Several have asked me here to explain my meaning of “fundamentalism.”  That’s difficult to do in a nutshell.  Like “evangelicalism” one has to distinguish between the Fundamentalist Movement (or “movement fundamentalism”) and the fundamentalist ethos. The Fundamentalist Movement is well understood; scholars such as Marsden and Carpenter have recounted its history and distinguishing features.  I have interacted with movement fundamentalists over the years by having them visit my classes.  One of those speakers (from Central Baptist Theological Seminary in Minneapolis)... Read more

I have been assured this will be published in the next issue of First Things. To the Editor, First Things: If Gerald McDermott is right, Martin Luther is the person ultimately responsible for liberal theology (“Evangelicals divided,” April, 2011).  Like those evangelicals McDermott labels “meliorists” (a term none of us use!), Luther dared to challenge time honored and settled traditions.  Of course, I disagree with McDermott that fresh and faithful biblical research that challenges traditional doctrinal formulations inclines toward liberalism. ... Read more

Read “Evangelicals Divided” by Gerald McDermott in the April (2011) issue of First Things.  Here is what I posted in the discussion following the article at First Things’ web site: “Ken Collins speaks for me on this particular issue.  McDermott is delivering a most ungenerous and even distorted representation of my postconservative evangelical approach to theology.  I have told him and written that for me and other postconservatives the Bible is our ultimate standard and rule for faith and practice... Read more

I admit that I’m very late coming to read Walter Wink (professor emeritus of Auburn Theological Seminary, New York City).  People have recommended his books to me for years and I’ve managed to avoid reading even one of them!  From what I knew about his central thesis it seemed to me very similar to the thesis of Walter Rauschenbusch in A Theology for the Social Gospel–that there is a “kingdom of evil” that causes much, if not all, of the... Read more

Over the last 50 years many notable evangelical thinkers have converted to the Roman Catholic Church (or to some independent Catholic church of which there are many; here I’m concerned mainly with those who have converted to the RC Church).  Think of Tom Howard, evangelical professor at Wheaton (and I think Gordon), who converted to RCC and wrote a book about his conversion called Evangelical Is Not Enough (1988).  Think of Peter Kreeft and, most recently, my own colleague Francis... Read more

Below you will find an essay entitled “Reclaiming Pietism.”  It is a response to critics of Pietism such as Mark Talbot of Wheaton College (who wrote against Pietism in Modern Reformation). Your responses are welcome. Reclaiming Pietism   Roger E. Olson     To the man or woman on the street the term “Pietism” probably evokes a feeling of disdain if not revulsion; it conjures up images of super-spiritual, holier-than-thou religious folks strictly to be avoided.  To the slightly better... Read more

I have been traveling and so have not been able to buy and read Bell’s book Love Wins yet.  As soon as possible I will.  Then we can have an informed discussion about what the book actually says.  In the meantime, don’t bother posting comments about Bell or his book or the controversy because I won’t post them here.  Watch for my on line review of the book, then hold forth…. In the meantime, watch for an essay here entitled... Read more

Today’s USA Today (Monday, March 14) contains an article about the Rob Bell book controversy entitled “Pastor/author’s ‘Love Wins’ bedevils traditionalists.” (Some headline writer had a field day with that one!)  The last word is from Fuller Seminary president Richard Mouw who is quoted as saying that the real controversy is between “generous orthodoxy and stingy orthodoxy.  There are stingy people who just want to consign many others to hell and only a few to heaven and take delight in... Read more

Several have asked me here why I am defending Rob Bell.  Haven’t they been listening?  I don’t defend Rob Bell; I defend the principle of “Before I say I disagree I should be able to say I understand.”  No one can truly say “I understand” Bell’s book until he or she has read it.  What I have attempted to do here is caution Christians to act like Christians and gentlemen (and gentlewomen) and wait until they read the book to... Read more

Yesterday I received in the mail a copy of the cover of a book to be published by Zondervan later this year: Four Views on the Spectrum of Evangelicalism edited by Andrew David Naselli and Collin Hansen.  It’s a volume in the Zondervan series Counterpoints whose general editor is Stanley N. Gundry.  The four authors are: Kevin Bauder (Fundamentalism), Al Mohler (Confessional Evangelicalism), John Stackhouse (Generic Evangelicalism) and Roger Olson (Postconservative Evangelicalism).  Each author responds to the other three.  The... Read more