There have been various threads where some of the negatives of fundamentalism have been discussed. What sometimes irks me is the idea that a person's spiritually can be gauged by externals, such as watching movies, watching TV, dancing, drinking, smoking, hair length, and the like. If you don't do these things, you're a 'good Christian', and if you do them you're not.
One thing I like about much of fundamentalism is their zeal for evangelism. Although I don't think doing any of these things in and of themselves are bad, if I wanted to be better at evangelism, it would make sense to take a look at some of these things and evaluate how much time is spent doing them. Watching TV, going to the movies, etc. may not be bad, but if I have x number of hours of free time after work or whatever, and I spend most or all of that time watching TV, then going to the movies, then going out dancing, then that would be counterproductive if I want to learn to become better at evangelism.
So, in a way, if I refuse to examine my life with regard to these things, and just say that I have Christian liberty to do them, perhaps that might be an indication that I'm not a 'good Christian' (though perhaps "wise Christian" might be a better term).
In thinking through my irkyness at what I see as negatives, I'm wondering how such thinking could be beneficial and helpful for the Christian walk. Any thoughts?
__________________
Bob Howes
Framingham, MA
A reoccurring thought:
Rev 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
One of the things that irks me about reformed thinkers is their willingness to make a truce with certain worldly things. It's not that owning a TV is inherently sinful. It's not that drinking is inherently sinful. It's not that owning a fast car is inherently sinful. It's not that being a wise investor is inherently sinful.
But when you take these things collectively, you end up with a materially wealthy family who has a retirement plan that allows them freedom to not depend on God, a television they watch religiously, toys to compete for their quiet time, prosperity that makes them forget God......
Now compare this to an untrained missionary in India who has nothing but shoes on his feet and scars on his back, doesn't have the foggiest clue what the word 'supralapsarian' means, but has planted 40 churches in the face of persecution.
Somewhere, somehow, we have lost our way. Based on this, it is good to examine the lives of others. Even if you disagree with their theology.
__________________
Chris Latch
Corinth MS
Crossroads church - SBC
Evangelism leader
The fundamentalists are right in the same area that the FV movement is right. They both point out a significant weakness in the church. They rightly observe that the members of the church do not act like they are members of the church. They ask, shouldn't there be moral evidence of the faith that supposedly inhabits church folk?
Next they ask, how then can we motivate christians to be holy? The fundamentalists attempt to motivate by preaching moralism and running the risk of confusing justification and sanctification. The FVer purposely mixes justification and sanctification and attempts to motivate by preaching a 'covenant faithfulness'. The Fundamentalists and the FVers end up with too much law and not enough gospel.
(The reformed response is to preach obedience as motivated by gratitude for justification.)
__________________
Bob Vigneault (Bawb Vēēn-yo)
"We are God's children and He's the Father of all fathers and we need to obey him." Jean-Baptiste Vigneault (5)
The fundamentalists are right in the same area that the FV movement is right. They both point out a significant weakness in the church. They rightly observe that the members of the church do not act like they are members of the church. They ask, shouldn't there be moral evidence of the faith that supposedly inhabits church folk?
Next they ask, how then can we motivate christians to be holy? The fundamentalists attempt to motivate by preaching moralism and running the risk of confusing justification and sanctification. The FVer purposely mixes justification and sanctification and attempts to motivate by preaching a 'covenant faithfulness'. The Fundamentalists and the FVers end up with too much law and not enough gospel.
(The reformed response is to preach obedience as motivated by gratitude for justification.)
The funny thing is, we sometimes accuse them of being antinomian, and in theology they may be. However in practice, they're legal as can be.
Psa 55:16 As for me, I will call upon God; and the LORD shall save me.
Psa 55:17 Evening, and morning, and at noon, will I pray, and cry aloud: and he shall hear my voice.
James Farley, Wilderness Road Baptist Assembly.
Husband of Melissa and father of Ann. www.wildernessroadbaptist.org
I went to 2 fundy schools (PCC & TTU) and graduated from one. Along the way I had a great deal of exposure to "evangelism" done the fundy way. It was not a pretty sight. I even took a (required) 2 credit hour course on evangelism.
Mostly it was a hard close style sales pitch. The gospel was a product that you could (heck you were encouraged to) "repackage" based on an individuals "needs". Several of the lectures were actully structured like a sales seminar. 1) getting in the door~Do you have product people want to buy? 2) the set up~ what do they need? 3) the pitch~ did you explain it in a way that sounds apealing? 4) the close~ Don't you see how Jesus meets your needs? see point #2. 5) objections~ How to get back to #4 again as soon as possible.
All very hard to take. We actually had sales books such as Zig Zigler on the reading list for the class. It was not evangelism so much as recruitment.
In keeping with the spirit of the OP I will close with one positive thing. The did make it a practice to set aside some time every week to actually speak to non-christians about the gospel.
__________________
Kevin Rogers
Sovereign Community Church, PCA
Moncton NB
I went to 2 fundy schools (PCC & TTU) and graduated from one. Along the way I had a great deal of exposure to "evangelism" done the fundy way. It was not a pretty sight. I even took a (required) 2 credit hour course on evangelism.
Mostly it was a hard close style sales pitch. The gospel was a product that you could (heck you were encouraged to) "repackage" based on an individuals "needs". Several of the lectures were actully structured like a sales seminar. 1) getting in the door~Do you have product people want to buy? 2) the set up~ what do they need? 3) the pitch~ did you explain it in a way that sounds apealing? 4) the close~ Don't you see how Jesus meets your needs? see point #2. 5) objections~ How to get back to #4 again as soon as possible.
All very hard to take. We actually had sales books such as Zig Zigler on the reading list for the class. It was not evangelism so much as recruitment.
In keeping with the spirit of the OP I will close with one positive thing. The did make it a practice to set aside some time every week to actually speak to non-christians about the gospel.
I actually went to some Hyles soul winning classes put on at a Sword of the Lord conference. I followed those practices for years. Lot's of disappointment when my "converts" didn't stick.
One of the things that irks me about reformed thinkers is their willingness to make a truce with certain worldly things. It's not that owning a TV is inherently sinful. It's not that drinking is inherently sinful. It's not that owning a fast car is inherently sinful. It's not that being a wise investor is inherently sinful.
But when you take these things collectively, you end up with a materially wealthy family who has a retirement plan that allows them freedom to not depend on God, a television they watch religiously, toys to compete for their quiet time, prosperity that makes them forget God......
Good point. I guess as has been stressed by many reformed thinkers there's a need for moderation, and going along with your point it'd be 'collective moderation'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Somewhere, somehow, we have lost our way. Based on this, it is good to examine the lives of others. Even if you disagree with their theology.
I agree. We can surely learn from others that have a different theology without adopting that theology.
(The reformed response is to preach obedience as motivated by gratitude for justification.)
Do you agree that this is the correct response.
I'm not a pastor/elder, but with my imagination I picture myself sitting in my church study, with aspirations of doing great things for the Lord with the church he'd entrusted me with, but I have a manpower problem. I can't count on all the members to be at all the services, and getting people to help out with much of the mundane things that need to be done is like pulling teeth. I preach sermons (again, with my imagination) that should stir them to help out out of gratitude for what their savior has done, but volunteers don't come forward. A few do, and they're stuck carrying more of the load than is necessary (and eventually get burned out).
So there I am, sitting in my office, wondering what it is that's competing for their time to just spend an hour or so helping out. Do they even want to help out? If not, why not?
I went to 2 fundy schools (PCC & TTU) and graduated from one. Along the way I had a great deal of exposure to "evangelism" done the fundy way. It was not a pretty sight. I even took a (required) 2 credit hour course on evangelism.
Mostly it was a hard close style sales pitch. The gospel was a product that you could (heck you were encouraged to) "repackage" based on an individuals "needs". Several of the lectures were actully structured like a sales seminar. 1) getting in the door~Do you have product people want to buy? 2) the set up~ what do they need? 3) the pitch~ did you explain it in a way that sounds apealing? 4) the close~ Don't you see how Jesus meets your needs? see point #2. 5) objections~ How to get back to #4 again as soon as possible.
All very hard to take. We actually had sales books such as Zig Zigler on the reading list for the class. It was not evangelism so much as recruitment.
In keeping with the spirit of the OP I will close with one positive thing. The did make it a practice to set aside some time every week to actually speak to non-christians about the gospel.
I know what you mean about the methods. I recently glanced through a soul-winner's guide I went through years ago called (I think) "Drawing the Net". I had mixed feelings about a lot of it.
Are there other things you can salvage from your fun(d) experiences?
I actually went to some Hyles soul winning classes put on at a Sword of the Lord conference. I followed those practices for years. Lot's of disappointment when my "converts" didn't stick.
Any thoughts about why they didn't "stick". Hard to tell, but do you think they weren't actually converted, or is it a discipleship issue?
Our lives are no longer our own. We have been bought with a price (1 Cor. 6:20), therefore we are to please the One who purchased us. It is not a matter of what we can or cannot do. It is what Christ commands us to do. All things have been given us to enjoy, but we are not to be mastered by any.
__________________
Bill Brown
Elder
Grace Baptist Church
Anne Arundel County, Maryland
The fundamentalists are right in the same area that the FV movement is right. They both point out a significant weakness in the church. They rightly observe that the members of the church do not act like they are members of the church. They ask, shouldn't there be moral evidence of the faith that supposedly inhabits church folk?
Next they ask, how then can we motivate christians to be holy? The fundamentalists attempt to motivate by preaching moralism and running the risk of confusing justification and sanctification. The FVer purposely mixes justification and sanctification and attempts to motivate by preaching a 'covenant faithfulness'. The Fundamentalists and the FVers end up with too much law and not enough gospel.
(The reformed response is to preach obedience as motivated by gratitude for justification.)
FV is so much more however, you have really let them off the hook with quite a generous explanation of their practices above.
It's all about treasuring God above all else. John Piper hits the nail right on the head when it comes to this topic. When our vision of God is what it should be then our understanding of Christian liberty etc. becomes clear to us.
__________________
Ryan Barnhart - Pastor of OGBC
Husband to a beautiful wife, Father to two beautiful girls "But by the grace of God I am what I am." I Corinthians 15:10
"I confess to you, that if I can but live and die serving the Lord Jesus, it will make no difference to me whether I am eaten by Cannibals or by worms. And in the Great Day my Resurrection body will rise as fair as yours in the likeness of our risen Redeemer." - John Paton
I'm not a pastor/elder, but with my imagination I picture myself sitting in my church study, with aspirations of doing great things for the Lord with the church he'd entrusted me with, but I have a manpower problem. I can't count on all the members to be at all the services, and getting people to help out with much of the mundane things that need to be done is like pulling teeth. I preach sermons (again, with my imagination) that should stir them to help out out of gratitude for what their savior has done, but volunteers don't come forward. A few do, and they're stuck carrying more of the load than is necessary (and eventually get burned out).
So there I am, sitting in my office, wondering what it is that's competing for their time to just spend an hour or so helping out. Do they even want to help out? If not, why not?
The pastor must preach the gospel in every sermon so that his people understand how it relates to every facet of life. Soul winning is the work of the gospel message, not the preacher. The preacher must know how to present the gospel clearly.
As far as motivating his congregation to evangelize this is done by preaching the obligation to witness and yes, out of gratitude. Paul did this very thing in 1 Cor 9:
1 Cor 9:16 For if I preach the gospel, that gives me no ground for boasting. For necessity is laid upon me. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! 17 For if I do this of my own will, I have a reward, but if not of my own will, I am still entrusted with a stewardship. 18 What then is my reward? That in my preaching I may present the gospel free of charge, so as not to make full use of my right in the gospel.
19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. 23 I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.
and again in Rom 1: Rom1:14 I am under obligation both to Greeks and to barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish. 15 So I am eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome.
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, The righteous shall live by faith.
If we have been forgiven the heinousness of our sins, if we have been brought from death to life, then out of gratitude we shall obey the commandments and work to fulfill our debt to our neighbor.
I once included in a sermon that if you are going to stick a fish to your car then obey the speed limit. I had so many people irritated with me because I had tied there trip to work with their gospel witness. This is the power of the Word, it constrains us from doing things we shouldn't and compels us to do the things we should. How? Fear and gratitude. The fear is the fear of what might have been had not God worked his grace, and fear of mocking his holiness and trivializing the cost of the Cross. Gratitude that you were included amoung the elect to receive adoption and the full heritage of one of God's own children. These ought to be motivation enough to overcome our fear of man and embarrassment of the faith and to prod us to deliver the good news.
As sinners, we stand shoulder to shoulder with the rest of the world. We have been given the only message of hope and we are obligated by scripture to deliver it.
Our lives are no longer our own. We have been bought with a price (1 Cor. 6:20), therefore we are to please the One who purchased us. It is not a matter of what we can or cannot do. It is what Christ commands us to do. All things have been given us to enjoy, but we are not to be mastered by any.
Excellent verses/thoughts, I especially like this:
1Co 6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
1Co 6:20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.
That's a good verse to meditate on when examining the things we do. It helps put things in their proper perspective.
Any thoughts about why they didn't "stick". Hard to tell, but do you think they weren't actually converted, or is it a discipleship issue?
I believe my motives were good. I really wanted to see people be saved. However, with the over emphasis on free will, I was leading a bunch of people to a false profession, albeit in ignorance.
I would pray and witness, lead sinnners in "the sinners prayer", and later become distressed about the lack of faithfulness of the converts. When it finally dawned on me, by God's free grace, that my responsibiblity was to present the Gospel and the rest was ALL GOD, a great weight came off me. The Scripture says "has newborn babes desire the sincere milk of the Word". Looking back, I had a lot of stillbirths.
Still I admire those in the IFB movement who pour thier heart into witnessing to sinners. It's just sad that thier is so much error in thier theology.
FV is so much more however, you have really let them off the hook with quite a generous explanation of their practices above.
The original post did not ask for an explanation of the practices of the FV proponents. I was just saying something nice about fundamentalists. I used something 'nice' about the FVers by way of comparison, however, the comparison stops there. I hope I didn't offend any fundamentalists by comparing them to the FV. It's just something I was thinking on recently.
I believe my motives were good. I really wanted to see people be saved. However, with the over emphasis on free will, I was leading a bunch of people to a false profession, albeit in ignorance.
I would pray and witness, lead sinnners in "the sinners prayer", and later become distressed about the lack of faithfulness of the converts. When it finally dawned on me, by God's free grace, that my responsibiblity was to present the Gospel and the rest was ALL GOD, a great weight came off me. The Scripture says "has newborn babes desire the sincere milk of the Word". Looking back, I had a lot of stillbirths.
Still I admire those in the IFB movement who pour thier heart into witnessing to sinners. It's just sad that thier is so much error in thier theology.
I'm sure there are good things what we can learn from them and their zeal. Experience tells us at the same time we need to be careful what we learn. I'll relate this negative experience, then try and reprogram my thinking positively. A good number of years ago, we had an evangelist come through and visited our church. He came out with us on Saturday visitation, and I had the opportunity to go to some doors with him to learn how to be better at witnessing for Christ. I felt bad for the young man that came to the door. I kid you not, within 2 or 3 minutes the evangelist had the guy bowing his head to say the sinner's prayer. It was so methodical, and the questions asked were such that there was only one way for the conversation to go. The young man was polite, so he didn't resist at all. When it was all done, the evangelist closed by getting assurance that, since the guy was now saved, we'd see him in church in the morning.
...I can't tell you what a blessing it was Sunday morning to see that young guy walk through the front door of the church so he could join his fellow brethren...(NOT!).
There have been various threads where some of the negatives of fundamentalism have been discussed. What sometimes irks me is the idea that a person's spiritually can be gauged by externals, such as watching movies, watching TV, dancing, drinking, smoking, hair length, and the like. If you don't do these things, you're a 'good Christian', and if you do them you're not.
...
In thinking through my irkyness at what I see as negatives, I'm wondering how such thinking could be beneficial and helpful for the Christian walk. Any thoughts?
The basic problem of Fundamentalism is hermeneutics. They misinterpret Scripture all the time, so, except when they are restrained by the common inheritance of orthodox theology from way back, they are consistently goofy in how they read Biblical texts.
Then they come at you with their proof texts, packed with the assumptions of their movement, but to their minds simply the literal reading of the text, and if you don't agree that their application is right, then you are simply a liberal who does not believe the Bible.
I know what you mean about the methods. I recently glanced through a soul-winner's guide I went through years ago called (I think) "Drawing the Net". I had mixed feelings about a lot of it.
Are there other things you can salvage from your fun(d) experiences?
I met my wife there(at PCC) .
I spent hours in the TTU library pouring over every reformed book I could find .
.
.