A Brief History of the IFB

Binaca Chugger

Well-known member
Doctor
Elect
Joined
Jan 22, 2013
Messages
4,323
Reaction score
75
Points
48
I have talked with some lately who are a little confused about the history of the IFB movement.  Many of the posters here have had some questions on the issue and I fear that even many in the IFB movement today have lost the truth of their own heritage.  This is by no means a complete work on the history, but will present a brief history.  Please feel free to comment.

A little background information is needed.  Since the foundation of the church, there has always been a tendency for a group that has heralded the truth to become enraptured with some false dogma or doctrine.  When this happens, there tends to be a small splinter group that abandons the group to maintain independence and calls others back to the truth.  When this happens, the more established, larger group lashes out in attack out of self-defense for their dogma or doctrine.  This phenomenon has been happening since the foundation of the church and is easily seen when looking at church history.  Thus, we should not be surprised when we see this occurring today or in the future.

The Fundamentalist movement began in the 1920's when a movement entitled "The Higher Criticism" began sweeping across the world.  This movement had its roots in Germany, then France and followed the great migration to America where it bloomed in the 1920's.  The Higher Criticism was deistic in nature and attacked the authority of the Scripture on historical and linguistic grounds.  This attack was followed by other arguments touting humanistic advancements in psychology over the truths of the Bible and sought to discredit many Theological foundations of Christianity.  The average pastor in America did not know how to discredit these new arguments and many were falling away from churches.  Scholars, pastors and evangelists banded together in preaching conferences to encourage the pastors and laity of this nation to stand for the Fundamental truths of Christianity.  Works were published to teach, encourage and equip Christians to argue against The Higher Criticism.  This was the birth of the modern fundamentalist movement.

Notice that these founders of the movement were not all Baptist.  In fact, Baptist was a minority in this group, though they did participate.  Not all of these agreed on every point of doctrine, nor on every dogma. 

The early Fundamentalist movement was a national stirring of all who claimed to be Christian.  This movement began to fall apart shortly after the Scopes trial debacle.  The leaders realized that a national harping with a loud voice would not change the nation.  Rather, there was a call to a grass roots movement of proselyting and discipling individuals.

As the national movement returned to a Biblical model, the group began a natural fragmentation due to varying doctrine and dogma of the various denominations.  Even among the Baptist there were great divisions.  The Southern Baptist and American (Northern) Baptists had their split long ago, mainly over slavery.  Frank Norris started the BBF.  Bob Ketcham started the GARB.  Myron Cedarholm started the CBA.  Lee Roberson started the SBF.  Jack Hyles wrote in his works that he was 75% SBF and 25% BBF.  John R Rice bridged the gap between many of these Baptist groups and the Non-denominational fundamentalists.  Billy Graham went a step further by calling for all of these groups to unite once again in city-wide campaigns.

Among the Southern Baptists, there were a few key players that led to the modern movement.  Jack Hyles and Lee Roberson.  All three of these were voted out of the SBC for their own choice to not participate in the SBC program.  This event was incredibly demoralizing for each of these leaders.  Lee Roberson would go on to start his own fellowship of churches.  Jack Hyles seemed to harbor a resentment towards the SBC and would not claim to ever have started another denomination or fellowship.  Lee Roberson had already built the largest Sunday School in the world.  Jack Hyles would move to Hammond, IN, to build an even larger work.  Both of these works were characterized by strong preaching, visitation, bus ministry and high moral standards of separation.

After Lee Roberson resigned from Highland Park, the church in Chattanooga began an obvious slide toward the liberal leaning faction of the Independent movement and would eventually seek membership in the SBC once again after the death of  Lee Roberson.  This movement left Jack Hyles and the First Baptist Church of Hammond as the lone bastion of the movement who had pulled out of the SBC, remained independent and fundamental in its teachings.  Of course, there were other local churches who would fit this description, but none with the influence of the world's largest Sunday School program.

As Jack Hyles grew the ministry of the FBCH, people began asking his opinion and modeling their ministries after his own.  This was true of not just IFB churches, but churches from varying non-denominational and denominations churches as well.  Thus, a college training people in the methodology of Jack Hyles and a national pastor's conference was born. 

Though it may be debated, many people believe that it is at this point that Jack Hyles began to make grave mistakes.  He decided to travel the nation as a voice for his cause rather than continue to care for his personal family and the church family that called him Preacher.  The real problems of such choices began to surface when Jack Hyles' son was being accused by many in the church of inappropriate relationships with teen girls.  Dave Hyles was appointed as youth director before his 20s and was not really able to spiritually lead this massive youth department.  Instead, his lust for sex began to control him.  Jack Hyles would not hear that his son was guilty of such issues.  He needed something to divert attention away from the supposed problems in the youth department.  Dave was sent to Texas to pastor a church (where he continued to hurt people).  To complicate matters, Jack was accused of an affair with his secretary.  This accusation was never proven, but had much credence. Jack Hyles needed to rally his followers.  Jack decided to take strong stands against minor issues that had never been contended before among those who called themselves fundamentalists.  This would give his followers something to rally around and circle the wagons into an us against them mentality.  From the 1980's forward, this branch of fundamentalism would forever be finding something wrong with some other group.  This fault-finding became a full time endeavor among some in their ranks who would publish articles and distribute information about the problems in some other group or church. 

The Fundamentalists had fragmented into a denominational sections.  The Baptist Fundamentalists had fragmented into varying denominations.  The strictest sect among the Baptist had fragmented to be independent of any denomination.  Now, these, calling themselves the Independent Fundamental Baptists, were fragmenting upon such lines as number of baptisms, types of ministries and how much they supported Jack Hyles.  In his elder years, Jack Hyles lamented this division among his followers and personally pleaded with these groups to unite once again around the cause of Christ.  This pleading was ignored even after the death of Jack Hyles.

In the last 15 years, the IFB has continued to fragment into various groups centered around strong, charismatic leaders and the Bible colleges which each has founded.  Like their father, Hyles-Anderson College, these colleges seek primarily to train people in the mannerisms of their leader, which gives some distinction between them.  Like their predecessor, they continue to focus on the reason why others are more sinful than they in efforts to rally people around their own methodologies. 

We reach the conclusion that the Independent Fundamental Baptists of today are not really like the people they point to as their founders at all.  The founders of the movement united with various denominations to nationally call people to repentance and a knowledge of the sufficiency of the Scripture.  Today's Fundamentalists, in the IFB, are calling for radical separation and radical accusation against any who are not utilizing the exact same methodology as themselves.

Today, many who have grown up in the IFB movement are realizing the errors of the last generation.  They are beginning to ask the Fundamentalists of America to reunite around the Cross, centering their union and cause around Christ and Him crucified.  The methodology might not be the same as the previous generation.  The focus is definitely shifting from simply attacking others and promoting a lifestyle to promoting the sufficiency of the Scripture and the worship of God.  Not surprisingly this has been met with an attack, just as has happened throughout the last two millennium.

My hope in this lengthy post, but brief history, is to call the Fundamentalists of America back to a place of willingness to work with others to let Christ be our cause once again.  Let us lay down our pens, step away from the keyboard and stop the hashtag attacks.  If you are going to claim your are "Old Paths," recognize the character of unity and doctrine in the old paths.  Point out sin and inappropriate doctrine, but unite with others who are carrying the Gospel and promoting the Fundamentals as we are instructed by Christ.

Luke 9:50 - And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.
 
Bob Jones should be included above. His school has had a far greater, longer-lasting influence in fundamentalism.
 
FSSL said:
Bob Jones should be included above. His school has had a far greater, longer-lasting influence in fundamentalism.

True.  I did not include him or the other non-denominational groups simply because I was focusing on the Baptist groups of today who are claiming their heritage to the original Fundamentalists.  Does the BJU crowd still promote their heritage to the Fundamentalists?
 
You betcha! They consider themselves to be the leading fundamentalists.

They are the largest resource on fundamentalism, devoting a large part of their library to it

Most Independent Baptist colleges were microcosms of BJU due to the overwhelming numbers of BJU grads as profs.
 
FSSL said:
You betcha! They consider themselves to be the leading fundamentalists.

They are the largest resource on fundamentalism, devoting a large part of their library to it

Most Independent Baptist colleges were microcosms of BJU due to the overwhelming numbers of BJU grads as profs.

Fill us in.  How did BJU contribute to the current state of the IFB and the movement away by this generation?
 
Binaca Chugger said:
Fill us in.  How did BJU contribute to the current state of the IFB and the movement away by this generation?

I am not a BJU grad, so I don't have a dog in this fight.

I already mentioned how they contribute/d to the IFB movement.

How did/do they contribute to the movement away? Various reasons, not altogether different than many IFB colleges. Like Hyles Anderson, they had a large problem with inbreeding their faculty. They cultivate/d a fanciful notion among their students and alumni that Bob Jones was an elite school, ranking up there with Ivy League schools. Along with this was an inordinate amount of reliance on grad students taking the place of the actual prof.

Their staunch 70s racist position did not help the IFB movement.
 
This is pretty good Chinaca Bugger! It took me years to come to the realization that what we deemed as 'fundamentalist' and not a 'fundamentalist' had little to do with the original 'fundamentalist".
 
BALAAM said:
This is pretty good Chinaca Bugger! It took me years to come to the realization that what we deemed as 'fundamentalist' and not a 'fundamentalist' had little to do with the original 'fundamentalist".

Me too. My next book has two very long chapters dedicated to explaining this in hopes of returning us to an understanding of what the term actually means. It includes some of what Binaca wrote above.

Words means things. We shouldn't use them unless we are going to use them properly.
 
Tom Brennan said:
BALAAM said:
This is pretty good Chinaca Bugger! It took me years to come to the realization that what we deemed as 'fundamentalist' and not a 'fundamentalist' had little to do with the original 'fundamentalist".

Me too. My next book has two very long chapters dedicated to explaining this in hopes of returning us to an understanding of what the term actually means. It includes some of what Binaca wrote above.

Words means things. We shouldn't use them unless we are going to use them properly.

I sure hope this mentality gets down hear soon and very soon.

Because IFB is dieing fast down here. We just left the IFB movement and trust me we didn't want to. It was more out of spiritual survival it just got to bad. The identity of the church is "standards" I believe in standards we need them, but standards is not who I am. It took 13 years of our married life to make the move. So it wasn't because we got mad or hurt. We struggled for 13 years as a married couple to "stay".

They might have 10 people on a Wednesday night and maybe 30 on a Sunday morning. I think it's sad and wish it wasn't this way. The church there, I believe, still has a lot of potential but he's not changing.

When we left I just told him we weren't on the same page. There was no need to go into details with him. I met wit him 3 different times in 13 years and .........well, standards is who he is, I've come to learn.
 
Binaca Chugger said:
FSSL said:
Bob Jones should be included above. His school has had a far greater, longer-lasting influence in fundamentalism.

True.  I did not include him or the other non-denominational groups simply because I was focusing on the Baptist groups of today who are claiming their heritage to the original Fundamentalists.  Does the BJU crowd still promote their heritage to the Fundamentalists?

You are correct not to include Bob Jones Sr. as a Baptist. He was an immersed Methodist although his mother was a Primitive Baptist. Methodists came from John and Charles Wesley who were Anglican Priests that left the Church of England.

Latter in life he became Nondenominational as BJU still is today.

BJU would be considered a Fundamentalist institution within the original meaning of the term.

Fundamentalism is not limited to one group or denomination.

Those who limit Fundamentalism to Presbyterians or Baptists have no idea what historic fundamentalism meant originally in the early 1900s. It was inclusive of all those who held to the Fundamentals of the Faith.
 
Here is some more history of what is called Fundamentalism.

Niagra Bible Conference

Here is what came out of that conference in 1878.

14 point creed of the Niagara Bible Conference of 1878:
1. The verbal, plenary inspiration of the Scriptures in the original manuscripts.
2. The Trinity.
3. The Creation of man, the Fall into sin, and total depravity.
4. The universal transmission of spiritual death from Adam.
5. The necessity of the new birth.
6. Redemption by the blood of Christ.
7. Salvation by faith alone in Christ.
8. The assurance of salvation.
9. The centrality of Jesus Christ in the Scriptures.
10. The constitution of the true church by genuine believers.
11. The personality of the Holy Spirit.
12. The believer?s call to a holy life.
13. The immediate passing of the souls of believers to be with Christ at death.
14. The premillennial Second Coming of Christ.

Many trace the beginnings of the Fundamentalist movement to this conference.

Some of the scholars who were present, known as the founding fathers of Fundamentalism, were W.E. Blackstone, Charles Erdman, James H. Brookes, William Moorehead, A.J. Gordon, A.C. Dixon, C.I. Scofield, and J. Hudson Taylor (who founded the China Inland Mission).

"We believe that the world will not be converted during the present dispensation, but is fast ripening for judgment, while there will be a fearful apostasy in the professing Christian body; and hence that the Lord Jesus will come in person to introduce the millennial age, when Israel shall be restored to their own land, and the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord; and that this personal and premillennial advent is the blessed hope set before us in the Gospel for which we should be constantly looking." Some of the contributions of the Niagara Conference were:

The conference spawned new missionary activity and evangelism
The conference contributed to the rise and spread of a large Bible conference movement (such as the Northfield conferences)
The conference had a significant impact on the rise of the Bible institute and Bible college movement
The conference gave early expression to Fundamentalism's emphasis on concentrated Bible study
The conference precipitated a vast amount of Fundamentalist literature, especially on the subjects of prophecy, the Person and work of Christ, the Holy Spirit and missions."
http://www.theopedia.com/Niagara_Bible_Conference


Two immediate doctrinal sources for fundamentalist thought were Millenarianism and biblical inerrancy. Millenarianism, belief in the physical return of Christ to establish a 1,000 year earthly reign of blessedness, was a doctrine prevalent in English speaking Protestantism by the 1870s. At the same time, powerful conservative forces led by Charles Hodge and Benjamin Warfield opposed the growing use of literary and historical criticism in biblical studies, defending biblical inspiration and the inerrant authority of the Bible.

The name fundamentalist was coined in 1920 to designate those "doing battle royal for the Fundamentals." Also figuring in the name was The Fundamentals, a 12 volume collection of essays written in the period 1910 - 15 by 64 British and American scholars and preachers. Three million copies of these volumes and the founding of the World's Christian Fundamentals Association in 1919 gave sharp identity to fundamentalism as it moved into the 1920s. Leadership moved across the years from such men as A T Pierson, A J Gordon, and C I Scofield to A C Dixon and Reuben Torrey, William Jennings Bryan, and J Gresham Machen.

This 12 volume set of paperback books is where I first learned about Fundamentalism. My parents distributed these in the 40s and 50s. During the 50s I traveled with my parents a great deal of the time giving me ample opportunity to read and read some more.

Here is the core source material for the Fundamentalist movement of the early 1900s.
How many Fundamentalists today have read these books or even know that they exist?


www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%201.pdf
www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%202.pdf
www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%203.pdf
www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%204.pdf

Suggested reading for more info.

L J Averill, Religious Right, Religious Wrong (1989)
S G Cole, History of Fundamentalism (1931)
N Furniss, The Fundamentalist Controversy, 1918 - 1931 (1954)
B Lawrence, Defenders of God (1989)
G Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture (1980)
E R Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism (1970)
G W Dollar, A History of Fundamentalism in America (updated edition, Marcia Dollar Phillips, daughter)(2006)
J I Packer, "Fundamentalism" and the Word of God
James Barr, Fundamentalism
R Lightner, Neo Evangelicalism
L Gasper, The Fundamentalist Movement, 1930 - 1956
Kevin Bauder, One In Hope And Doctrine (2014) Origins of Baptist Fundamentalism 1870 - 1950
 
BALAAM said:
This is pretty good Chinaca Bugger! It took me years to come to the realization that what we deemed as 'fundamentalist' and not a 'fundamentalist' had little to do with the original 'fundamentalist".
Thanks.  After reading my first book on the topic nearly a decade ago, I saw a problem in our IFB dogma.  After reading everything I could find on the topic for several years, I have become convinced that the position of the current IFB NADD is in great error.
 
Tom Brennan said:
BALAAM said:
This is pretty good Chinaca Bugger! It took me years to come to the realization that what we deemed as 'fundamentalist' and not a 'fundamentalist' had little to do with the original 'fundamentalist".

Me too. My next book has two very long chapters dedicated to explaining this in hopes of returning us to an understanding of what the term actually means. It includes some of what Binaca wrote above.

Words means things. We shouldn't use them unless we are going to use them properly.
Thanks.  I look forward to reading it.
 
bgwilkinson said:
Here is some more history of what is called Fundamentalism.

Niagra Bible Conference

Here is what came out of that conference in 1878.

14 point creed of the Niagara Bible Conference of 1878:
1. The verbal, plenary inspiration of the Scriptures in the original manuscripts.
2. The Trinity.
3. The Creation of man, the Fall into sin, and total depravity.
4. The universal transmission of spiritual death from Adam.
5. The necessity of the new birth.
6. Redemption by the blood of Christ.
7. Salvation by faith alone in Christ.
8. The assurance of salvation.
9. The centrality of Jesus Christ in the Scriptures.
10. The constitution of the true church by genuine believers.
11. The personality of the Holy Spirit.
12. The believer?s call to a holy life.
13. The immediate passing of the souls of believers to be with Christ at death.
14. The premillennial Second Coming of Christ.

Many trace the beginnings of the Fundamentalist movement to this conference.

Some of the scholars who were present, known as the founding fathers of Fundamentalism, were W.E. Blackstone, Charles Erdman, James H. Brookes, William Moorehead, A.J. Gordon, A.C. Dixon, C.I. Scofield, and J. Hudson Taylor (who founded the China Inland Mission).

"We believe that the world will not be converted during the present dispensation, but is fast ripening for judgment, while there will be a fearful apostasy in the professing Christian body; and hence that the Lord Jesus will come in person to introduce the millennial age, when Israel shall be restored to their own land, and the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord; and that this personal and premillennial advent is the blessed hope set before us in the Gospel for which we should be constantly looking." Some of the contributions of the Niagara Conference were:

The conference spawned new missionary activity and evangelism
The conference contributed to the rise and spread of a large Bible conference movement (such as the Northfield conferences)
The conference had a significant impact on the rise of the Bible institute and Bible college movement
The conference gave early expression to Fundamentalism's emphasis on concentrated Bible study
The conference precipitated a vast amount of Fundamentalist literature, especially on the subjects of prophecy, the Person and work of Christ, the Holy Spirit and missions."
http://www.theopedia.com/Niagara_Bible_Conference


Two immediate doctrinal sources for fundamentalist thought were Millenarianism and biblical inerrancy. Millenarianism, belief in the physical return of Christ to establish a 1,000 year earthly reign of blessedness, was a doctrine prevalent in English speaking Protestantism by the 1870s. At the same time, powerful conservative forces led by Charles Hodge and Benjamin Warfield opposed the growing use of literary and historical criticism in biblical studies, defending biblical inspiration and the inerrant authority of the Bible.

The name fundamentalist was coined in 1920 to designate those "doing battle royal for the Fundamentals." Also figuring in the name was The Fundamentals, a 12 volume collection of essays written in the period 1910 - 15 by 64 British and American scholars and preachers. Three million copies of these volumes and the founding of the World's Christian Fundamentals Association in 1919 gave sharp identity to fundamentalism as it moved into the 1920s. Leadership moved across the years from such men as A T Pierson, A J Gordon, and C I Scofield to A C Dixon and Reuben Torrey, William Jennings Bryan, and J Gresham Machen.

This 12 volume set of paperback books is where I first learned about Fundamentalism. My parents distributed these in the 40s and 50s. During the 50s I traveled with my parents a great deal of the time giving me ample opportunity to read and read some more.

Here is the core source material for the Fundamentalist movement of the early 1900s.
How many Fundamentalists today have read these books or even know that they exist?


www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%201.pdf
www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%202.pdf
www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%203.pdf
www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%204.pdf

Suggested reading for more info.

L J Averill, Religious Right, Religious Wrong (1989)
S G Cole, History of Fundamentalism (1931)
N Furniss, The Fundamentalist Controversy, 1918 - 1931 (1954)
B Lawrence, Defenders of God (1989)
G Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture (1980)
E R Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism (1970)
G W Dollar, A History of Fundamentalism in America (updated edition, Marcia Dollar Phillips, daughter)(2006)
J I Packer, "Fundamentalism" and the Word of God
James Barr, Fundamentalism
R Lightner, Neo Evangelicalism
L Gasper, The Fundamentalist Movement, 1930 - 1956
Kevin Bauder, One In Hope And Doctrine (2014) Origins of Baptist Fundamentalism 1870 - 1950
This is exactly the list,  with a glaring hole where immersion belongs, and obviously excluding me from the club.


Earnestly Contend

 
bgwilkinson said:
Here is some more history of what is called Fundamentalism.

Niagra Bible Conference

Here is what came out of that conference in 1878.

14 point creed of the Niagara Bible Conference of 1878:
1. The verbal, plenary inspiration of the Scriptures in the original manuscripts.
2. The Trinity.
3. The Creation of man, the Fall into sin, and total depravity.
4. The universal transmission of spiritual death from Adam.
5. The necessity of the new birth.
6. Redemption by the blood of Christ.
7. Salvation by faith alone in Christ.
8. The assurance of salvation.
9. The centrality of Jesus Christ in the Scriptures.
10. The constitution of the true church by genuine believers.
11. The personality of the Holy Spirit.
12. The believer?s call to a holy life.
13. The immediate passing of the souls of believers to be with Christ at death.
14. The premillennial Second Coming of Christ.

Many trace the beginnings of the Fundamentalist movement to this conference.

Some of the scholars who were present, known as the founding fathers of Fundamentalism, were W.E. Blackstone, Charles Erdman, James H. Brookes, William Moorehead, A.J. Gordon, A.C. Dixon, C.I. Scofield, and J. Hudson Taylor (who founded the China Inland Mission).

"We believe that the world will not be converted during the present dispensation, but is fast ripening for judgment, while there will be a fearful apostasy in the professing Christian body; and hence that the Lord Jesus will come in person to introduce the millennial age, when Israel shall be restored to their own land, and the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord; and that this personal and premillennial advent is the blessed hope set before us in the Gospel for which we should be constantly looking." Some of the contributions of the Niagara Conference were:

The conference spawned new missionary activity and evangelism
The conference contributed to the rise and spread of a large Bible conference movement (such as the Northfield conferences)
The conference had a significant impact on the rise of the Bible institute and Bible college movement
The conference gave early expression to Fundamentalism's emphasis on concentrated Bible study
The conference precipitated a vast amount of Fundamentalist literature, especially on the subjects of prophecy, the Person and work of Christ, the Holy Spirit and missions."
http://www.theopedia.com/Niagara_Bible_Conference


Two immediate doctrinal sources for fundamentalist thought were Millenarianism and biblical inerrancy. Millenarianism, belief in the physical return of Christ to establish a 1,000 year earthly reign of blessedness, was a doctrine prevalent in English speaking Protestantism by the 1870s. At the same time, powerful conservative forces led by Charles Hodge and Benjamin Warfield opposed the growing use of literary and historical criticism in biblical studies, defending biblical inspiration and the inerrant authority of the Bible.

The name fundamentalist was coined in 1920 to designate those "doing battle royal for the Fundamentals." Also figuring in the name was The Fundamentals, a 12 volume collection of essays written in the period 1910 - 15 by 64 British and American scholars and preachers. Three million copies of these volumes and the founding of the World's Christian Fundamentals Association in 1919 gave sharp identity to fundamentalism as it moved into the 1920s. Leadership moved across the years from such men as A T Pierson, A J Gordon, and C I Scofield to A C Dixon and Reuben Torrey, William Jennings Bryan, and J Gresham Machen.

This 12 volume set of paperback books is where I first learned about Fundamentalism. My parents distributed these in the 40s and 50s. During the 50s I traveled with my parents a great deal of the time giving me ample opportunity to read and read some more.

Here is the core source material for the Fundamentalist movement of the early 1900s.
How many Fundamentalists today have read these books or even know that they exist?


www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%201.pdf
www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%202.pdf
www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%203.pdf
www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%204.pdf

Suggested reading for more info.

L J Averill, Religious Right, Religious Wrong (1989)
S G Cole, History of Fundamentalism (1931)
N Furniss, The Fundamentalist Controversy, 1918 - 1931 (1954)
B Lawrence, Defenders of God (1989)
G Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture (1980)
E R Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism (1970)
G W Dollar, A History of Fundamentalism in America (updated edition, Marcia Dollar Phillips, daughter)(2006)
J I Packer, "Fundamentalism" and the Word of God
James Barr, Fundamentalism
R Lightner, Neo Evangelicalism
L Gasper, The Fundamentalist Movement, 1930 - 1956
Kevin Bauder, One In Hope And Doctrine (2014) Origins of Baptist Fundamentalism 1870 - 1950
Great post.  I have read many of these works but not all.  Do you know of a source for the later works you mentioned?
 
Since you brought up millenarianism.....

I recently had a discussion with a pastor who believed this theory was first introduced to Christianity by Clarence Larkin and was unheard of before Larkin.  Do you have source material to prove otherwise?
 
Binaca Chugger said:
bgwilkinson said:
Here is some more history of what is called Fundamentalism.

Niagra Bible Conference

Here is what came out of that conference in 1878.

14 point creed of the Niagara Bible Conference of 1878:
1. The verbal, plenary inspiration of the Scriptures in the original manuscripts.
2. The Trinity.
3. The Creation of man, the Fall into sin, and total depravity.
4. The universal transmission of spiritual death from Adam.
5. The necessity of the new birth.
6. Redemption by the blood of Christ.
7. Salvation by faith alone in Christ.
8. The assurance of salvation.
9. The centrality of Jesus Christ in the Scriptures.
10. The constitution of the true church by genuine believers.
11. The personality of the Holy Spirit.
12. The believer?s call to a holy life.
13. The immediate passing of the souls of believers to be with Christ at death.
14. The premillennial Second Coming of Christ.

Many trace the beginnings of the Fundamentalist movement to this conference.

Some of the scholars who were present, known as the founding fathers of Fundamentalism, were W.E. Blackstone, Charles Erdman, James H. Brookes, William Moorehead, A.J. Gordon, A.C. Dixon, C.I. Scofield, and J. Hudson Taylor (who founded the China Inland Mission).

"We believe that the world will not be converted during the present dispensation, but is fast ripening for judgment, while there will be a fearful apostasy in the professing Christian body; and hence that the Lord Jesus will come in person to introduce the millennial age, when Israel shall be restored to their own land, and the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord; and that this personal and premillennial advent is the blessed hope set before us in the Gospel for which we should be constantly looking." Some of the contributions of the Niagara Conference were:

The conference spawned new missionary activity and evangelism
The conference contributed to the rise and spread of a large Bible conference movement (such as the Northfield conferences)
The conference had a significant impact on the rise of the Bible institute and Bible college movement
The conference gave early expression to Fundamentalism's emphasis on concentrated Bible study
The conference precipitated a vast amount of Fundamentalist literature, especially on the subjects of prophecy, the Person and work of Christ, the Holy Spirit and missions."
http://www.theopedia.com/Niagara_Bible_Conference


Two immediate doctrinal sources for fundamentalist thought were Millenarianism and biblical inerrancy. Millenarianism, belief in the physical return of Christ to establish a 1,000 year earthly reign of blessedness, was a doctrine prevalent in English speaking Protestantism by the 1870s. At the same time, powerful conservative forces led by Charles Hodge and Benjamin Warfield opposed the growing use of literary and historical criticism in biblical studies, defending biblical inspiration and the inerrant authority of the Bible.

The name fundamentalist was coined in 1920 to designate those "doing battle royal for the Fundamentals." Also figuring in the name was The Fundamentals, a 12 volume collection of essays written in the period 1910 - 15 by 64 British and American scholars and preachers. Three million copies of these volumes and the founding of the World's Christian Fundamentals Association in 1919 gave sharp identity to fundamentalism as it moved into the 1920s. Leadership moved across the years from such men as A T Pierson, A J Gordon, and C I Scofield to A C Dixon and Reuben Torrey, William Jennings Bryan, and J Gresham Machen.

This 12 volume set of paperback books is where I first learned about Fundamentalism. My parents distributed these in the 40s and 50s. During the 50s I traveled with my parents a great deal of the time giving me ample opportunity to read and read some more.

Here is the core source material for the Fundamentalist movement of the early 1900s.
How many Fundamentalists today have read these books or even know that they exist?


www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%201.pdf
www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%202.pdf
www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%203.pdf
www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books%20II/Torrey%20-%20The%20Fundamentals%204.pdf

Suggested reading for more info.

L J Averill, Religious Right, Religious Wrong (1989)
S G Cole, History of Fundamentalism (1931)
N Furniss, The Fundamentalist Controversy, 1918 - 1931 (1954)
B Lawrence, Defenders of God (1989)
G Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture (1980)
E R Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism (1970)
G W Dollar, A History of Fundamentalism in America (updated edition, Marcia Dollar Phillips, daughter)(2006)
J I Packer, "Fundamentalism" and the Word of God
James Barr, Fundamentalism
R Lightner, Neo Evangelicalism
L Gasper, The Fundamentalist Movement, 1930 - 1956
Kevin Bauder, One In Hope And Doctrine (2014) Origins of Baptist Fundamentalism 1870 - 1950
Great post.  I have read many of these works but not all.  Do you know of a source for the later works you mentioned?

Here is a link for Kevin's book.
http://www.rbpstore.org/Products/5128/one-in-hope--doctrine.aspx

Louis Gaspers book was distributed by my parents in their ministry.
I believe it is out of print.
 
Binaca Chugger said:
Since you brought up millenarianism.....

I recently had a discussion with a pastor who believed this theory was first introduced to Christianity by Clarence Larkin and was unheard of before Larkin.  Do you have source material to prove otherwise?

Number 14 from the Niagra conference was premillenial coming of Christ that was in 1878 four years before Larkin became a Baptist preacher in 1882.
Premillennialism was very popular amount believers of the Niagra conference.
You could probably say he was in on it soon after becoming Baptist in 1882, but not the first.
 
bgwilkinson said:
Binaca Chugger said:
Since you brought up millenarianism.....

I recently had a discussion with a pastor who believed this theory was first introduced to Christianity by Clarence Larkin and was unheard of before Larkin.  Do you have source material to prove otherwise?

Number 14 from the Niagra conference was premillenial coming of Christ that was in 1878 four years before Larkin became a Baptist preacher in 1882.
Premillennialism was very popular amount believers of the Niagra conference.
You could probably say he was in on it soon after becoming Baptist in 1882, but not the first.

Thanks, I should have thought of that.  Does anyone know of other writers promoting premillennialism prior to the Niagra Conference?  I could probably go back and read the conference notes again and discover it myself, but, hoping to save a step here.
 
bgwilkinson said:
Here is a link for Kevin's book.
http://www.rbpstore.org/Products/5128/one-in-hope--doctrine.aspx

Louis Gaspers book was distributed by my parents in their ministry.
I believe it is out of print.

Thanks.  I will look into some of these newer looks at the history.  Most of my initial reading on the topic was source reading.  For several years I have access to an incredibly large collection of books published in the late 1800's and early 1900's.  Reading these source documents, I was able to quickly see that the Fundamentalism of today is not the Fundamentalism of the founders of the Fundamentalist movement.  The only connection real connection is the modern group is trying to defend the Bible as the KJV only, but this argument is very different than the argument against the Higher Criticism.  Today's group is arguing one version only and the original argued the Bible against humanism.
 
Top