Dr. Kevin Bauder, president of Central Baptist Seminary, in Minneapolis, is trying to stir up a bruhaha in the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship. He has his drawers in a knot over a sermon delivered by Pastor Dan Sweatt.
Dan Sweatt preached at an FBF meeting, at the Wilds, on April 6 & 7. He titled his sermon, “Young and Restless.” He is concerned that Baptist fundamentalism is losing so many young preachers who seem to be enamored by neo-evangelicals such as John Piper, R.C. Sproul, Al Mohler, and John Mac Arthur.
Sweatt’s concern is shared by many in fundamentalism. It is a concern which is enhanced by a survey of young fundamentalists conducted a few years ago. The survey results were reported on Duller Iron (that’s my name for it. Others call it Sharper Iron), an internet bulletin board. The survey revealed that a surprising number of young “fundamentalists” do not believe in a literal hell of fire where the lost will spend eternity; do not believe in any kind of separation, either personal or ecclesiastical, such as the previous generations of fundamentalists believed; and do not believe that some important doctrines must be held as true in order for a person to be considered a Christian.
It was also revealed in this survey that the young fundamentalists are having a love affair with Piper, Sproul, Mohler, MacArthur, and other neo-evangelicals.
Sweatt knows that the old “giants” of fundamentalism have been demonized in many college and seminary classrooms, and he regrets that the young fundamentalists know only the caricatures of those stalwarts of the Faith. Sweatt named some who were admired by him, but never admired by me.  I was never in Hyles’ fan club. Roberson was a sweet man, but weak on separation.  I never cared for Bob Gray.  John R. Rice had a passion for souls, but was a theological train wreck.  However, Sweatt has a right to admire and defend these and other fundamentalists from that old generation if he so desires.  And since when does a preacher in fundamentalism have to apologize for his sermon?  That is what the boys on Duller Iron want–an apology.   This is the age of the politically correct apology, when politicians are going around the world apologizing for our country and when people are apologizing for things their forefathers, or somebody else’s forefathers may have done.  In this case, no apology is needed.  When a sermon is preached and the shoe fits, take it off! And if it does not fit, smile and go on with your life.
Incidentally, I have never had any heroes among the old preachers I knew, but I did admire some.  I greatly appreciated H. C. Slade, C. Woodbridge, D. Billington, M. R. DeHaan, N. Smith, and B. Jones (Sr. and Jr.).
Sweatt sees Piper, Sproul, Mohler, MacArthur, and others who are idolized by today’s young fundamentalists as EXTREME Calvinists. He believes these idols displace the Bible with a theological system; that their emphasis will not sustain church growth, or a durable movement; that they distort the Gospel.  Therefore, they make dangerous heroes for young fundamentalists, no matter that they have made worthwhile contributions, otherwise.
Kevin Bauder has written that Sweatt’s sermon was a “diatribe against Calvinism.” He declares that Dan Sweatt does not know the history of Calvinism. And besides, Bauder eschews the “giants” on Sweatt’s list. So, Kevin is asking the board of the FBF to do something to distance Dan and his ideas from the FBF. According to Bauder, those on his own list of people that he wanted to emulate were gentler, kinder, meeker, sweeter, and more fair than those on Sweatt’s list. Those on Sweatt’s list were bullies, according to Bauder. But none of those on Bauder’s list were bullies or empire builders, says he (“Bully” is a code word for those who “earnestly contend for the faith.”–Jude v. 3)  Strangely, Bauder never gets around to naming any of those men who were worthy of our admiration, the men who helped to make him into the sweet, gentle, meek, non-bully that he is today!
I have been acquainted with Kevin Bauder for about twenty years. He is an intelligent guy, but he has never been much of a fundamentalist, in my opinion. He has always looked at those to the left of him for approval.
I have known Pastor Dan Sweatt for about 45 years. He is an intelligent, dedicated, and talented man of God. He has legitimate concerns for fundamentalism. He may not have expressed his concerns in the best possible way. However, Bauder has given Dan’s statements the wildest possible interpretation, which always helps to win an argument, but it is not the sweet, gentle, meek, fair and non-bullying thing to do.
Bauder says that Sweatt does not know the history or the implications of Calvinism. But it is certain that Dan Sweatt knows a lot more about that history than Bauder gives him credit for. We are not in much danger of knowledge and wisdom dying with Kevin.
Bauder excoriates Sweatt (in a gentle, kind, sweet, non-bullying way, of course) for saying, “It is difficult or impossible to judge a generation unless you have lived through it.” Well, of course, we know that we all have to make judgments about the principal people of every previous generation. But, surely Sweatt was simply saying that those who lived through a generation, and were well acquainted with some people have an advantage in understanding those times and those people. Bauder says he “remembers” all of the “giants” on Sweatt’s list, and he did not like them. But, Sweatt is about 20 years older than Bauder, and he does not simply remember those men who are now with the Lord, he KNEW them. They preached in his pulpit. He entertained them in his home, ate with them, fellowshiped with them. And he sang in their meetings.  Sweatt knew them better, and he does not believe that the young Baptist fundamentalists have an accurate view of those men. Those young ministers have a warped and distorted view because of the ridicule heaped upon those old fundamentalists–heaped by people like Kevin Bauder.
Bauder accuses Sweatt of saying that Calvinism makes God the Author of sin. But, those who actually took the time to listen to Dan’s sermon know that this is a false charge. Dan actually said, “If we believe that God eternally decrees every thought, every word, and every deed, then we make God the Author of sin.”
So, Sweatt did not say what Bauder accused him of saying. Not every Calvinist believes that God eternally decrees every thought, every word, and every deed of all men.
It is obvious that Sweatt was talking about EXTREME Calvinism. I know that Sweatt was not saying that there is no room in fundamentalism for Calvinists. Calvinists have always been welcome in fundamentalism. Ian Paisley believes strongly in the sovereignty of God and in election to salvation, and he gets along quite nicely in fundamentalism. H.C. Slade, Charles Woodbridge, Robert Ketchum, Richard Clearwater, Paul Jackson, Ernest Pickering, and David Otis Fuller were all strong electionists. And, all of these men were important pillars in fundamentalism. They were not EXTREME Calvinists. They could actually find some other subjects in the Bible in addition to election and predestination on which to preach. They did not act “hoyty-toyty” and “smarter than thou.”  They did not make up doctrines, such as, “You have to get regenerated before you can believe,” or “Prayer does not really change anything,” or “Every thought , word, and deed of every man was determined by divine eternal decree.” It was the EXTREME Calvinist heroes of the young fundamentalists to which Dan Sweatt was referring in his sermon.
Sweatt readily admits that his own generation as well as the previous generations of fundamentalists had their excesses. But, the young fundamentalists and those who attract them (neo-evangelicals) have their excesses as well. The young fundamentalists would do well to keep this in mind.
Fundamentalism is changing, just like Bauder says. It is changing in some places where we never expected it to change. Some of the changes are good, but not all of them. Most of the changes are coming about because of what Dan Sweatt mentions in his sermon–we change because we are trying to satisfy our detractors on the left. We are looking for approval from a new batch of heroes. We want the neo-evangelicals to think we are educated, and flexible, and sweet, and gentle, and meek, and not a bully.