Can Evangelicals and Neo-Fundamentalists Stay Together for the Kids?

Are the bonds of cooperative mission fraying to the point of...

I have said before, and I repeat myself: the Southern Baptist Convention is a decidedly if uneasily evangelical denomination. By “evangelical” I don’t mean a political interest group (even if that unfortunately may apply sometimes). By “evangelical” I mean Southern Baptists have wedded ourselves to theology and mission in a specific way, which can’t easily be torn asunder. For its shortcomings, I still think we can define evangelical by the fourfold framework of David Bebbington.

Evangelicals have historically committed themselves to seeing people become Christians (conversionism), to righting social wrongs (activism), grounding their claims in Scripture as the basic authority (biblicism), and revolving all of life and mission around the cross of Christ (crucicentrism).

In June, after the Southern Baptist Convention Annual Meeting, I concluded:

For all the smoke and heat, debate and distraction, Southern Baptists basically affirmed historic evangelical theological and missiological convictions.

I have rejoiced, and I will rejoice in this commitment, and pray it continues.

In contrast to this convictional evangelical commitment, I have also argued that a new form of fundamentalism has emerged, a neo-fundamentalism. I define this neo-fundamentalism by three markers: (1) holding second- and third-tier theological issues as dividing lines of orthodoxy; (2) misunderstanding what it means that Scripture alone is our inerrant authority, and thus basically prizing one’s interpretation over the Scripture itself; (3) a wholehearted buy-in to the Republican political project. More generally, I would define these neo-fundamentalists markers as more of an impulse or mood than as a specific set of confessional distinctives.

I admit that the distinction between “evangelical” and “neo-fundamentalist” might be difficult to discern at times, not least because “evangelicals” (at least in the last 75 years since Carl Henry’s The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism) have deep roots in fundamentalism, and the “line” between fundamentalists and evangelicals is often more of a spectrum or continuum. Nevertheless, I think we can and should make the distinction, especially now, when convictional evangelicalism and neo-fundamentalism are becoming more and more clearly delineated, especially by neo-fundamentalists themselves. Neo-fundamentalists tend to claim that historic, convictional evangelicals have been captivated by the spirit of the age, gone “woke” or “liberal.” Neo-fundamentalists tend to claim that they themselves are the faithful remnant of God’s conservative church, and all (or most) others have compromised the gospel and the authority and sufficiency of Scripture. It seems from my small little corner of the world that neo-fundamentalists have a mind not only to convert the world to Christ but to convert evangelicals to neo-fundamentalism under the guise of “reformation” or “discernment” or whatever other buzzword gets deployed.

I could give you specific examples and embedded tweets, but I won’t do that. I’m being vague, because I’m not trying to get into a spitting contest with any specific person or group. That said, I often see claims and warnings about the drift of the Southern Baptist Convention into a liberal theological whirlpool that will capsize the ship. Because of this fear, the neo-fundamentalist brothers (and sisters) want to take over the ship so that they can steer it in a more faithful and fruitful direction. I want love these brothers and sisters well enough to believe the best and not to assume any malice in their motives. In other words, I choose to believe these fellow Christians are genuinely concerned about shipwreck of the faith, specifically in the Southern Baptist Convention. Even so, they are, quite simply, wrong about their claims and warnings. The Southern Baptist Convention is not going “woke” or “liberal” in any meaningful sense. Instead, the Convention has repeatedly committed itself to historic Christian, evangelical theological beliefs and missionary action.

Thus we arrive at my point, or, more accurately, my question: if our neo-fundamentalist brothers and sisters are really that concerned about the decided conviction and action of the Southern Baptist Convention, how can we move forward? Can we stay together “for the kids,” for the next generation of faithful and fruitful theological and missional labor?

I think we can, but I also think that the burden sits on the shoulders of those claiming that the convention is heading for disaster. I think they must lay down their swords and their plans for taking the helm and simply join the crew like the rest of us. We can have spirited (Spirited?) disagreements and distinctions, but I really wish that our neo-fundamentalist brothers and sisters would stop trying to weaponize the evangel against evangelicals.

To say it differently: I disagree with the neo-fundamentalist impulse, but I think there can be room in the Southern Baptist Convention for a neo-fundamentalist contingent to link arms and work with the more historic evangelicals in our midst. But I’m not sure that the neo-fundamentalists believe the same thing. Instead, it seems that it’s their way or the highway. In fact, I genuinely wonder if some of the neo-fundamentalist folks think that someone like me along with a large number of fellow Southern Baptists are lost and in need of conversion. I wonder if they think I’m not even a Christian, let alone a fellow worker for the harvest of God’s mission.

If that is their belief, how can we work together? How can two groups work together in unity for the conversion of the world when one group thinks the other is itself in need of converting to Christ? Such animus, bad faith, and lack of Christian love will pull on the threads of our cooperative mission until it unravels.

It doesn’t have to go this way. The neo-fundamentalists can stop fighting, beat their pirate swords into plowshares, and get to work with the rest of us.

I hope that’s what happens.