Fundamentalism and Young-Earth Creationism

Young-Earth Creationism and Modern Fundamentalism: A Historical Study (Part 2)

The fundamentalist movement began as early as the 1850s. It has been divided into at least a non-conformist period (1850-1930) and a separatist period (beginning in 1930 with solidification by the 1950s). Non-conformist fundamentalism exhibited a practice of fighting falsehood and apostasy within their denominations, like the Puritans. The later separatist fundamentalists left their denominations to start new works on a pure foundation, like the Separatists from England.¹ During the non-conformist period, Darwinian evolution began and grew extensively.² However, in fact uniformitarian old-earth geology was present in the church even prior to the beginning of fundamentalism.³ In connection with our discussion of the Young Earth Creationism (YEC) movement, we want to examine fundamentalism’s historical positions regarding origins. This examination will help us effectively understand the current situation.

Non-Conformist Fundamentalism’s Anti-Darwinian and Old-Earth Positions

Early fundamentalists were generally against Darwinian evolution, but they were for an old-earth model of origins that believes the earth to be thousands and, for some, even millions of years. They recognized the significance of the creation issues to the defense of the Christian faith.⁴ Evolution was viewed as “probably the most despised enemy of American fundamentalism in the early 1900s.”⁵ In spite of this antipathy to evolution, the majority of the six articles in The Fundamentals regarding science and the Bible demonstrate an acceptance of old-earth positions to varying degrees.⁶ James Orr is the strongest such contributor, drawing a distinction between Darwinism and his own views.⁷ In one of his essays, we find various old-earth views that are in strikingly similar form to current old-earth views.⁸ Some of these views include: (1) Argumentation for holding the “essential teaching of the Scriptures” while the Bible is not taken as a scientific textbook, (2) Discussions about the supposed non-literal and factual language used in the Bible, (3) Uniformitarian geology as being compatible with the Bible, (4) the Day-Age Theory, and (5) theistic evolution.⁹ Other essays in The Fundamentals often have similar problems.

Furthermore, not only The Fundamentals exhibited these views.¹⁰ Two other specific sources are examples. First, the Scofield Reference Bible, popular among early fundamentalists, is a well-known promoter of the gap-theory model.¹¹ William Jennings Bryan, the popular speaker and opponent of evolution also frames his anti-evolutionism with an old-earth perspective. His role in non-conformist fundamentalism in the Scopes Trial is unquestionable, and his views and person merit further consideration. While the loss resulting from this trial is sometimes overstated, the trial was a significant event in the evolution and creation controversy. He argued for the Bible as the starting point. He was more militant than many contributors to The Fundamentals in pitting the Bible against evolution. However, when asked in the trial about the length of the days of creation, he clearly affirmed the day-age theory of the days of Genesis 1 as including many years of time.¹² Contrary to what some may believe, older fundamentalists of the period often simply assumed the old-earth position. They did maintain a concern for the threat that Darwinian evolution posed for Biblical Christianity, but didn’t see the significance of the old-earth arguments. By the 1940s, separatist fundamentalism was forming but Henry Morris rightly perceived that most fundamentalists still did not hold to a young earth or literal creation.¹³ The founders of YEC correctly observed the failures of non-conformist fundamentalism in this regard.

Modern Fundamentalism’s Young-Earth Position

While somewhat difficult to substantiate, it seems somewhat self-evident that modern fundamentalism is YEC. It can only be suggested informally that at a grass-roots level fundamentalism is nearly entirely young-earth and creationist. Given that YEC offers a more straightforward and literal reading of the Bible and rejects views based by and large on anti-Christian assumptions, it is not surprising that fundamentalists would gravitate to the view. Older fundamentalists may have overlooked the old-earth position they inherited, missing the significance of this issue during the early years. Therefore, once YEC began to promote its message of reasoned arguments for a young earth, fundamentalists were likely to accept those arguments. In addition, John Whitcomb’s connections with fundamentalism¹⁴ and the position of the school he taught at may have helped spread YEC in fundamentalism as well.

A few examples of modern fundamentalism’s young-earth posture include what follows. First, several fundamentalist educational institutions are friendly toward YEC. Some are explicitly young-earth in their own official statements.¹⁵ Answers in Genesis (AIG) lists many of them on their Creation Colleges list.¹⁶ Additionally, it is noteworthy that Ken Ham recently spoke at two fundamentalist schools.¹⁷ Second, the theme of the 2016 annual meeting of the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship was Biblical creationism.¹⁸ In fact, John Whitcomb was a featured speaker for this meeting, and spoke twice about the topic of creationism and his own testimony and experiences. One can easily find literature from fundamentalists that defend YEC.¹⁹

However, despite the fact that the modern creation movement is broader than separatist fundamentalism and the modern period, it is clear that the YEC ministries have succeeded in influencing fundamentalism and that for the better.

We need to say more concerning the relationship between these two movements at the present time. We also need to discuss the challenges or opportunities the collaboration between these two movements may present. More on this subject next time.

See Part One here.

---

Jacob Reinhardt is an IT engineer and a M.Div. student at Maranatha Baptist Seminary. He blogs at Biblical Worldview Musings and he is a member of the First Baptist Church of West Seneca, New York, a suburb of Buffalo.

---

Check out our Resources page for recommended books and other materials helpful for your ministry.

1. David O. Beale, In Pursuit of Purity: American Fundamentalism since 1850 (Greenville, SC: Unusual Publications, 1986), 5-6. Beale’s work was published approximately thirty years ago, and the period since its publication could be posited as a third era called modern fundamentalism (approximately 1990 to the present). [↩]
2. Charles Darwin’s first work on evolution was published in 1859, though Beale, 80, says that it didn’t have a major impact on America immediately due to the Civil War and that it didn’t really get into the spot light until the Scopes Trial in 1925. [↩]
3. Terry Mortensen, The Great Turning Point: The Church’s Catastrophic Mistake on Geology — Before Darwin, (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2004). [↩]
4. James Orr, “The Early Narratives of Genesis”, in The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth, ed. R. A. Torrey, A. C. Dixon, et. al., (n.l.: Delmarva Publications, 2013), Kindle edition, loc. 3959. [↩]
5. Gerald L. Priest, “A. C. Dixon, Chicago Liberals, and The Fundamentals”, Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 1, no. 1 (Spring 1996): 114, accessed September 2, 2017, http://archive.dbts.edu/journals/1996_1/ACDIXON.PDF. [↩]
6. See discussions in Larry R. Oats, “The Priorities of ‘The Fundamentals’“, Maranatha Baptist Theological Journal 2, no. 1 (Spring 2012): 72-74 accessed September 2, 2017, https://www.mbu.edu/seminary/journal/the-priorities-of-fundamentals/, and Terry Mortensen, “Exposing a Fundamental Compromise”, Answers Magazine, accessed July 8, 2017, https://answersingenesis.org/theistic-evolution/exposing-a-fundamental-compromise/. [↩]
7. Orr, “The Early Narratives of Genesis,” loc. 4124 [↩]
8. See James Orr, “Science and Christian Faith,” in The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth, eds. R. A. Torrey, A. C. Dixon, and others (n.l.: Delmarva Publications, 2013), Kindle edition. [↩]
9. Orr, “Science and the Christian Faith,” locs. 5700, 5770ff., 5810ff., 5837ff. [↩]
10. Gerald L. Priest, “William Jennings Bryan and the Scopes Trial: A Fundamentalist Perspective”, Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 4, (Fall 1999): 68-69n72, accessed September 2, 2017, http://archive.dbts.edu/journals/1999/Priest.pdf. [↩]
11. See the note on Genesis 1:2 in “Notes for Verse 2”, Scofield’s Study Notes, (n.l.: WORDsearch Corp., n.d.). WORDsearch edition. [↩]
12. Priest, “William Jennings Bryan and the Scopes Trial: A Fundamentalist Perspective”, 81-83, 61, 66, 68-69. [↩]
13. Rebecca Morris Barber, Henry M. Morris: The Father of Modern Creationism, (Dallas: Institute for Creation Research, 2017), 94-95. [↩]
14. Note one fundamentalist’s reflections on his own experience with Dr. Whitcomb in the post-Genesis Flood era in Rolland D. McCune, Promise Unfulfilled: The Failed Strategy of Modern Evangelicalism, (Greenville, SC: Ambassador Emerald International, 2004), ix. Dr. Whitcomb also explicitly taught a class on Biblical fundamentalism, see Biblical Fundamentalism: An Historical Syllabus from Grace Theological Seminary By Dr. John C. Whitcomb Ca 1980 (Winona Lake: Morgan Library of Grace College, 2008), which is available through his own ministry Whitcomb Ministries, Inc. This syllabus contains typical fundamentalist critique of the neo-evangelicalism of the early 1980s. [↩]
15. As three examples, see “Articles of Faith”, Pensacola Christian College, accessed September 5, 2017, http://www.pcci.edu/spirituallife/articlesoffaith.aspx, “Position Statements”, Bob Jones University, accessed September 5, 2017, http://www.bju.edu/about/positions.php, and “Doctrinal Statement”, Clarks Summit University, accessed September 5, 2017, https://www.clarkssummitu.edu/about/faith-history/doctrinal-statement/. [↩]
16. For the list, see “Creation Colleges”, Answers in Genesis, accessed September 4, 2017, https://answersingenesis.org/colleges/. Institutions generally regarded as fundamental or not far from it included, but may not be limited to, the following: Appalachian Bible College, Bob Jones University (and Seminary), Maranatha Baptist University (and Seminary), Pensacola Christian College (and Seminary), Clarks Summit University (which includes Baptist Bible Seminary), Crown College of the Bible (and Seminary), Faith Baptist Bible College (and Seminary), International Baptist College (and Seminary), Central Baptist Theological Seminary, and Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary. [↩]
17. See “Fighting the Culture War at Bob Jones University”, Ken Ham’s Blog, accessed September 5, 2017, https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2017/03/01/fighting-culture-war-at-bob-jones-university/, regarding his recent visit to BJU, and “Looking for a Creationist College?”, accessed September 5, 2017, https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2015/04/16/looking-for-a-creationist-college, regarding Ken Ham’s visit to Maranatha Baptist University in April 2015. These are not necessarily his first time speaking at fundamentalist schools. We cite them here as recent examples. [↩]
18. “Declarations from Our Designer–Next Week!” Defend and Proclaim, June 10, 2016, accessed September 9, 2017, http://www.proclaimanddefend.org/2016/06/10/declarations-from-our-designer-next-week/. [↩]
19. As two examples from the blogging world, see Matt Recker, “New Evangelicalism and New Calvinism: The Same Disaster”, Defend and Proclaim, July 15, 2014, accessed September 2, 2017, http://www.proclaimanddefend.org/2014/07/15/new-evangelicalism-and-new-calvinism-the-same-disaster/, and Kevin T. Bauder, “Matt Recker and The Gospel Coalition, Part 5: Inerrancy and Creationism”, In the Nick of Time, October 24, 2014, accessed September 2, 2017, http://www.centralseminary.edu/resources/nick-of-time/matt-recker-and-the-gospel-coalition-part-5-inerrancy-and-creationism. [↩]