The Standpoint Declarations

We are historic fundamentalists in the sense that we acknowledge our roots in the Machen-style fundamentalism of the 1920’s.  
Therefore we reject all attempts to define cultural Fundamentalism or its tradition as the real fundamentalism.   In fact, we affirm that the ideas behind historic Fundamentalism are the real fundamentalism and the only form of Fundamentalism worth saving.
We also reject all those who attempt to define who is or is not a Fundamentalist by conformity to cultural Fundamentalism’s methods and traditions, or by loyalty to the movement itself.  
We acknowledge that the Fundamentalist Movement is only one of many works of God in this world, and that only the idea of fundamentalism is of lasting value.

We believe that Scripture does and ought to inform our form in worship and service to Christ.   Our philosophy of ministry is circumscribed by the authority of Scripture.  
Therefore we reject all attempts to deny that form and philosophy of ministry matter, and deny the normative value of drawing form and philosophy of ministry from traditions of men and movements or from secular sources.

We admit the battles of today require we do battle royal for the truth, but believe the battles of today are largely about the Gospel and its presentation, and the authority of Scripture in methods of ministry. 
Therefore we assert that parts of cultural Fundamentalism have in recent decades focused on the wrong battles, fighting over surface methods and their own traditions rather than underlying meanings, and have failed to fight the important battles of doctrine and meaning in this age.

We recognize the multi-cultural nature of the mission fields both at home and abroad.   While many Fundamentalists have attempted to prop up a Fundamentalist Christian sub-culture, we believe that it is necessary and proper for us to give attention to varying form in worship and service to Christ according to the culture(s) we are attempting to reach.   We still affirm that such variations are still all subject to the Word of God, and that such variations ought to be informed by, drawn from, and subject to Scripture.
Therefore we reject the practice of separation from or condemnation of those who practice different forms merely because they are different or unfamiliar, and affirm the importance of regarding them Scripturally, independent of our preconceived notions.

We believe that we are united in Christ and to Christ, and all separation arises from the fact that those things which are unlike Christ are not united with us in Him. We recognize that all the truly redeemed are united by the cross, and that the very nature of the gospel calls us to stand united with those who are redeemed except in cases where the Scriptures specifically require separation.  
Therefore we reject the spirit among some of our Fundamentalist brethren who practice separation as a default position and give only lip-service to unity.    We also recognize the brotherhood of many Conservative Evangelicals and are willing to fellowship with some of them – regarding them as fundamentalists in practice if not in name.

We affirm that the Scriptures require us to deny and separate from the world, but deny that the term “worldly” means “like the world” in any cultural sense.   Instead we affirm that “worldliness” refers to “like the world-system”, and gives reference to carnal systems, understandings, aspirations, and motivations, as in I John 2:15-17.
Therefore, we reject a para-monastic spirit among some cultural Fundamentalists as unscriptural, and unhelpful.

We affirm that sanctification is grace-based rather than a process that occurs due to mere obedience to rules.   While we acknowledge the role of rules in the individual life of a believer and the necessity for them in certain organizational settings, and acknowledge the proper role of obedience to Scriptural commands, we deny that rules have real transforming power and deny that they can produce true inward holiness.
Therefore, we disagree with those who would attempt to define holiness as obedience to a list of rules, and strongly reject all teaching that tends to persuade people that submission to rules equates with the transforming power of the Spirit of God.

We affirm that the proper role of the church and all service to Christ is His work in the hearts of individuals, and that all societal reform efforts by Christians are secondary to this goal, and ideally arise from this goal.
Therefore we reject the social gospel, and all philosophies which set as their goal the creation of a Christian Kingdom here on earth through the works of men.

We affirm that the proper heart of a servant of the Lord is to be gentle, apt to teach, and patient.    We believe that the attempt to define the Fundamentalist movement purely in terms of a fighting spirit has been unhelpful, and in violation of the spirit of Christ.    While we affirm the need to fight for the faith, we also affirm the need to grieve over unrepentant sinning brothers or apostates, and to lovingly persuade where opportunity arises.
Therefore we condemn a spirit among some of our Fundamentalist brothers that exults in conflict and rejoices to draw lines over issues that the Scriptures do not authorize.
We further encourage all we who are in the Fundamentalist movement to examine ourselves and our motivations.

Similarly, we further affirm the importance of servant-leadership in the church as the only model authorized by Christ.
Therefore we reject dictatorial leadership styles, philosophies, and systems for church management.

We acknowledge the work of God in our hearts through the instrumentality of some men in Fundamentalism, and rejoice in it and are thankful for it.
We therefore reject the bitter spirits that have characterized some who are critical of the Fundamentalist Movement, and encourage them to evaluate by the true measure of God’s Word.

We believe that the work of God in this world is accomplished primarily through the ministry of healthy New Testament churches, and that organizations, movements, associations, and fellowships arise in response to needs of the day, but should not be vested with all our hopes for the future of God’s work.
Therefore, we reject the faddishness of some aspects of modern evangelicalism that works against the local church by communicating that various innovations and media are necessary for effective ministry.
Further, we reject the spirit of some Fundamentalists who place disproportionate emphasis on the movement itself and the maintenance of it.
We commit ourselves to a renewed emphasis on encouraging healthy churches.