A man questioning his fundamentalist upbringing, part 1


Our mutual friend told me about your struggles. I do not want to pry, but I would love to correspond with you—even connect you with someone close to your area—if you are willing. Pepper me with questions if you like.

You need to know that you are not alone with your doubts. You probably know enough Bible to remember the lean times experienced by people like Elijah and John the Baptist. Christianity is not only reasonable and defensible, its strong refuge is the best place to run when in doubt. During storms of doubt I have often run to what I know for sure.

Let me recommend a couple of books by Lee Strobel: The Case for Faith and The Case for Christ. This is from a man who started with unbelief and turned to Christ.

I would recommend a church or Christian ministry in your area but I am not sure what part of town you are living in. I will wait to find out.

One thought and I will leave the ball in your court: Faith is not a quality we feel first and foremost. It—even in its weakest form—must have a reliable object or it is worthless (e.g., people put great faith in untrustworthy leaders, security systems, cars, etc.). Tiny faith in a great God is all that is necessary.

We are living in a sin-cursed world and are consequently like the married woman who complained to her husband that the two never sat close in the car anymore. From behind the wheel he asked, “Who moved?”

The glory of God is his constant, heavy presence that does not change when we ignore it or even rebel against it. He is there whether you like it or not. He is faithful though we are faithless.

I have asked God to show himself to you. I hope you are looking for him.


  1. You're recommending Strobel? I thought you were a presuppositionalist!

  2. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

  3. Even Neo-Evangelical clocks?!?

  4. O.K., so they're not exactly broken. They just run several minutes to the left of actual time.

  5. only several minutes to the left? Some funy you are!

  6. ahem...."some *fundy* you are!"

  7. If embracing the inerrancy of Scripture, the virgin birth, the deity of Christ, the substutionary atonement, the physical resurrection and return of my Lord is being a fundy, then sign me up. If I have to separate from those who do not separate from those who do not separate from Southern Baptists, then call me Neo.

  8. I take it you're not a fan of the GARBC decision?

    BTW, what is your blog about? I feel like I'm hijacking it!

  9. You are not hijacking. The posts on this blog will mostly be about biblical counseling issues, but I know that many topics can spring from any discipleship discussion (that is what biblical counseling is). Is it possible that you are the only person reading the blog?

    No, I am not impressed with the position of the GARBC on Cedarville University. I will add that I do think this is the fellowship's historical practice, so they are being consistent, but my bigger issue is this: is it a biblical position?

  10. I agree that they are being consistent with who they've been. I think that is good. I think with these things, if one finds an association (or convention) not doing the biblical thing, and can find something better, they ought to leave. This is really what individual soul liberty is about. Nobody's killing anybody or forcing anything.

    Now, from what I understand, the conservatives in the GARBC were okay with how things were, and that it was the Cedarville proponents who pushed this issue to the forefront to have a vote on it.

    Also, from what I understand, Cedarville wouldn't sign the GARBC's doctrinal statement.

    Did you happen to read Dr. Bauder's take on this? He is not in the GARBC, as you know, and he even put off the title of "Fundamentalist" for a time (if I'm remembering correctly).


    I gather that he agrees with the GARBC doing what it did because it needed to be consistent. He also looks at this as a Paul/Barnabas type separation (Acts 15:36-41).

    He said that there is always a degree of censure that goes with any kind of separation. But there are certainly different degrees. The Fundamentalist impulse is to say that Cedarvillains are Neo-Evangelical abortionist communist queers. But this is nothing like that! There may be some who cheer this on as a stand against the New World Order, but I think they are nuts! This was two groups of Christians that decided their divergent ideas about some things were important enough that they can' go hand-in-hand in their ministry endeavors.

  11. I did read Bauders excellent article and agree. This struggle (not just about Cedarville) leaves a number of garb pastors and churches with a dilemma:

    1. If I do not agree that the historic position is biblical, should I leave (urge my church to leave)?
    2. If I do not believe secondary separation is biblical (which I mostly do not), am I practicing it by separating from the GARBC?
    3. Is it better to stay in and put up a fuss about an extra-biblical doctrine, stay in and wait to be found out or leave quietly?

    At this point I am taking the “Keep your mouth shut and pay attention to shepherding” approach. If people want to make an issue of it they can read the blog or the website.

  12. Sorry--possessive: Bauder's excellent article.


What do you think?