26.08

preachers of influence

I want to pick up on something I said in my last post. I was observing the influence of much admired and frequently listened to preachers on those who admire and listen to them. Here is a bit of what I said:

The preachers you listen to influence your own preaching. … I have spent hours listening to Mark Minnick. Mark was my Pulpit Speech teacher. I have intentionally tried to imitate his methods and something of his style. As I began listening to the Trinity messages this summer though (and most of them were Chuck Phelps), I caught myself a few times in the pulpit saying things in a way that sounded to me like the way Chuck would say it. I think Chuck has a certain cadence to his preaching that is a bit unique among preachers, and I was unconsciously (or semi-consciously) picking up on that.

Chuck himself mentioned this tendency among preacher boys in one of the messages I listened to today. He said that those who sat under Tom Malone often mimicked some of his habits as did those who sat under Dr Bob Sr. Of course, I have observed this with other admired preachers as well. I don’t think this is necessarily a bad thing!

But it does mean preachers need to be careful who they admire, who they listen to, and who influences them. I think that subject is probably worth another post at some point.

The influence of one preacher on another is all well and good if the admired and followed preacher is a fully faithful member of the clergy. You may pick up mannerisms – that is one thing. But much more you should pick up philosophy, methodology, zeal, and ministry patterns. And you will, if you make a study of a particular preacher or preachers.

That means you must choose your models very, very carefully. Some young men today are making extremely unwise choices in this regard.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues, Minnick, Personalities, Phelps, Preaching
by on 6.15.08

do conservative ‘e’s separate?

Mark Dever asks, I think, for fundamentalists to clearly and consistently spell out what separation means to them. I could be wrong, and am willing to stand corrected, but I think he is asking the same question that I thought was unanswered in the Minnick interview (see previous posts).

Here is my initial answer to Dever’s questions as posted in the comment section of the 9marks blog (I add a bit more below my quoted answer):

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Dever, Fundamentalism, Issues, New Evangelicalism, Personalities
by on 6.14.08

is there an answer here?

On another blog, a discussion is ongoing regarding the Mark Dever – Mark Minnick interview. I, along with some others, contend that our friend Mark Minnick didn’t answer the last question Dever asked. Others say that he did answer. I have taken the trouble to transcribe the last six or seven minutes of the interview, hopefully accurately, so that you can analyze what was said and come to your own conclusions.

Here is the transcript, beginning at about 1:01:35 of the interview:

1:01:35 Dever: “What would we have to do to change for you to be free to preach here?”

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Dever, Fundamentalism, Issues, Minnick, New Evangelicalism, Personalities, Separation
by on 5.25.08

when you wish more was said…

Frank Sansone alerts us that the 9Marks interview with Mark Minnick by Mark Dever is now available. I stayed up late to listen to it because, as you know, this is my main topic.

Frank heard about it from Andy Naselli and I see that Greg Linscott is linking to it as well over at his site. I expect this to immediately be the topic du jour in the fundamentalist blogosphere.

Why would that be? Because as Minnick points out very well in the interview: “Associations matter.”

This interview matters because associations matter. I think I understand what Pastor Minnick is trying to do in having communication with Pastor Dever, but even this low-level public association matters (though it is certainly not the same thing as sitting on a platform in a cooperative effort or appearing on the platform of Capital Hill BC, for example).

This interview, I predict will be the buzz this next week because associations matter.

But, oh, how I wish a little more had been said!

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Dever, Fundamentalism, Issues, Minnick, New Evangelicalism, Personalities, Separation
by on 5.19.08

an evangelical really gets it

John Mark Reynolds, professor at Biola, writes in response to the Evangelical Manifesto on the Washington Post On Faith site I mentioned the other day. His article, Reasonable Evangelicals contains a number of very interesting statements, but this one particularly caught my eye.

An Evangelical is moderate, fundamentally opposed to fundamentalism. They believe in truth and that God has spoken to humankind, but know that understanding that truth is difficult. They are willing to walk the hard road of Socratic persuasion and of cultural engagement. Sometimes they do this badly, but modern American Evangelicals historically came into being through a rejection of any narrow intolerance that refuses to consider competing points of view.

I would describe this as the Canadian approach to self-definition.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues, New Evangelicalism
by on 5.9.08

a couple of evangelical editorials worth pondering

First, one from Paige Patterson on the current state of the SBC with some interesting insights for fundamentalists — Of grinches, goblins, gremlins and ghosts, from the May 6 Baptist Press.

Second, one from Alan Jacobs, professor of English at Wheaton, taking a slap at the so-called “Evangelical Manifesto” — Come On, You Call This a Manifesto?, appearing in the Wall Street Journal.

A few thoughts and quotes below:

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues, New Evangelicalism
by on 5.3.08

they sound like young fundies

“All too often we have attacked the evils and injustices of others,” they wrote, “while we have condoned our own sins.” They write, “we must reform our own behavior.”

Read the CT blog here. Usual disclaimers apply.

don_sig2

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues, New Evangelicalism
by on 4.23.08

stages in the history of visible church unity

I’d like to resume my notes from Church History class. I am taking a break from my break from blogging – largely related to working out my taxes… I hate doing taxes. Reality is so depressing! Far better to live in the imprecise haze of not knowing exactly where one stands! In Canada, our tax day is Apr 30, so we have a bit longer to dither than our USA friends. (Of course, if you don’t have to pay, they are in no hurry for you to get your refund!)

So a little R & R… blogging!

The lecture I am entering today comes under a header entitled:

The Ecumenical Movement

Next comes a quote – may not be exact words, but something was said that struck me:

Be aware of the difference between my will, Satan’s wiles, and the Spirit’s wooing.

Now for the main lecture:

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Church History, Fundamentalism, Issues, New Evangelicalism, Scholarship
by on 4.11.08

discerning and eschewing new evangelicalism

In my Church History notes folder I have the reprint of an article written by Dr. Panosian in 1963 for the Nov/Dec issue of Voice of the Alumni, the news-magazine for BJU alumni. The article has a picture of a very young Dr. P. It was written a bare six or seven years from the Billy Graham 1957 New York crusade, the moment when lines were starkly drawn and personal decisions for or against the new evangelicalism had to be made.

Dr. P summarizes the definitions of other men for the (then) new movement. Among those cited are William E. Ashbrook, Harold J. Ockenga, Charles Woodbridge, Bob Jones, Jr., and Robert C. Brien. From these, Dr. P distills this definition:

So Neo-Evangelicalism is a movement, an approach, a group, a theological position, a practice, an attitude, a method and a mood. It prefers positivism without negativism, liberalism to fundamentalism, infiltration to separation, results to principles, scholarship to Revelation, ‘Preaching the Gospel’ without contending for the faith, ‘love’ to Truth, and ‘unity’ to loyalty to the Word of God. Ignoring the injunctions of the Epistles, concerning the believers’ reaction to error, infidelity, and apostasy — mark them, avoid them, rebuke them, have no fellowship with them, reprove, exhort, receive not, try them, from such turn away — the Neo-Evangelical has already been judged by God’s Word. He needs no other judgement.

A few thoughts flow from this…

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Church History, Fundamentalism, New Evangelicalism
« Previous Page
Next Page »