Dear Guests of IDOTG:
On Tuesday I published, Do Fundamentalists & Evangelicals, “Believe, Preach and Defend the [Same] Gospel?” There have been over 600 reads of that article to date. In the article, which is likely to have a sequel, I called upon Dr. Kevin Bauder to be honest and transparent on the true nature of the relationship between fundamentalists and evangelicals in regard to the gospel. For example,
IMO it is disingenuous and irresponsible for Kevin Bauder to speak of the Gospel in his [Differences, Part 12] article as if there is wide spread unanimity in all of Fundamentalism for agreement with evangelicals on what constitutes the Gospel, the nature of saving faith. His failure to disclose the well-known, demonstrable division in Fundamentalism over the LS interpretation of the Gospel, the open rejection of the LS gospel of the evangelicals, is in fact the practice censorship by omission. I am calling on Kevin Bauder to be honest with his readers. To publicly recognize that many men in Fundamentalism reject Calvinistic soteriology and especially the Lordship Salvation interpretation of the Gospel, which the evangelicals “believe, preach and defend.”This morning the pseudo-Fundamentalist Sharper Iron1, whose leadership is a willing ally and conduit for the push to sweep aside significant doctrinal differences for the sake of unity between fundamentalists and evangelicals, has published Central Baptist Seminary’s Ethos Statement on Fundamentalism & Evangelicalism, which was written by Kevin Bauder. This article contains trace elements on the theme, which we have identified as a misrepresentation of the relationship on the gospel between fundamentalism and evangelicalism.
Biblical Separation taught us that separation is the struggle for a pure church. That is what Kevin Bauder is pushing aside for his new paradigm, of fellowship around his so-called “pure gospel,” or as Dave Doran references as a “gospel-driven separation.”
In his article There is a Difference and It’s a Name Changer Evangelist Gordon Phillips addressed this paradigm shift. For example he wrote,
“What are the implications of changing Fundamentalism ecclesiastical separation from the purity of the church to the purity of the Gospel and forging strategic alliances with Conservative Evangelicals around that Gospel?2 At least one Fundamentalist suggests that to do that should only come with a change of labels as one is no longer in accord with historic Fundamentalism....If you are going to change your stance on ecclesiastical separation, please do not forget to change your name, as the two go hand-in-hand.... what he [Kevin Bauder] is presently doing appears to be giving the new life-filled movement of his ‘ideal’ Fundamentalism the compromised thinking of Neo Evangelicalism rather than a greater degree of Biblical fidelity.”In the ethos statement we also read,
“Because of these differences, we do not believe that complete cooperation with conservative evangelicalism is desirable.... For this reason, we believe that careful, limited forms of fellowship are possible.”Last month that excerpt was dealt with in the article, Faith Baptist-Central Seminary Merger Talks Shelved… I encourage you to read that commentary, which includes the following,
For many what should come immediately to mind is the camel’s nose in the tent. “Careful, limited forms of fellowship” now. Sure, but it never ends there; does it? Later there will be unfettered, full cooperation. If you crack the door open, even a little, it will eventually be found wide open. Much could be said here, it is probably enough to say that elements from the institutional ethos/culture statements of each school would have yielded contributing factors for the cessation of merger talks. (edited 8/27 @ 3:35pm)We’ll watch with great interest how these issues develop in the coming days beginning tomorrow with Kevin Bauder’s 13th installment in his series Now, About Those Differences. Kevin Bauder is well aware there is no universal “mutuality, allegiance” or agreement across the whole of fundamentalism with the evangelicals who believe, preach and defend the Lordship Salvation gospel. I am hopeful and confident he will publish a sorely needed retraction and clarification of his current misrepresentation of the relationship between fundamentalists and evangelicals on the nature of the gospel.
Just heard from a friend who wrote, “How odd it is for 2 staunch Calvinists (Bauder/Doran) to react against the Faith/Central non-merger, which in their thinking should be accepted as Sovereignly ordained.”
For an excellent related read see Don Johnson's a new-fundamentalist manifesto at an ox goad, eh?
For important related discussion, in which the Central/Bauder ethos statement was challenged please see, SI Playing Favorites: Again???
Kevin Bauder is beginning to realize there is a growing number of persons and blogs willing to challenge his assertions. By his sharp reaction(s) at SI it is apparent he does not like this very much at all. Of course, the SI team lines up to defend him from legitimate inquires and once again gang-tackles those who dare question their star contributor.
1) SI Gang-Tackles “Doc” Clearwaters, a companion article to, A Letter from Dr. Richard V. Clearwaters to Kevin Bauder by Evangelist Dwight Smith.
2) “That Gospel,” is Calvinistic soteriology in the form of Lordship Salvation.