The Fundamentals

While the original edition of The Fundamentals might be slightly out of date, it seems to me that the essential arguments are still valid today. In the light of entire denominations and many "evangelical" seminaries selling out to higher criticism, it is apparent that there is a tremendous need for neo-fundamentalists to answer the theological left on these issues. If the Bible is merely an "inspired story" and is not based in historical facts and an infallibly recorded inerrant and divinely inspired text, then what we have left is merely an evangelical form of neo-orthodoxy. It seems to me that liberalism and neo-orthodoxy are on the rise and conservatives need to rise to the occasion. Harold Lindsell's book, The Battle for the Bible, is proving to be prophetic. While I do not necessarily hold to a literal six day creation, Professor Herman Hanko, professor emeritus, of the Protestant Reformed Theological Seminary, makes valid observations about higher criticism in the following article he also calls The Battle for the Bible.

The following review of Lindsell's book by Donald Dayton demonstrates clearly the proclivity evangelical Arminians have for compromising with higher criticism, pragmatism, and theological liberalism in general: The Battle for the Bible: Renewing the Inerrancy Debate. The fact that Dayton's article is published in a theologically liberal journal (Christian Century) simply proves my point that Asbury Theological Seminary and the scholars who associate themselves with the Wesleyan-holiness tradition and pentecostalism in general are apt to sell out to subjectivism and liberalism because essentially their theology is irrational. This is why neo-orthodoxy is an out for liberal minded Arminians in dealing with the apparent conflict between modernism and neo-fundamentalism. This is the way Arminian higher education has chosen to go. Apparently, many "reformed" seminaries are following suit.