Recently, there have been a lot of emails flying back and forth among the authors of this site. (Some of us don’t check our inboxes frequently, so imagine that it has been a shock to see hundreds of emails from the rest of us.)
The reason for all the emails? We’re trying very hard to avoid becoming known as an ‘anti-fundamentalism’ site. All of us, at some point in our lives, have left some form of extreme fundamentalism, and there are a lot of excesses in that particular camp that probably do need to be pointed out along the way. But we do not want to be reactionary.
Instead, we want to create a forum where people emerging from fundamentalism can discuss what fundamentalism needs to be;what the fundamentals actually are; and where we go from here. We want to heal wounds, not pour salt into them.
In the first post in this series, Will noted that we should strive to be humble in our approach to God’s Word. In this follow-up, I want to encourage everyone who participates in both the writing of these articles and in commenting on them afterward that this is a conversation – a discussion. None of us have arrived and have all the answers. No matter how definitive we may sound in our articles, we are striving to grow and learn from God’s Word.
There is a lot of diversity among the writers of this blog. Most of the writers are somewhat Reformed in their theological bend; some of us are widely read; others are maturing students of textual criticism. None of us are at a place where we are telling people what to believe, and may God save us from ever being in that place.
So if humility is the first characteristic of this New Dynamic, then let’s make conversation the second. This is a humble conversation for those coming out of extreme fundamentalism and asking, “What am I supposed to believe?”
JasonS
May 19, 2010
Erik,
Though we didn’t intend a series, I have piggy-backed a post that is scheduled for tomorrow.
Looking forward to our changes, and excited that we can get together and work on something much more positive, challenging, and Biblical.
fundyreformed
May 19, 2010
Erik,
To some extent I think we should tell other people what to believe. But I get what you’re saying. I agree a humble discussion is good, and as I would contend we can disagree on things and still agree on the most important things. That’s what fundamentalism is really all about.
Erik
May 19, 2010
I guess we’ll have to disagree on that one. I don’t think it is the job of this blog to tell people what to believe. We can certainly speak and teach clearly but convinvcing people we are right and they are wrong is out of our purview – IMHO
fundyreformed
May 19, 2010
Erik,
There are things we will try to convince others of. And there are things we are right about (divinity of Christ, salvation by grace through faith, etc.) that others may well be wrong about – and that we are obligated to defend as right before these others.
In general, an unwillingness to say we have any doctrine figured out or that we know as truth anything at all from the Bible is a postmodern impulse which the apostles certainly would not have shared.
I’m not assuming our blog is about pontificating our views on every little thing, but it is about discussing important truths and at time we will think we are correct and aim to convince others of our view. Maybe I’m just too affected by modernistic thought, but I don’t see anything wrong with that.
Erik
May 19, 2010
I think you are using the word convince differently than I am. If you mean present the truth of God’s Word and let the Holy Spirit speak through it, then I agree. If you believe that you can persuade people of the truth of God’s Word, then I disagree.
fundyreformed
May 20, 2010
I’m sorry I didn’t reply again Erik. You are right, we have a semiotic problem here. I mean that I intend to persuade people, hoping the Spirit convinces them. And some things I will aim a little harder and speak a little louder on than others. But whether anyone accepts my views isn’t the issue. I hope they do, only as much as my views echo the Truth.
williamdudding1977
May 19, 2010
I think another dynamic that I would like to post on later is holiness. I’m talking about a Puritan kind of holiness, not the synthetic, hypocritical veneer of holiness that fundamentalism has always worn.
fundyreformed
May 19, 2010
sounds good, Will
brakelite
May 21, 2010
Hi guys. Isn’t it weird how we admire those who are scholars, those who spend their days seeking truth, studying God’s word, even commending them for their industriousness and dedication; but when they come to us and claim they have found the “truth”, and it disagrees with our own understanding, we call them arrogant when they dare say we are wrong.