Post Reply
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
Switch to Forum Live View Evangelicalism vs fundamentalism
6 years ago  ::  Aug 08, 2008 - 1:29PM #11
LiveOak
Posts: 119
[QUOTE=CaliberCadillac;675946]LOL!!!!!:D

I think words like "fundamentalist" and "evangelical" are, (regardless of their historical origins), just useless labels. I'm good to go with just being referred to as a 'believer.'

Good post LiveOak

Cal[/QUOTE]

Thanks, Cal, and not just useless, but harmful, labels. Paul chided the Corinthian church for their divisions (1:10-17, 3:1-4:6), some wanting to wear the label "Paul", others wanting to wear the label "Apollos", some wanting to wear the label "Cephas", but Paul reminded them that none of these guys died for them, nor were they baptized into the name of any of them. We often use labels to simplify our understanding, so we can quickly know what a person believes, but what these labels often do is divide Christians from one another, and give us an excuse for not reading the Bible ourselves to verify what we should believe.   "If I'm a ___________ (fill in church name), then I must believe this ___________ (fill in doctrine), based on these scriptures _______________ (taken out of context); whereas you are a _______________ (fill in church name), must therefore be wrong about this _____________ (fill in heresy) and I must tell you that you are wrong, avoid you altogether, or show my love by accepting you in your error." We really need to have the view of Priscilla, Aquila and Apollos (Acts 18:24-26) and lovingly open the word of God with each other - then we will be true followers of Christ, and not merely followers of religion.

Cheers,

Dave

P.S. Since I mentioned 1 Cor 1:10-17, I wanted to point out (because it's what I do) that Paul's comments "I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you ..." and "For Christ did not send me to baptize..." are NOT scriptures that argue against baptism in the name of Jesus in becoming a Christian; on the contrary, Paul's rhetorical questions, "Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul?" imply the answers that "Christ is not divided", "Christ was crucified for them", and that "they were baptized in the name of Christ". Paul then remembers those that he did baptize in Corinth, even though his primary job was to teach, while others would perform the baptisms, similar to John 4:1-2, where Jesus' disciples were doing the baptisms, not Jesus. Paul gives the reason why he was thankful that he baptized only a few: "SO no one can say that you were baptized in my name," not because baptism is not a critical step in becoming a Christian.
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jul 03, 2009 - 12:07AM #12
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

I hold to the essensial teachings of the Church, in that way I am a fundamentalist, though orthodox is my preferred label if I must have one.


However I shun the legalism associated with fundamentalism and the sociological  trappings of that mindset. It reminds me of the traditions set up by the Pharisees to try to ensure compliance to the Mosaic Law.

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jul 03, 2009 - 1:06AM #13
Wheelsafire18
Posts: 7

There is a difference that should be taken note of.  For one thing, the Vs. should read compared to.  They are merely different ways to approach interpreting the Scriptures.  Both fundamentalism and evangelical literalism have their limitations.  A literal Biblical interpretation is associated with the fundamentalist and evangelical hermeneutical approach to Scripture, and is used by most conservative Christians today.  The fundamentalist approach is rooted in Calvinism, which many of our nation's first settlers ascribed to.  


I once sat in the pew and listened to a non-denominational pastor preach from Job's three friends as if it were gospel.  I thought to myself, "Didn't he read the end of the book?"  I also disagree with evangelical doctrines of dispensation that nullify the gifts of the Holy Spirit.  They say that the gifts are no longer needed because the Bible is now complete and perfect.  In 1 Corinthians 13:12, in context with other Scriptures, Paul was referring to Jesus himself, not the Bible.  If the Bible were perfect, it would contain all the books that the Apostle John referred to in John 21:25.


My experience as a born again believer of 32 years has shown me that the hermeneutic approach is the correct approach if you understand and have experienced "agape" love.  I once met a man that thought God was out to get him only because he perceived God that way.  Interpreting the Bible properly comes with the aid of the Holy Spirit.  Understanding is only a prayer away.  It is also helpful to study church history to put things in perspective.  Y-Jesus has been a great source for me.  


The beginning of wisdom is to know that we know nothing.  Even silly Bill and Ted of Excellent Adventure fame knew that.  LOL!   

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jul 11, 2009 - 10:16PM #14
spudette
Posts: 959

It seems so sad to me that most people are so intent on putting labels on everyone. We all need to choose either to believe the Bible in its entirety, or not to believe it. I heard it said once that there are people who read the Bible to find what they believe, and others who read it to believe what they find.


What troubles me is that there are so many "teachers" who teach that what the Bible says is not really what God means. God has given each of us  a certain amount of intelligence. Yet so many of us are afraid to use it, and depend on what someone else says that the Bible really says. Is the Holy Spirit not available to anyone who asks for Him? If we honestly ask Him, He will teach each of us the real truth, and there will be no more separate groups each claiming that only they "have the truth".


There is only one Truth, that is He Who calls Himself "the Way, the Truth, and the Life". There is only one gospel, that is Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jul 11, 2009 - 10:34PM #15
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

Both Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism would claim to preach Christ and Him Crucified, Risen, Ascended and Returning in Glory. The centrality of Christ is not the issue in these two camps.

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 18, 2009 - 7:44PM #16
gorman33
Posts: 49

Jul 31, 2008 -- 6:26PM, LiveOak wrote:

I think the difference between "Evangelical", "Fundamentalist", and "Liberal"  is a lot like George Carlin's joke: 'everybody driving faster than me is a maniac and everyone driving slower than me is an idiot.' If someone tells me I should follow an instruction in the Bible, but I feel it the instruction doesn't apply that way, then the other person is a "fundamentalist", but if I feel someone else should follow an instruction in the Bible, and they feel it doesn't apply that way, then the other person is a "liberal". But I'm always an "evangelical", because I'm telling people the good news.



Very funny quote from George Carlin.  Laughing


I do feel Eddie13's pain.  Although I am a relatively new Christian, I actually, have always thought of myself as Mainline-Liberal.  But I took the "What Kind of Christian are You" quiz on B-Net.  My result.........Pat Robertson Christian!


I didn't think I even answered all of them that conservatively.  Particularly, with the Science questions...(I think the world is older than 6k years, not sure about the flood ect.)  However, most of the questions were of the following vein:


Do you believe the bible was inspired by God?  Yes.


Do you believe Mary was a Virgin?  Sure.  (I mean God can do anything, right?)


Do you believe Jesus was God?  Um....yeah...I figure that's pretty much a minimum belief, if your a Christian in the first place.


Do you believe Jesus actually performed miracles?  You mean there are actually Christians, who believe Jesus is God, but don't think he could turn some bread a couple of fish into a lot of bread and a bunch of fish??  To quote that great philosopher of Tennis, "You cannot be serious?!"


So, I guess maybe I am an Evangelical.  I still don't like Benny Hinn...Smile

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook