Reddit reviews Reforming Fundamentalism: Fuller Seminary and the New Evangelicalism

Conservative usually just refers to holding traditional views on a topic. I could have conservative views on changing rules in major league baseball, for example, and argue against the designated hitter rule or inter-league play since that is not the way the game was played originally.

Fundementalism originally defined itself as traditional theological views in contrast to the rise of modernism in mainline denominations in the early 20th century. Modernism denied inerrancy of scripture, miracles, the virgin birth, literal six-day creation, etc., conservative Christians published a series of booklets called The Fundementals defending traditional Christian doctrine against modernism.

By mid-century, fundementalism was increasingly associated with hyper conservative views and conservative politics (KJV only for example, or joining the John Birch Society, protesting integration, etc.) Many conservative Christians began using the designation "evangelical" for those who held to traditional doctrines like miracles and inerrancy, but were not necessarily right-wing radicals.

I highly recommend two books by George Marsden on Fundementalism and Evangelicalism: Fundamentalism and American Culture and Reforming Fundamentalism: Fuller Seminary and the New Evangelicalism.

The designation "evangelical" has slipped in the last few election cycles, now it is used in the media for hyper-conservatives who have confused support for right-wing politics and gun laws with evangelical theology.

The Evangelical theological Society, for example, has two points on their doctrinal statement, the Triune God and Inerrancy. The society defined inerrancy in the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, and there are a wide range of theological views in the ETS, and papers offered at the national ETS meetings are generally non-political. There are a few (southern baptists) who might be conservative politically, but there is nothing in the ETS requiring a conservative political view, and there is a great deal of angst over the current use of the word evangelical and the use of the word by the president as he tries to portray himself as a Christian.

One example: Within the ETS, there is a wide range of opinion on creation, from Young Earth to theistic evolution. All those views are acceptable since they all agree "God created the Universe" even if they disagree on the mechanics of that creation since the mechanics are not clear in Scripture. On the other hand, there would not be a range of opinion on the Virgin Birth or Jesus doing Miracles, since these things are stated in Scripture.

If you're considering Moody, The Masters' Seminary is fairly similar in theology from what I've heard (strong dispensational).



edit: I've also heard (have not done the research myself) some questionable things about Fuller's compromise on the inerrancy of scripture. You might want to look into that