I don’t have time now to get in depth, but I wanted to at least give you the link.
9 Marks Ministries‘ March/April e-journal is on the topic of fundamentalism and separation.
Some of the very issues, I’ve been debating about recently here are covered (including article’s I’ve referenced by Albert Mohler and Wayne Grudem). There are other new articles and thoughts on this topic from Ian Murray, Mark Dever and others. And they include David Doran and Mark Minnick with a fundamentalist perspective. Ben Wright, of Paleoevangelical, also contributes.
Again, I’m pressed for time, so I’ll just give you the link to the PDF copy as well as a link to the page that introduces the journal and provides html links to the articles.
Looks interesting. It’ll give me something to chew on for a few days.
I read David Doran’s critique of T4G, and I know he’s spot on with his assessment. I believe Doran gave a better (and biblical) rendering of the statement that should have been inserted in Article XV.
My only qualm with one of the writers about their statements on the forum on Fundamentalism was on some comments from Marc Noll. Although many parts of Fundamentalism became associated with dispensationalism, creation science, and prohibition, I think it would be dishonest to categorize fundamentalism as being monolithic with these doctrinal distinctives. Noll seems to believe these (and other distinctives of *some* fundamentalists) are aberrant and are an eyesore within fundamentalism. I would agree wholeheartedly that prohibition is biblically aberrant, but I am a classic premillennial dispensationalist, and to infer that I’m being naively literal in my hermeneutic underscores Noll’s lack of understanding of what makes a fundamentalist a “Fundamentalist”. Secondly, holding to a literal view of creation is a rather important distinctive of fundamentalism; the Bible is true! Historically, both covenanantalists and dispensationalists were and are ‘fundamentalists’! Also, being a Calvinist/Particular Baptist, I’d be shunned by some fundamentalists, but being a Calvinist does not automatically make me a non-fundamentalist. I’m surprised that Noll didn’t add “Arminianism” to his list of aberrant fundamentalist doctrinal distinctives.
back in the 60’s -70’s the fundamentalists dominated. They had almost all the mega churches, and then that all changed in recent years. Does this mean we’re getting ourselves back on the radar?
Very interesting. And at last, I finally understand what “primary” and “secondary” separation are. Till now, I was just kind of nodding and grinning.
Great articles.