The providence of God has brought us to a unique time in the history of the world. Global powers are ideologically manipulating political forces in order to bring the world to a greater financial and social unanimity. Nations that were once at philosophical odds are now being internationally pressured to be reconciled toward a greater global agenda. Independence of nations and their personal political agendas will soon be a thing of the past; declarations of interdependence will become necessary for survival. As Northern Ireland is being forced to a dualistic government of Protestant and Roman Catholic leadership, it will also be the beginning of a forced ecumenicity of opposing theologies. Our generation may be witnessing the end of a biblical view of nations that is being replaced by an Antichrist system established for the coming "son of perdition."

We also live in a unique time of church history. At an accelerated pace, biblical absolutes are being forced into extinction by the modern madness within public Christianity to clone the contemporary for its identity. Although the Last Days commenced with the coming of Christ to earth (Acts 2), we have come to the End Time of these Last Days. This End Time of the Last Days is also culminating the Laodicean Church Age. One of the saddest deaths occurring in this last church age at the end of the Last Days concerns that last bastion of biblical Christianity in any public forum. The dying of this voice has been demonstrated in the dismantling piece by piece of its historical doctrinal and separatist foundation. This historical bastion for Truth is a movement that transcended denominations for well over the last century; it finds itself now collapsing from within. This implosion of intentional self-destruction is found in the only movement remaining on earth that has been the clear defender and preserver of the true, Christian Faith. That movement has historically been called Christian Fundamentalism.

Although the early, infamous enemies that rose up against the cardinal doctrines of the Christian Faith were Liberalism and Modernism, the Fundamentalist movement has had to face other enemies during its existence. Among these enemies of the Cross have been the continued threats of Universalism, Evolution, the cults, Neo-Orthodoxy, Situationalism's Neo-Morality, Charismatism as well as the mutating false piety of Roman Catholicism. The foes to combat have continued to increase as the apostasy of Christianity has mutated into global proportions. Historic Fundamentalism did well in those decades when the battle was raging. Its leaders did their homework, studying carefully each new enemy that arose to attack the Word of God. This precious movement of God stood firm amidst the overwhelming hatred, foul names, and obscene caricatures hurled at it. The Holy Spirit empowered the movement to be strong and militant against both Roman Catholic and Protestant apostasies.

The "Darling" Enemy

In the latter part of the prime years of historic Christian Fundamentalism an enemy from within arose. It had the features and likeness of the Fundamentalist, but it became the Judas-betrayer of twentieth century Christianity. It called itself Neo-Evangelicalism. It gave claim to the fundamentals of the Christian Faith; it even gave lip service at times to the inerrancy of Scripture. Nevertheless, it became syncretistic and dialectic in its thinking, being strongly influenced in the theological reasonings of Liberalism, Modernism, and Neo-Orthodoxy. These enemies of Fundamentalism became the steady intellectual diet of the Neo-Evangelicals who through their preaching and writing sought to accommodate and sympathize with such enemies.

For the most part Neo-Evangelicals, rather than boldly denouncing the fundamentals, sought the intellectual and methodological fellowship of the enemies of God. Convinced that the end justifies the means, Situational Ethics became their pragmatic method. The product of their pursuit was a dialectic methodology of evangelism that tried to make cohabitational the flesh and the spirit.

As a result, the message of the Gospel had to be made palatable to the world in order to "win the world" to Christ. Thus a neo-Jesus and a neo-Holy Spirit were created from a neo-Gospel. This new movement of Neo-Evangelicalism brought a mood and spirit across America that has eventually become the public presentation of Christianity. Their compromising doctrines and practices became the core of the infrastructure of the movement. What new innovations came through this new movement?

1. First, this neo movement believed that Fundamentalism was excessively negative and that the presentation of the Gospel needed to be from a more positive side. This philosophical presupposition demanded less emphasis on repentance, righteousness, holiness, judgment, godly living, dress standards, and anything that suggested a truly changed life from the world.
    

2. Neo-Evangelicalism wanted to be more accepted by the scholastic world in order to give greater credibility to their message. Believing that association with liberal and modernistic seminaries would contribute more affluence and clout to their movement, they plunged their young men into a study and eventual acceptance of the Liberal and Neo-Orthodox view. These men then carried these beliefs into mainstream denominational pulpits. This in return placed pressure upon their own colleges and universities to become prestigiously accepted and accredited by the world's eyes.
    

3. More and more Neo-Evangelical students adopted the spirit of this age and began to theologically reason as the liberals. To gain more people in attendance to their crusades, churches, and seminaries, they acclimated their Gospel message to include an appearance and appeal of the world.
    

4. One of the escalating beliefs in Neo-Evangelicalism became a strong ecumenical spirit that fellowshipped the broadest spectrum of professing Christianity. This fellowship included anyone who gave some semblance to identifying with Christ. The elasticity of their ecumenicity eventually has embraced Roman Catholicism.
    

5. The increased emphasis for social vision and social programs to reshape the gospel to a social gospel became a mandate for the movement. When one leaves biblical, spiritual living for God, there is an inevitable inclination to exchange a burden of the "spiritual man" for the "natural man." Obviously, the social reform of the natural man is their mission and church planting their pursuit now.
    

6. Neo-Evangelicalism also became tired of the old "war-horse" English translation of the Bible, the King James Version. This Bible became more and more hated for its antiquity because it had been the sword in the English-speaking world against Roman Catholicism and Liberalism. Neo-Evangelicalism began to draw more from the Critical Text because it was a more recent discovery making it the scholastic, contemporary text for their contemporary movement. Westcott and Hort became their intellectual champions, resulting in a flood of lauded English versions.
    

7. Amidst their preeminent pursuit of evangelism and the Great Commission, there was a conspicuous absence of "earnestly contending for the faith, once delivered to the saints."
    

8. While science was becoming equal in its authority with the Scriptures (and at times even superior when apparent contradictions appeared), there was an increasing curiosity of and emphasis in modern psychology. To the Neo-Evangelicals, counseling became more successful than preaching. Since their gospel message was impotent (no anointing of the Holy Spirit), they succumbed to the natural man's sciences to repair the growing emotional and mental problems of their parishioners. "Christian Counseling" became the watchword of Christian universities and Bible colleges suggesting an effective method to answer all of man's problems. More and more their ministers filled their preaching with secular psychology, merely adding a Scriptural twist to it in order to Christianize this secularist tool. Neo-Evangelicalism embraced this uncircumcised Philistine giant to now fight the growing twentieth-century despair of its people.
    

9. It is also interesting to note that Neo-Pentecostalism, under the leadership of men such as Oral Roberts, was born around the same time as Neo-Evangelicalism. This new view of Pentecostalism later birthed the Charismatic movement in the late 1960s. The majority of characteristics found in the Charismatic movement are also found in Neo-Evangelicalism with perhaps the exception of "speaking in tongues." In the mid-1960s a close association arose between Billy Graham (of Neo-Evangelicalism) and Oral Roberts (of Neo-Pentecostalism) when Graham dedicated Oral Roberts University. Soon afterward, Billy Graham invited Oral Roberts to the World Congress of Evangelism. The two movements have become more and more alike because of the likeness of principles.
    

10. Both Charismatism and Neo-Evangelicalism became strong promoters of a powerful, fleshly tool in their ministries called Contemporary Christian Music. CCM is literally the world's secular music forced into a "Christian" context. This music was innovative, moving, highly emotional, imitative of the Spirit's moving, and powerfully manipulative of the flesh. It was a sound the world would love whether within or without the institution of the church.
    
    The invitation of such music began with "easy-listening" Christian music, an effective sedative for the growing falling-away symptoms in Christianity. This music enticed male voices toward an effeminate soothing tone. Musicians prided themselves in a non-offensive music found acceptable in any camp of theology; soon, even greater popularity resulted as they crossed over into secular musical charts. The visceral became the greater thrust over the spiritual. CCM animates the spiritually dead with synthetic life. In harmony with their non-offensive message was the casual, non-offensive appearance of their singing groups. All of this made the world's crowd feel at ease around these "professing" Christians. People moved by this visceral and fleshly entertainment falsely credited it to the work of the Holy Spirit. They were convinced that this fleshly music was God's new-found tool for evangelistic results.
     

11. Another part of the infrastructure of Neo-Evangelicalism was a strong retreat from any dogmatic stand of principle; in its place appeared an emphasis upon "the love of God." No longer did man need true repentance and the Grace of God; the attribute of God's love became the central focus of saving power in modern evangelism. This unbiblical view of God's love eventually leads to Universalism.
     

12. The dominance of expositional preaching provided Neo-Evangelicalism a way of presenting the Scriptures without actually dealing with the growing spiritual issues destroying spirituality and biblical separation. Conventions and "How-to" seminars took the place of the old Fundamentalist's solid, Bible preaching that dealt with the issues and pertinent spiritual needs. More succinctly stated, golf tournaments replaced prayer meetings.

In a March 1956 article from Christian Life, the Neo-Evangelicals spoke of their own goals and desires: (a) "a friendly attitude toward secular science"; (b) "a willingness to re-examine beliefs concerning the work of the Holy Spirit"; (c) "a more tolerant attitude toward varying views of eschatology"; (d) "a shift away from so-called extreme dispensationalism"; (e) "an increased emphasis on scholarship"; (f) "a more definite recognition of social responsibility"; (g) "a re-opening of the subject of biblical inspiration"; and, (h) "a growing willingness of evangelical theologians to converse with liberal theologians."

The "darling" enemy of Fundamentalism, the enemy that departed from its ranks, continued to grow in greater alliance with the enemies of historic Christianity.

Alarmingly, Fundamentalism is following in the same path Neo-Evangelicalism took to Liberalism. Therefore, Fundamentalism's fall necessitates passing through the twilight of Neo-Evangelicalism before arriving at the full darkness of modern Liberalism and Universalism. Fundamentalism's greatest foe now is not Liberalism or Romanism; it is Neo-Evangelicalism, the enemy nearest to us in belief yet estranged from us by its heretical heart for the Neo-Christianity of the End Time. Before the final collapse can come to Fundamentalism, it must first yield to the powers of Neo-Evangelicalism. The inevitable yielding to Neo-Evangelicalism will become the gate to its inevitable assimilation into one-world religious powers.

The Trojan Horse Appears

From Virgil's Latin epic poem The Aeneid comes the story of the Trojan horse. After the Trojan army had kidnapped Helen, Queen of Sparta, and held her captive in the city of Troy, the Greek Spartans began an unsuccessful ten-year war to liberate their Queen. The chief problem the Spartans faced was the insurmountable gates and walls which surrounded Troy. Ulysses, the Greek hero, thought of building a huge, hollow wooden horse on wheels as an apparent gift or truce offering. This hollow gift could hold a band of warriors that the people of Troy would draw into the city. After the Spartans presented the gift, they seemingly sailed away, appearing to forfeit the victory. After ten long years of battle, it was hard for the people of Troy to believe that the Spartans had finally left. After some care and reluctance, the people opened their gates and pulled the wooden horse into the city. As the curious crowd gathered around the horse, a priest threw a spear at the horse; noticing its hollow sound, he warned the people not to accept the "gift" so quickly. However, no one would listen to the priest. As the people became drunk in their celebration that night, the Greek warriors slipped out of the horse, opened the gates of the city to waiting fellow warriors, and pillaged the city killing all its men and enslaving its women and children.

Fundamentalism has been fighting Neo-Evangelicalism since 1948, and its spirit even earlier. In our generation it is evident that Fundamental preachers, churches, and educational institutions have become tired of the war. As our churches and schools flourish and prosper, we see a parallel flourishing of Neo-Evangelicalism among us. Have the national and international popularity and acceptance of Neo-Evangelicalism made Fundamentalism envious? Have our ministers been reading and digesting Neo-Evangelical presuppositions and standards? Have our Fundamentalist music leaders secretly been listening to their contemporary sound and year by year more boldly convincing pastors and congregations to accept this sound to evangelize the lost and build churches?

The Lord knows that Fundamentalism has had a remnant of men to arise as the priest of Troy and hurl the Word of God at this hollow, man-made movement of Neo-Evangelicalism. They have warned the schools, the seminaries, the musicians, the pastors and evangelists that there is definitely something wrong with this neo-gospel. They have warned that taking such a gospel into our churches would destroy the Truth with which God has blessed and honored us. Sadly, most have scoffed at these warnings, calling these voices "prophets of doom" and "isolationists" who are too serious about life.

Has Fundamentalism convinced itself that God will never leave it, that God will never allow it to collapse and go the way of all flesh? Does it believe that no matter the changes that come, we will still be the Lord's people? The cry of the young fundamentalists is that "it is time for a change." This call to change is toward Neo-Evangelicalism although cloaked in the term Neo-Fundamentalism.

Conclusion

Fundamentalism is not in need of a new theology; it is not in need of a new approach to preaching; it is not in need of a cutting-edge music aesthetic. To the contrary, it is in need of a mighty awakening and revival among its churches, its pastors, and its music directors that calls us back to our heritage, to our foundation, and to the Word of God. There is nothing in Neo-Evangelicalism's contemporary music, its prestigious and accredited schools, or its carnal and worldly churches of which to be envious. Their popularity with Presidents, politicians, professional athletes, and Hollywood stars is but empty pomp and show.

Within our midst is a perilous Trojan horse preparing for a full annihilation of the historic Fundamentalist movement. The only remaining hope for Fundamentalism will involve a deep humbling before God, a "coming out from among them," and a being separated to and for the glory of Christ. As we candidly approach the remaining two articles on the fall and collapse of historical Fundamentalism, may God the Holy Ghost grant us the eyes to see and the ears to hear.