You are here: Home / Archives for Issues
by on 8.1.09

but…

Isn’t this exactly what some fundamentalists are doing with evangelicals they admire for one reason or another?

It is not helpful when fundamentalists try to discredit the evangelistic fruitfulness of Graham’s ministry or when evangelicals use that fruitfulness to justify all of Graham’s associations and actions. Both attempts are rooted in the same false assumption—God can only use those who are perfectly obedient (or close to it). … The evangelical, coming from the opposite angle but with the same assumption, feels compelled to argue that since God used Graham, what Graham was doing can’t be wrong (or, at least, not that bad).

Dave is giving some good analysis in his series of articles, but this paragraph seems to describe precisely the problem I have with the way some fundamentalists talk about their evangelical ‘faves’.

And I have one other point where I want to make a mild objection.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Evangelicalism, Fundamentalism, Graham, Issues, New Evangelicalism, Personalities
by on 7.27.09

does temperance = moderation?

The debate over the use of alcohol continues to rage over at Sharper Iron, being the most talked about topic in recent days involving a number of threads. I would refer you to my recent post on drunkenness for a biblical argument for abstinence.

One recent comment on SI included this paragraph:

To your initial question, I would respond that self control is a fruit of the Spirit and those who do not yield to Him can find themselves where you and your family found yourselves [a reference to a previous commenter’s personal testimony]. Nevertheless, it is clear from Church history and Christian circles where moderation is practiced today that this isn’t as mysterious as we sometimes pretend it is. Those who imbibe in moderation don’t drink wine as though it were Gatorade after a long run. They have it in small quantities with dinner or a beer after work. I’ve often wondered at the large wine glasses and small quantities that they pour. This is apparently not just to enhance the wine’s bouquet but the practice of moderation.

This comment sparked some thinking. Notice the first line: “self control is a fruit of the Spirit”. This appears to be a reference to Gal 5.23 where ‘egkrateia’ is translated by the NAS and ESV as “self-control” (KJV = “temperance”).

Notice that later in the paragraph the idea of self-control is equated with ‘moderation’. “Those who imbibe in moderation…” and “… the practice of moderation.”

Now, we wonders, does temperance = moderation?

A look at the words involved seems to indicate something quite the contrary.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Alcohol, Issues
by on 7.20.09

beware the nuancers

Says Jay Adams, and I agree with him. Deception by sophistication is what the term usually means.

don_sig2

Filed Under: Issues, Worldliness
by on 7.17.09

what about drunkenness?

On another blog, I made this comment regarding my stance against alcohol use:

I am not saying that our culture is now so corrupt that alcohol is a worldly device. I am saying that there are good and sufficient reasons for Christians today to totally abstain from alcohol use. We can make the arguments on the basis of wisdom, on the basis of changes in alcohol content and production in modern times, on the basis of clear scriptural warnings, and, I think, on the basis of the prohibition on drunkenness.

I may need to revise my statement on culture in that first sentence at some point, but my purpose here is to develop an argument against alcohol use on the basis of the prohibition on drunkenness.

The first thing we need to establish is this: What do we mean when we talk about the prohibition of drunkenness?

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Alcohol, Issues
by on 7.16.09

reverse disclaimers

I was listening again this week to a presentation on the state of evangelicalism by a very prominent evangelical. I think this was delivered a year or two ago, I don’t remember exactly, just have the mp3 sitting on my hard drive.

The individual and the content of the address aren’t all that important for the purpose of this post. I was interested in how the speaker was describing various movements, in distinction with the evangelical movement.

My regular readers may remember how we have had some tussles over ‘disclaimers’ in the past few months. (Not that it is disclaimers I am after!!! I still protest that I am misunderstood.) But when fundamentalists talk about the need for disclaimers, it works this way:

The fundamentalist says something positive about some teacher/preacher outside “the camp”. The fundamentalist at the same time feels obligated to issue a disclaimer, making sure everyone knows that he knows that the guy he just said something nice about is bad in some way.

In evangelicalism, the opposite seems to be true. They use reverse disclaimers.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Evangelicalism, Fundamentalism, Issues
by on 7.7.09

fundamentalism applied to conduct

In the comments on “fundamentalism defined”, a certain ambiguity in the FBFI definition was noted at this point:

3. Endeavors to practice Biblical conduct in all areas of his life.

A question could be raised here: “So exactly how does this aspect of the definition differentiate you fundamentalists from conservative evangelicals? Don’t they believe in practicing Biblical conduct in all areas of life also?”

In my reply, I noted that other phrases of the definition might more clearly differentiate a fundamentalist from a conservative evangelical. I am willing to concede that in many ways, conservative evangelicals agree with fundamentalism in terms of “Biblical conduct in all areas of life.”

I will also concede that the statement as it stands is pretty open-ended. Everyone thinks that the way they apply the Bible to their life is the ‘Biblical’ way.

However, let’s be really clear… Fundamentalists are not vague and uncertain about what they believe to be biblical conduct.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues, Music, Separation
by on 6.30.09

fundamentalism defined

Among the many false charges raised against fundamentalism by the neo-experts is the notion that fundamentalism is undefined. Some argue that it is hard or impossible to define [how post-modern is that?]. Others say, ‘Which fundamentalism?’ as if there is more than one. Some say that the definitions have never been really offered, or, if offered, they have been inadequate.

I am undertaking a little project to examine the resolutions of the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship International over the last 30 years. I have simply copied all of the resolutions from the FBFI website into a database for ease of reference and sorting. My plan is to write articles based on these statements highlighting the view of a significant fundamentalist body. Perhaps there are fundamentalist groups who might quibble over some of the FBFI resolutions at points. That isn’t really relevant. This project is intended to show that the charges laid against fundamentalism by its most recent and most vocal critics are really baseless.

We start with the definition of fundamentalism. I find in my survey of thirty years of resolutions that statements intended to define fundamentalism have been offered at least ((If you consult the FBFI website, you will note that resolutions for some years are not posted. I don’t know the reason for this, or if they are available elsewhere.)) ten times in the last thirty years.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues
by on 6.28.09

more on the FBF symposium

In my earlier assessment of the FBF National Conference, I posted the following in summary on the symposium session held on the last day of the conference:

Symposium – a good start. Maybe too long in defining terms, or too short a session. We need to have more on this line next year, to flesh out the FBF position more clearly. I thought most panel members acquitted themselves well. I’ll want to listen to this again and give some detailed analysis.

I’ve now listened twice. If any venue at the meeting had the potential for fireworks, this one did. I thought Dr. Vaughn did a good job conducting the session and several important subjects were addressed.

Of course, the announced subject was only all too briefly addressed, much to the disappointment of many. The subject, as I understood it, was Conservative Evangelicalism and Fundamentalist relationship with the same. Several observations come to mind:

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Evangelicalism, Fundamentalism, Issues
by on 6.27.09

exhibit A

Interesting.

See this follow up and this one as well. See a response to the original article at 9Marks and one at another blog. Finally, see here Dave’s excellent response (and he says, hopefully, his last word) on the subject. Hear, Hear! Exactly right, Dave.

A little kerfuffle between Fundamentalists and Conservative Evangelicals erupting over Dave’s quite reasonable questions illustrates perfectly why we have two groups of men, Fundamentalists on the one hand and Conservative Evangelicals on the other. Fundamentalists don’t get why CEs are willing to be collegial and congratulatory of those who betray the faith. CEs don’t get why Fundies question their respect for their ‘moderates’.

Hence the divide.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Evangelicalism, Fundamentalism, Issues, New Evangelicalism, Separation
by on 6.26.09

cornbread and caviar

I am reading Cornbread and Caviar: Reminiscences and Reflections by Bob Jones, Jr. I think this is the first time I have read it, though it was published during my last year working at the BJU Print Shop where I would have seen it as I ran the folders… maybe it came out after I left that year.

Reading it is like listening to Dr. Bob talk. Witty, erudite, bold, cultured, and ready to stand for the Lord.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues
« Previous Page
Next Page »