3 TYPES OF FUNDAMENTALISTS AND EVANGELICALS AFTER 1956

The way you described Bauder’s taxonomy (which I don’t know about independently from what you wrote), all 5 movements in fundamentalism are “negative”. I wouldn’t want to be a part of amy of them. Was that your intent?

I found TGC’s taxonomy amusing (but truer than it ought to be), and both Bauder’s and Straub’s descriptions good. I would agree with JIm that I want to be, as much as is possible, a Confessionalist.

One thing that bothers me, though, along with Mark, is that apart from confessionalism, a lot of the forms of fundamentalism are things that I don’t want to touch with a ten foot pole. Dictatorial authoritarianism in the pulpit? Been there, done that, had enough of it for more than a lifetime.

And a comment regarding the actual text of TGC’s description is that it is interesting that they describe fundamentalists who do not separate, ecclesiastically, from theological liberals/nonbelievers. Let’s just call that…..different…..

…..and I would argue that it suggests that what is lacking from large portions of evangelicalism and fundamentalism alike is a downgrading of theology. It leads to authoritarian leaders, byzantine sets of rules not authorized in the Scriptures, and I dare say….a lot of people not coming to Christ. Ugh.

Or, as Pastor MacLachlan used to say, “left ditch, right ditch”.

[Bert Perry]

Or, as Pastor MacLachlan used to say, “left ditch, right ditch”.

Hearing mention of Pastor McLachlan immediately brings to my mind his book (above). I’ve read it twice, and each time I’ve thought, “What fantastic insights! What great recommendations! Why is (almost) nobody actually doing these or taking these seriously ?!?!?!”

[Side note: I bought my copy second-hand online, and it’s actually Dell Johnson’s (formerly of PCC; now with ACE, last I knew) former copy. Or at least his signature is on the inside front cover…]

That is an excellent book. I have an old, second-hand copy that, for some reason, is actually pink! Why is the cover pink? Who knows …

To this day, that book makes some people nervous. I’ve been told by several respected fundamentalist leaders that McLachlan went a little too far in his book. I personally haven’t found anything in there I’ve objected to. Now, I’m not castigating those who disagree with McLachlan’s work - all I’m saying is that friendly criticism is always helpful. His book is excellent.

The Taylor/Finn chart that places separatist fundamentalists as geographically located in the south is insufficient. The author of the chart is highly unaware of the Baptist Bible Union (with leaders from Toronto to Minneapolis to Fort Worth) that appeared in 1922. The GARBC (formed in 1932) was largely a northern Baptist, separatist phenomenon. The Conservative Baptists concentrated in the north and were also Baptist fundamentalists from 1943 forward. They endured a struggle between new evangelicals and fundamentalist separatists from about 1953 (adoption of the Portland Manifesto) until 1963 (when they refused to reaffirm it). A sizeable segment of that movement went its own way into several ministries of Baptist separatist fundamentalism while the leadership and organization of the Conservative Baptist movement remained firmly entrenched as a new evangelical movement.

After reading Dr. Bauder’s One in Hope and Doctrine, and attending the MacDonald Lecture at Central last year, I’d say that this is a book that ought to be made:

• “Three Views on the Spectrum of Baptist Fundamentalism.”

since the mid 1990s, there’s been a slow dividing of the BJU segment from the John R. Rice segment. So, that today they are almost two separate movements.

[Rob Fall]

since the mid 1990s, there’s been a slow dividing of the BJU segment from the John R. Rice segment. So, that today they are almost two separate movements.

The dividing happened big time long before the mid 1990s, especially here in the Indianapolis area.

I was being cautious in my time frame. As I didn’t have a definite point in time. But, I can see how the split would develop earlier in some locales than in others.

[Jim Barnes]

Rob Fall wrote:

since the mid 1990s, there’s been a slow dividing of the BJU segment from the John R. Rice segment. So, that today they are almost two separate movements.

The dividing happened big time long before the mid 1990s, especially here in the Indianapolis area.

[Jim]

On: “a fundamentalist is someone who thinks Billy Graham is apostate”

Not my own observation. Billy was a tremendous preacher of the gospel. His problem is he hung with apostates.

This is a correct evaluation of the problem with Graham’s evangelism; an opinion I’ve heard stated by some noted conservative evangelicals who respect Graham in spite of this. However, most of the fundamentalists I know treated Graham like an apostate; thus the conclusion.