,
7 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
You might be a fundamentalist...
If you believe there are doctrines so essential to Christianity that you cannot deny them and still rightly call yourself a Christian.
If you believe there are doctrines so essential to Christianity that you cannot deny them and still rightly call yourself a Christian.
You might be a fundamentalist...
If you believe that granting Christian recognition & fellowship to those who reject essential doctrines of the Faith is prohibited by Scripture.
If you believe that granting Christian recognition & fellowship to those who reject essential doctrines of the Faith is prohibited by Scripture.
You might be a fundamentalist...
If you believe that Christians are called to a life of holiness which does not conform to this world but is being transformed to do God’s will and according to the pattern of Christ’s character.
If you believe that Christians are called to a life of holiness which does not conform to this world but is being transformed to do God’s will and according to the pattern of Christ’s character.
You might be a fundamentalist...
If you believe the NT declares and demonstrates that the mission of the church is to make disciples, form assemblies, and prepare believers to live as aliens and strangers in this world as they wait for Jesus to return from heaven.
If you believe the NT declares and demonstrates that the mission of the church is to make disciples, form assemblies, and prepare believers to live as aliens and strangers in this world as they wait for Jesus to return from heaven.
This was historic fundamentalism and it was what Henry, Ockenga, Graham, et al rejected. They wanted to keep fundamentalist doctrine, but abandon separation and pursue cultural engagement. This change has led to 70 years of repeated doctrinal and missional drift.
Within 1 decade Graham was openly partnering w/ apostate churches & leaders. Within 2 decades Fuller Seminary caved on inspiration (& more). Within 3 decades holistic mission shifted the priorities of the church toward social causes.
These points aren’t really debatable. The only debate is whether the compromises where worth the “gains” evangelicals experienced. I don’t think so, but others disagree. The current mess, IMO, has deep, historical roots.
