Lately I have been researching and rereading the Bible without any systematic of mankind's put on top of it. This has lead me to reject Calvinist soteriology. It is very clear by many passages which use the Greek term Kosmos meaning all entire world that the idea of limiting the Atonement and provision of the Blood of Jesus is not possible.
Of course, that is not the only thing that makes me need to reject the Calvinist TULIP. It was the inconsistency of what The Gospel message affirms and affirming the rest of the system. We cannot truly believe that God wishes for all to Repent and Believe if the offer is not genuine. Which if only the elect are saved they cannot do what they are called to do by God Himself under the unconditional election and limited Atonement doctrines.
Ones salvation is based on a genuine free will decision to accept or reject God's Prevenient Grace and to thus not take part in God's desire to save you. The Atonement is not limited and Christ's Blood is for all! However, the Grace which frees you from your Depravity to respond by, repentance, belief and True Faith is resistible not Irresistible as Calvinism maintains. Nor doss regeneration proceed Faith placing being Born Again before having Faith. Your repentance, belief and True Faith is what causes you to be placed in Christ's sheep fold and the Blood of Chris to be accepted by you.
This leaves those that have not done so with actually only themselves to blame for going to eternal damnation and the fires of eternal hell. So, I plead with you to not ignore the call and drawing of The Father through His Holy Spirit. While Salvation has been provided for you it is up to you to accept God's Free Gift and Provision to you. Christ is not a way, but, The Way, Truth and Life. No one gets saved; into the Kingdom of God and then on the New Heavens/New Earth. Until accepting your depravity and responding in repentance and True Faith on Christ and His accomplishments on Your behalf.
It is the most important thing you will ever do. Once you have True Faith God and His Holy Spirit has promised to keep you sealed as His Own Until the End of all things has come.
I am a Christian Fundamentalist as I am totally opposed to Modernism and False Gospels of liberal theology. I refuse to compromise on the fundamentals of true Christianity. Fundamentalism as I am using the term is a 20th-century anti-modern/liberal orthodox Christian movement. This definition is drawn from the history of the movement, from its inception in the early part of the 20th-century until the present.
To understand fundamentalism one must first understand its opponent: theological liberalism or modernism. The core of liberalism is its reliance on experience over doctrine. Thus the liberal will maintain that the Bible is not necessarily true doctrine but merely information about people’s experience with God. A liberal will appeal to the individual experience of a Christian as the basis of authority. The power of liberalism comes from its use of Christian language with a new definition. Since they reject the objective truth and rely on experience, then words such as ‘salvation,’ ‘Christ,’ and ‘resurrection’ are not taken from the Bible but redefined in a subjective or modern sense. This new definition is formed using modern principles of criticism, science, and philosophy. Thus liberalism is an experience-based theology, that rejects the inerrancy of Scripture in favor of subject personal relationships and modern scientific methods. Though some would define it differently, to do so would reject the writings and arguments of the vast majority of fundamentalists over the past century.
To understand fundamentalism is to place it in its proper context, namely 20th-century America. Fundamentalism’s anti-modernist nature necessitates that there exist modernism for it to oppose. Thus before the late 1800s and early 1900s fundamentalism could not exist because liberalism did not exist, at least not as a movement or theology. To attempt to find fundamentalism in the centuries prior is impossible, though you may find individual aspects of it, such as doctrinal purity or separatism. Only when Christianity was mixed with modern methods of science, history, and theology would there be a need for a group to oppose it. This is the movement we call fundamentalism.
The most basic aspect of fundamentalism is its adherence to the inerrancy of Scripture. This can be defined as a belief in the inspiration of the Scriptures by God that completely rules out any possible error in the transmission, so that what the writers penned on paper was completely true: doctrinally, historically, and scientifically. This view is not a strictly fundamentalist view, as other conservative denomination and groups have also ascribed to it, but it is an essential part of its doctrine. Along with the inspiration of Scripture, fundamentalist hold to four other doctrines, collectively entitled “The Five Fundamentals of the Faith:”
1) Inerrancy of Scriptures
2) Virgin Birth
3) Christ’s Substitutionary Atonement
4) Christ’s Bodily Resurrection
5) The Second Coming of Christ
While many individual would hold more than these, no fundamentalist could hold less. For instance, a dispensationalist view would later become a hallmark of fundamentalism, but was rejected by J. Gresham Machen, leader of Presbyterian Fundamentalism, and Williams Jennings Bryan, who fought evolution in the Scopes Monkey Trial.
The guiding principle in fundamentalist thought is that the inerrant Bible is foundational to knowledge, and that modernism, with its accompanying ideas of subjectivism, Darwinism and higher criticism, is to be rejected.
The final mark of fundamentalism is its willingness to separate from liberalism. This was evidenced in various leaders of the movement: Machen left Princeton and founded Westminster Theological Seminary, J. Frank Norris left (or was kicked out) of the Southern Baptist Convention, John R. Rice separated from the Southern Baptist Convention and then later from Billy Graham when he associated with liberals. While these men did not categorize these groups as liberal, they believed that they were tolerant of such, and thus separated to defend doctrinal purity.
If the disjunction is between "Christian Fundamentalism" and "Modernism," then I am a Christian Fundamentalist of the most pronounced type.
“Fundamentalism (in so far as consistent Biblical Theology is meant by this term) is in principle nothing but Christianity itself.”
“‘Fundamentalism’ is the only consistently thought-out version of the faith, and the ‘Fundamentalist’ is the only Christian who uses his mind in a fully Christian way.” —J. I. Packer
“The deepest cleavages in Christendom are doctrinal; and the deepest doctrinal cleavages are those which result from disagreement about authority.”
“Sham unity is not worth working for, and real unity, that fellowship of love in the truth which Christ prayed that His disciples might enjoy, will come only as those sections of the wall which rest on unsound foundations are dismantled and rebuilt.” —J. I. Packer
People use the term “fundamentalist” in a disparaging sense because of a handful of bad apples who abuse the title At its core, fundamentalism is about nothing more than getting back to fundamental tenets and beliefs of Christianity, following what the Bible says and guided (but not reliant upon) the historical understanding of scripture by the early Church and Church Fathers.
