Fundamentalism: Necessarily Missing What is Essential
(Hello everyone! I’m so grateful for all the new subscribers over the past few weeks! I’ve been posting older posts on Mondays. I’ll be posting some of the most popular posts I’ve written on this site for the next couple of weeks for all the new subscribers. This was originally posted in March 2022 and sadly it’s still relevant to issues going on in the PCA and SBC)
Over the next two months two of the biggest and most vocal conservative coalitions of the already conservative SBC and PCA will meet prior to those denominations annual meetings. The Conservative Baptist Network will be meeting late April and will feature speakers like John MacArthur and Voddie Baucham. The Gospel Reformed Network will meet in May. Both of these associations have attempted to influence if not take control over their respective institutions. I bring up these two “movements” as prime examples of a trend within broader Conservative Evangelicalism- that is the entrenchment of far-right neo-fundamentalism.
I may in the future write about the characteristics of this entrenchment. My purpose here is not to engage with the various concerns these two associations have (real or imagined). Rather I want to engage with an essential presupposition most fundamentalists have- namely the assumption of slippery slope thinking. The assumption on almost whatever issue will be something along the lines of “If we do not take stance A the church will inevitably embrace stance G.” For those on the Right the slippery slope only goes one way- towards liberalism. Thus either antithetical views opposing “the world” must be taken, or resistance towards any kind of moderation of our current position must be resisted. Both tacts’ must be taken irrespective of history, failure, or multiple testimonies because any challenge to what we take as “truth” must be a liberal conspiracy.
What fundamentalists fail to recognize is that the “slippery slope” goes the other way as well. The slide towards ever more radical fundamentalism isn’t just an observable reality, but a readily diagnosed issue in scripture. A part of this lack of recognition is that, from my observation, fundamentalists have an inability to discern between that which is essential and that which is necessary. What they will often do is agree to what is essential, but then state a necessity that they believe flows from an essential or that they believe preserves that essential. For example, they may say that a belief in the truthfulness of scripture is essential. However, to have a “correct” view of the “truthfulness” of scripture (and to not fall into error), it is necessary to believe “this” about scripture. The problem is that whenever you add a necessity on to what is essential you run the risk of making what you deem necessary essential, and the danger ultimately is that you make what was essential unnecessary. I’m going to argue this is Paul’s argument in Galatians but let me define what I mean by essential and necessary.
I want to first acknowledge that we tend to use these two words interchangeably. I have no doubt said something was necessary when what I meant was essential and vice versa. Yet there is a significant difference. Essential means that thing which is modified (both essential and necessary are adjectives) cannot be that thing unless it has what is essential. A good example would be: “Water is essential for human survival.” Without water humans cannot survive. When we say something is necessary there are two components. First, we are admitting that what is modified can happen without the modifier. Take this statement for example, “Hard work is necessary for success.” There is the acknowledgement that hard work is important, but that success may happen without it. Using “necessary” at least leaves a bit of room if you will. Secondly, “necessary” means a desired goal will not be achieved unless it has what is necessary. There is a “inner meaning” to “necessary” that implies a desired result. Going back to my example of work and success, when we state that hard work is necessary for success there is a type of success we have in mind. The hard work necessarily brings out the desired end.
It appears to me this is the nuance that fundamentalists cannot grasp. Either everything is essential, or fundamentalists do not see that what they deem necessary is motivated by desire (even a good desire). Especially on the latter there is a failure to recognize that they are starting from a good desire, or image, or ideal and then dictating what is necessary to achieve that. Be it heterosexual marriage (with children) or being “anti-woke”, the starting place is either an ideal or the antithesis of something else which makes their prescription necessary.
This is the precise blindness that confronts the early church. We see in the New Testament that the Pharisaical sect argued that Torah obedience was necessary (Acts 15:5). We see in Acts, Galatians and Romans the main responses to that assumption. Namely that obedience was not necessary to faith (Acts 15:7-21; Gal. 3:5-18; Rom. 6-8). Secondly that law observance did not prevent sin (Acts 15:10, Gal. 3:18-24; Rom 5:20-21). Thirdly that law observance was never what distinguished the people of God, rather what always distinguished them was God’s sovereign initiative (Gal 4:21-5:1). The irony of the Pharisaical Judaizers is that what they claimed was necessary did not even do what they desired!
But in Galatians Paul goes further in chapter 5. He states that to make circumcision essential is to make Jesus unnecessary (Gal. 5:3)! He says this because if you can get what you desire apart from Jesus you make Jesus irrelevant. Moreover, you forfeit the grace that is yours in Christ (Gal. 5:4). Because only through the Spirit by faith do we achieve the hope of righteousness, that is faith working itself out in love (5:5-6). This faith working itself out in love actually does what those looking to law hope their obedience will do- it leads them to forsake the flesh and pursue righteousness.
In the midst of this argument Paul makes a surprising statement- “A little leaven leavens the whole lump (Gal. 5:9). You have a “slippery slope” argument from Paul but on the side of fundamentalism! The “little” the Galatians had acceded to the Judaizers (switching to the Jewish calendar and festivals) threatened to corrupt their whole theology. Paul’s fear (and some of his harshest words) comes to a church embracing something as “necessary” at the cost of what Paul deemed essential.
This is where our modern interaction with those who are leaning towards fundamentalism should take us. I am convinced that difficult discussions need to be made, not about what those who embrace these more “fundamental” elements believe, but why they see what they champion as necessary. We need to have these discussions because what they deem necessary will reveal what they ultimately deem as essential. What I fear is that many within conservative Evangelicalism see not being “liberal” as essential to their Christianity. I fear that for too many marriage and children are essential to not just their Christianity but their anthropology. I fear too many see their cultural comfort as essential to their Christian experience.
It is they who are on a “slippery slope”. They are sliding towards a church that is defined by its embrace of Conservative, white, hierarchical, authoritarian, heterosexual nuclear family centric procreative evangelism. We are already in danger of telling single people, “Get married, have children and Jesus loves you.” Of telling LGBT persons “Be straight, and Jesus loves you.” Of telling persons of different ethnicities, “Ignore your lived experience and culture for our comfort, and Jesus loves you.” Telling women, “Submit more, and Jesus loves you.” Telling families, “Please hold the weight of all of our evangelical energy, and Jesus loves you.”
Sooner or later people will no longer believe Jesus loves them…
(Thanks for reading! I’m always grateful for those who give me their time each week. If you want to receive my latest subscribe and consider supporting me in creating this content. If you’d like to gift a one-time gift of coffee or dinner, that would also be appreciated https://venmo.com/u/Jason-Mallow-1.)