Comments for acmuri

Comment on Has Fundamentalism outlived its cause? by Craig Muri

Craig Muri — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:09:42 +0000

Marc,
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one. I’d be interested to see a direct quote from either Rick Warren or Leith Anderson where they make apostate claims regarding God. If you wish to reply, please send them to acm@visi.com.
The issue I’m referring to in my post is the fact that when theological liberals attacked our Bible there was a cause for war. The vast majority of “evangelicals” I know are affirming sola Scriptura and passionately calling me to love the Lord with all my heart, soul, mind, & strength, and to lovingly confront my neighbors and the world with the one and only gospel of Jesus Christ. My war is not with them. Blessings!

Comment on Has Fundamentalism outlived its cause? by Marc Monte

Marc Monte — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:17:38 +0000

Dear Brother Craig:

While reading the seminary post, I came upon your blog address. I trust the Lord is blessing your work. Your recent article on Fundamentalism is interesting.

My answer is simple: Fundamentalism as a movement is necessary as long as it insists upon separatism–both from apostasy AND neo-evangelicalism (now commonly called “evangelicalism”). Our distinctives are important because they’re Bible distinctives. When fundamentalists find themselves comfortable with today’s evangelical, it’s the supposed fundamentalist who has the problem–he has compromised. Evangelicalism today has far less to recommend itself than the evangelicalism of a generation ago. Some of the luminaries of the evangelical movement (Rick Warren and Leif Andersen, for example) are apostates (both of them claim Christians and Muslims worship the same God–that’s apostasy!). In short, the right brand of fundamentalism has never been more needed. The right brand of fundamentalism is compassionate, evangelistic, Biblically based, separated, etc. That kind of fundamentalism is alive and well!

By the way, thank you, Craig, for your ministry to me as a young teenager. I often think with fondness on those great days at the 4th Baptist youth group!

Marc Monte

Comment on Has Fundamentalism outlived its cause? by Jim Peet

Jim Peet — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 19:15:23 +0000

Craig,

If interested join the discussion on S/I about your article

here

Comment on Has Fundamentalism outlived its cause? by Craig Muri

Craig Muri — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 11:48:27 +0000

MCarver, in defense of Fundamentalism, let me just say that your critique of the movement is really the critique of a vocal few. There are some nutty Fundies out there and there are also Fundamentalist who understand history, speak precisely and accurately to contemporary theological issues, offer cogent defense of historic doctrines, and do it all with dignity and grace. If we stereotype all Fundamentalists as angry separatists fighting silly battles, we commit two grave errors: [1] We fail to appreciate a rich heritage of doctrinal defense that continues into the present, and, [2] we find ourselves holding a smoking gun, guilty of the same “fundamentalist folly” we just attacked. Dr. Bauder, president of Central Baptist Theological Seminary in Plymouth, MN is currently writing an historical analysis of the movement that offers a very balanced survey of both its strengths and weaknesses. As an outsider to the movement, I’d invite you to come on in and look around via these articles at http://www.centralseminary.edu/index. Thanks for commenting.

Comment on Has Fundamentalism outlived its cause? by Philip Hunt

Philip Hunt — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 06:07:43 +0000

I’ve appreciated the posts Dave Doran has been putting up on the issue. One observation he has made is that there is no longer a fundamentalist “movement” because a movement requires a rallying point. Anyway thought provoking read at http://gloryandgrace.dbts.edu/.

Comment on Has Fundamentalism outlived its cause? by M.Carver

M.Carver — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 04:09:36 +0000

Stevet, I believe you are correct. I’m not a historian or a fundamentalist (at least in the sense of what it might mean today), but I am a Christian. Someone jump in and correct me if I’m wrong (I have Baptist, ultra-conservative relatives so I’m a bit familiar with this group). Europe, was hundreds of years older than America is today, 200 years ago. Fundamentalism in America was in large part a stand against humanistic, anti-God, anti-Christian philosophies which had their origin in Germany. American fundamentalism was a good thing. Somehow it apparently stopped being a stand against radically anti-Christian philosophies and became a totally internecine battle. Instead of taking a stand against pagan, anti-God philosophies, fundamentalists started fighting each other over who could be the best Pharisee and be as nutty and isolated from mainstream society as possible. The world and its anti-God, pagan philosphies were completely forgotten and instead the battle became one about which group of Christians could dress more modestly and piously than the other, smoking, whether women should wear makeup, can a man go topless at the beach, and myriad other issues which in the long run are insipid issues compared to the original ones such as the authenticity of Scripture, etc.

I am only looking at this anecdotally and from an outsider’s point of view so I will readily admit I may be offbase and I will glady acquiesce if someone wants to say I’m wrong.

Comment on Has Fundamentalism outlived its cause? by stevet

stevet — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:08:48 +0000

As I understand it, just like the blog entry says, wasn’t fundamentalism really started in order to fight European liberalism, especially that coming out of Germany? I could be wrong, but I’m not convinced that Graham or Dobson or Northern Baptists really identify themselves as German or even as German-influenced. Perhaps the author of this blog was wondering how the original focus somehow morphed into something completely different and doesn’t even have anything to do, apparently, with its original cause.

Comment on Has Fundamentalism outlived its cause? by Mark

Mark — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:44:47 +0000

In the church where I grew up the pastor was one who fought the war against the compromise of of the Northern Baptist Convention – and I think he did a great service for Baptists in the north. But as I look at some of the things he wrote and what he did later in life I wonder if he was enjoyed the battle so much he couldn’t stop.

Fundamentalism can be distinguished as a movement by its practice of the doctrine of separation. One pastor friend of mine describes the Doctrine of Separation as the “Immune system of the Body of Christ.” I believe that is a good parallel. If the body’s immune system does not work, it will become diseased and weak. If it is working properly the body is strong and able to fight off disease. However, if the immune system becomes too strong (as in an autoimmune disease) it destroys the body from the inside out.

Comment on About by Matt

Matt — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 05:11:52 +0000

Hey Craig this is Matt Nerdahl.
I enjoy reading the blog. Please tell David and Grandma Muri that I say hello from sunny California.

Comment on Has Fundamentalism outlived its cause? by cmuri

cmuri — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:41:59 +0000

GAC – BG & JD have served the cause of Christ and also earned their share of criticism. I’ve earned mine too but I’m too small to be noticed. I’m personally grateful for every person who came to Christ through the BG crusades – his gospel was pure, his alignments were not, but they didn’t warrant calling out all the guns!