The first time I heard the strong opposition which I now see much more wide spread was in my own home. Now, I am aware that there are many of my generation who look at the churches of America, or look at Fundamentalism and feel disgust. This is because of what has become popular from "Bible-thumpers."
Don't drink.
Don't smoke.
Don't dance.
Don't go to theater.
Don't get tattoos .
Don't get piercings.
Men's hair shouldn't touch their ears, or the collar of the neck.
Don't listen to rock/jazz/country/etc.
Well, isn't this what is preached? In some circles it is seen as churches preaching rules. Others see a slightly broader perspective and claim that this isn't happening outside fundamentalism and attribute this "rule preaching" to us. This is what makes the leaders worried. They think the movement is dying...in honesty, I have no reason to doubt them. I am not "up" on Fundamentalism. If the leaders are talking about whether it is going to survive, I'm pretty sure we can think about it that way.
Well, I think that its true that we preach that way. Somehow through the last several decades the church has grown lethargic. Pastors worry about their people and instead of trusting the Word of God to work in hearts they begin to preach more and more application. They see the types of activities that the unsaved are involved in, and preach against it. It doesn't help, so they continue to preach application, application, application. Instead of allowing the Spirit of God to work in the hearts through the power of the Gospel, they preach keeping rules. But then, the next generation does not know how to preach doctrine. They don't know how to preach the whole counsel of God. They only know to preach rules.
I'm not doubting any one's salvation, but instead of being able to handle strong meat, they struggle with anything but simple milk. The pastors see this, and probably partly in fear shy away from anything difficult. With so many pastors being kicked out of their churches why risk talking over their heads. Continue to preach the application/rules.
Of course, it would be wrong to assay that the decline of the church these past decades has been solely the fault of the elders. If the sheep had themselves kept to the word of God, if they had done their responsibility to live holy separated lives, if they had kept themselves unspotted from the world. In all, the church is at fault for the mess we are in. Whether you say "the church" or "fundamentalism" it doesn't matter. We are where we are through our own laziness and unbelief.
Something else that occurred to me earlier is that even if Fundamentalism as a movement died, it wouldn't phase little GFBC. In all likelihood, it would not phase Southshore Baptist Church. Fundamentalism will continue for years to come. At least for some years, since I am a fundamentalist. While there are not as many younger folk here in Edmore, there are enough in my generation within my family who are also Fundamentalists, who would continue to be so even if the movement just died. But that implies a movement can just die. I don't know much about movements, but I think that they slow down, rather than just fall over. I think Fundamentalism had a fiery start (wouldn't be a good movement without it), but its been a century almost. Of course it is waning. Multitudes have considered starting a new movement, but why start a new fire when you have coals still burning? Easier to stoke an existing fire. . .and that has been the conclusion often arrived at.
Still, many are leaving. They see the rule preaching, and in the foolishness of Rehoboam's counsellors, they perceive that in order to escape this they must abandon all they have been taught. They begin to build again the foundation testing every thought, every creed, every statement of faith. They want to preach Christ (to their credit), but they do so with the dropping of everything their parents held dear. Now, we must with Paul rejoice when Christ is preached and as I think of some whom I have seen leave MBBC and go to preach, though I wonder at their doctrine and liberality, I do believe that they can preach the Gospel. So, while I rejoice that the Gospel is going forth, I regret that it be with such means and accompanying stubble.
Who am I to judge? Most of you will know that I am often a quick judge (slowing down as I grow up, but often still quick). Is it my place to sit here and judge them? Why do I not look inward and judge? Simply put, I do. I know many of my faults and behind them I know lurk a multitude waiting to show themselves.
This does not neglect me however from seeing and commenting on the way the church is going. The church is the Bride of Christ. I was speaking with my cousins a few weeks back, and one of them brought this fact to my mind yet again. How can we look at our Lord's bride and see the weak, lazy, sin filled pews and not grieve? How can we not desire it to be spotless?
Side note: I hesitated significantly to even mention the church as Christ's bride. It is not a thought for loose consideration. My quick judgment judged me immediately. I fear to write because I fear that I will sound like some old reformed or puritan writer. That doesn't bother me. What does is that I will be judged because of that. I would rather that my words got across their meaning rather than people finding me falsely pious. But I mean no false piety. I believe what I write. . .It is just a hesitation that often besets me. I have found that as I age, I feel more inclined to use such terminology. I remember being afraid to speak my mind for fear I was copying others. But if I truly mean it, then why would I fear? The insecurities of being human, and a lack of trust in God. I find that I have often dumbed myself down, and now, when I reach for the right word it is well beyond my grasp. Something that I could not have seen coming, nor could I have prevented. It is still often subconscience and it stems from laziness.
The Puritans recorded their prayers, and they are read now giving insight into how these men thought and felt. But were someone to stand and open the worship of God in such a prayer, I think the church would be in shock. Perhaps it is my cynical judgmentalism.
I won't discuss the above mentioned rules. I may at some point. People put too much effort into following rules.
Every now and then someone will tell you something they have learned spiritually, and when you take that in sincerety it can be an incredible exhortation/encouragement. One of my cousins was entirely and Biblically convinced of something once. He was right, but at the time he told me it still had the hold on him that it was something to strive daily for. It made an impression. It is rare that something like that takes hold of me. I remember one time more vividly than any other. And it changed my life. Changed my actions. I had been saved for years, but this message opened my spiritual eyes. Anyway, back to my cousin. He told me that life was not about any of those rules. It was about a relationship with God. First, he said it and I said, "yes, you're right." Then he said it again, "No Dave[realizing that it wasn't just a fact for the mind], that is all that matters. Abraham was the friend of God." It doesn't sink in the first time. It probably didn't the second time. He told me several times. Those are the times when I
see (I don't just know the definition in my head) what Christian fellowship and exhortation among the saints are. I
see it. All of this due to the short sentence above: It isn't about rules. It isn't. Never has been, even back to Exodus 20. It isn't a secret either. It isn't some brilliant riddle that I uncovered and can now share with you. It is about a relationship. It is about faith. You all know this too. Oh, but how often I forget. What kind of relationship can you have with someone you barely talk to? I persuaded my father-in-law before he was such with just those words. I wasn't wrong then, nor am I now.
Posts
