Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Recovering the Real Old Paths

By William Dudding

I recently saw an advertisement in the Revival Fires paper for an "Old Paths" Conference hosted by Jeff Owens. Kieth Gomez also had a conference last year about staying on the "Old Paths". These guys consider men like Paul Chappell and to be neo-fundamentalists or borderline neo-evangelicals because they use modern architecture for their buildings, digital keyboards, conservative contemporary music and screens to display sermon notes.

So, ask yourself: "What are the old paths of fundamentalism?" These so-called old paths that these extreme fundamentalists claim to be holding to are really not old at all. They're realatively new in the light of the history of American Fundamentalism. In March 2006 there was an article called "Defending the Faith" in Tabletalk Magazine produced by Ligonier Ministries. I read this article as they explained the modernist vrs. fundamenalist controversy of the early 1900's. In the late 1800's it was Baptist pastor Charles Spurgeon who laid the ground work for fundamentalism as he fought for doctrinal purity during the "Downgrade Controversy". Later, the predominant leader of the fundamentalist movement was J.Gresham Machen, a Presbyterian theologian who started Westminster Theological Seminary. At this point in history, Fundamentalism was purely a theological movement that was vigorously defending the faith against liberalism. R.A. Torrey was also a heavy hitter for the fundamentalists who wrote a book called 'The Fundamentals'. Within 50 years, the liberals had won over several seminaries and thier theology of unbelief became mainstream in many of the mainline denominations. It wasn't until the late 1940's and 50's that men like Lee Roberson, Lester Roloff and John R. Rice started to separate from the Southern Baptist Convention that had been tolerating liberalism in it's ranks, and became maverick independents. During this time, however there were still loyal fundamental men who were contending for the faith within their denominations like Martin Loyd-Jones, and Bob Jones Sr. It was at this point in history that the fundamentalist movement had started departing from the "Old Paths" which their fathers Machen, Torrey, Spurgeon had paved.

When Elvis introduced Rock 'n Roll and the Beatles lead the British Invasion of boy bands to America, Fundamentalism abandoned the theological fight and entered the culture wars. These culture wars have been a distraction from the real war that the Devil has been waging on Christianity which has always been against the Word of God. John R. Rice spent most of his time writing books like "What's Wrong with the Movies" and "Hippie Hair" produced by The Sword of the Lord. By the 70's and 80's Jerry Falwell's Moral Majority started up as a counter attack to political liberalism, Jack Hyles started Hyles-Anderson College to produce preacher boys who would fight against cultural wickedness and worldliness. All this time, fundamentalists have been fighting the wrong war, the Devil has crept in and stolen the crown jewels of doctrinally sound, biblical theology. Pseudo-Theologies like 'secondary separation', and 'King James Onlyism' have taken the place of the essentials: the fundamentals.

My wife came from a more reformed Baptist background in Mexico. She had grown up on a steady diet of preaching on the subjects of justification, imputation, election and predestination, the atonement, the incarnation of Christ, sanctification, regeneration, and evangelism. When she moved to the U.S. and went to what she thought was a historic fundamental Baptist church (where we met eachother) she heard preaching on standards, King James onlyism, standards, soul-winning, standards, convictions, soul winning and more standards. She was used to singing hymns written by Isaac Watts, Charles Wesley, and Martin Luther, but when she went to a typical Fundamental church, they were singing the 'old fashioned' songs of Bill Gaither, Squire Parsons, and Dottie Rambo. She asked: "what is this?" and we told her this was fundamentalism....and she had to get rid of her Reina Valera 1960 translation of the Spanish Bible and get a real Bible: a KJV!!! "BLESS GOD!!" She questioned why we called our churches "independent" when in reality we were answering to our favorite mega-church and Bible College. "So, why do you guys criticize conventions like the Southern Baptists?" she asked me "just because your association or fellowship doesn't have a charter? You're doing the same thing. We need to look back to the monuments of our Baptist heritage and teach them to our future generations." I'm glad that God sovereignly led my wife on the old paths before I even met her and that we crossed paths in His Providencial plan. This reminds me of the London Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689. This confession of faith is the old paths of real Baptist fundamentalism!

Fundamentalism has come a long way off the old paths. Those who want to return to them only want to return to the rabbit trails of the 1950's because they wouldn't recognize the original old paths if they saw them. In fact, they attack those who have continued on the original old paths like John MacArthur and the Bob Jones University crowd.

I have been hacking my way through the jungle of false teaching and hysteric fundamentalism in search of the old paths of historic fundamentalism. As I've been tracking foot prints that lead to the old paths, here are the charactaristics of old path fundamentalism that I have found in comparison to the new 1950's fundamentalism:

Historic Fundamentalism
1. The Sovereignty of God
2. The authority and sufficiancy of Scripture
3. Theological preaching
4. The Holiness of God reflected in His people
5. Preaching faith and repentance unto salvation
6. Fighting the enemy of liberal unbelief
7. Persecuted for their doctrine

1950's Style Fundamentalism
1. The sovereignty of man (Arminianism)
2. The worship of the KJV or KJB!
3. Theatrical preaching
4. Legalism enduced holiness
5. Preaching fast prayer easy believism
6. Fighting eachother for influence
7. Complacent with doctrine

No comments: