Fundamentalism

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

B

brakelite

Guest
Take some time to seriously study Romans chapters 9-11. Then start at Genesis and work your way through Malachi. using Strong's Concordance for every reference to "Israel", "Jacob", "Zion" and "Jerusalem". I do not believe you have done such a study (which I have). Then organize all the Scriptures properly to get the full perspective. And just ignore all the commentaries.
I have no false allusions was to the importance nation of Israel held in the overall purposes of God. Established, chosen, protected, loved, cherished, sanctified for a holy purpose, disciplined when going astray, and none of the promises or covenants made between the nation and her God ever broken by God... But constantly broken, abused, forgotten, and trampled on by a succession of fornicating idolatrous adulterous Kings and priests until they murdered the very one Who established and protected and nurtured them throughout their history. And when He was living among them, He told them what they would do, and they pronounced upon themselves appropriate sentence. Which is why the Lord said just a day or two before His death
Your house is left into you desolate. It was no longer His, nor His Father's house. Romans 9-11 will still be fulfilled, but Paul isn't talking about any nation or political entity.
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Romans 9-11 will still be fulfilled, but Paul isn't talking about any nation or political entity.
Now you are just engaging in WISHFUL THINKING (never a good thing).

Israel or Jacob are terms applied to the nation of Israel even more frequently than they are applied to the patriarch Jacob/Israel. So here is the evidence that Paul was indeed talking about a national entity (not political).

ROMANS 11
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, [the nation of Israel] until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

26 And so all Israel [the nation of Israel]
shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:[the nation of Israel]

How in the world did you miss that?
 
B

brakelite

Guest
Now you are just engaging in WISHFUL THINKING (never a good thing).

Israel or Jacob are terms applied to the nation of Israel even more frequently than they are applied to the patriarch Jacob/Israel. So here is the evidence that Paul was indeed talking about a national entity (not political).

ROMANS 11
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, [the nation of Israel] until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

26 And so all Israel [the nation of Israel]
shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:[the nation of Israel]

How in the world did you miss that?
Didn't miss it at all. The text says... Blindness on the part of Israel until all the gentiles come in.... Come into what? Into Israel of course. But that is not the nation... The only entity with a composite of Jew and Greek is the church. The church did not replace Israel... Israel morphed into a church.
What is Christ the Cornerstone of over which the Jews stumbled? It was this entity...
KJV 1 Peter 2
9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
The true temple of God in which resides the spirit of God. It is not the nation of Israel.
How did you miss this....?
KJV Matthew 21
42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
44 And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
45 And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them.
46 But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: quietthinker

amadeus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2008
22,483
31,632
113
80
Oklahoma
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You folk dont realise do you that when the government lays down guidelines condemning fundamentalism, and you think it means Islamic extremism, you forget who is in charge of this world's kingdoms... While God has overall sovereignty, the Prince of this world leads those who belong to this world to do his bidding. The Devil does not mind Islamic extremism but he has Christians who cleave to the basic fundamentals of faith because he knows that over those he has no power. Those laws that governments are laying down against extremism in religion do not exclude Christians who believe in scripture... In fact the devil inspired those laws to specifically include Christians.
There is, in fact, the left as well as the right hand of God. Those on the left go where? "And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal" Matt 25:46

Are there no 'would be' believers among those on the left?

"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." Matt 7:22-23


"Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof... " II Tim 3:5
 
B

brakelite

Guest
Are there no 'would be' believers among those on the left?
Now, yes, absolutely. But God is a God of infinite mercy and justice, not willing that any should perish and all come to a knowledge of the truth. I do not believe the end will come until such time as there are no more candidates to accept the gospel. Everyone has heard...and all who will receive, have received. Al who have rejected, have rejected. NO second chances, no 'purgatory' or preaching in hell or anywhere else to convince life long sinners of their need to repent. Re 22:11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.
 

epostle

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2018
859
289
63
72
essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Fundamentalism is right to insist on the divine inspiration of the Bible, the inerrancy of the word of God and other biblical truths included in its five fundamental points. But its way of presenting these truths is rooted in an ideology which is not biblical, whatever the proponents of this approach might say. For it demands an unshakable adherence to rigid doctrinal points of view and imposes, as the only source of teaching for Christian life and salvation, a reading of the Bible which rejects all questioning and any kind of critical research.

The basic problem with fundamentalist interpretation of this kind is that, refusing to take into account the historical character of biblical revelation, it makes itself incapable of accepting the full truth of the incarnation itself. As regards relationships with God, fundamentalism seeks to escape any closeness of the divine and the human. It refuses to admit that the inspired word of God has been expressed in human language and that this word has been expressed, under divine inspiration, by human authors possessed of limited capacities and resources. For this reason, it tends to treat the biblical text as if it had been dictated word for word by the Spirit. It fails to recognize that the word of God has been formulated in language and expression conditioned by various periods. It pays no attention to the literary forms and to the human ways of thinking to be found in the biblical texts, many of which are the result of a process extending over long periods of time and bearing the mark of very diverse historical situations.

Fundamentalism also places undue stress upon the inerrancy of certain details in the biblical texts, especially in what concerns historical events or supposedly scientific truth. It often historicizes material which from the start never claimed to be historical. It considers historical everything that is reported or recounted with verbs in the past tense, failing to take the necessary account of the possibility of symbolic or figurative meaning.

Fundamentalism often shows a tendency to ignore or to deny the problems presented by the biblical text in its original Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek form. It is often narrowly bound to one fixed translation, whether old or present-day. By the same token it fails to take account of the "re-readings" () of certain texts which are found within the Bible itself.

In what concerns the Gospels, fundamentalism does not take into account the development of the Gospel tradition, but naively confuses the final stage of this tradition (what the evangelists have written) with the initial (the words and deeds of the historical Jesus). At the same time fundamentalism neglects an important fact: The way in which the first Christian communities themselves understood the impact produced by Jesus of Nazareth and his message. But it is precisely there that we find a witness to the apostolic origin of the Christian faith and its direct expression. Fundamentalism thus misrepresents the call voiced by the Gospel itself.

Fundamentalism likewise tends to adopt very narrow points of view. It accepts the literal reality of an ancient, out-of-date cosmology simply because it is found expressed in the Bible; this blocks any dialogue with a broader way of seeing the relationship between culture and faith. Its relying upon a non-critical reading of certain texts of the Bible serves to reinforce political ideas and social attitudes that are marked by prejudices—racism, for example—quite contrary to the Christian Gospel.

Finally, in its attachment to the principle "Scripture alone," fundamentalism separates the interpretation of the Bible from the tradition, which, guided by the Spirit, has authentically developed in union with Scripture in the heart of the community of faith. It fails to realize that the New Testament took form within the Christian church and that it is the Holy Scripture of this church, the existence of which preceded the composition of the texts. Because of this, fundamentalism is often anti-church, it considers of little importance the creeds, the doctrines and liturgical practices which have become part of church tradition, as well as the teaching function of the church itself. It presents itself as a form of private interpretation which does not acknowledge that the church is founded on the Bible and draws its life and inspiration from Scripture.

The fundamentalist approach is dangerous, for it is attractive to people who look to the Bible for ready answers to the problems of life. It can deceive these people, offering them interpretations that are pious but illusory, instead of telling them that the Bible does not necessarily contain an immediate answer to each and every problem. Without saying as much in so many words, fundamentalism actually invites people to a kind of intellectual suicide. It injects into life a false certitude, for it unwittingly confuses the divine substance of the biblical message with what are in fact its human limitations.
Pontifical Bible Commission
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Without saying as much in so many words, fundamentalism actually invites people to a kind of intellectual suicide.
It is not intellectual suicide to believe that divine revelation supersedes all human knowledge and philosophy, and must be accepted by faith (not human reason). It was Catholic Scholasticism which allowed philosophical ideas to enter into theology.

"Scholasticism was a medieval school of philosophy that employed a critical method of philosophical analysis presupposed upon a Latin Christian theistic paradigm which dominated teaching in the medieval universities in Europe from about 1100 to 1700. It originated within the Christian monastic schools that were the basis of the earliest European universities. The rise of scholasticism was closely associated with the rise of these 12th and 13th century schools that flourished in Italy, France, Spain and England." (Wikipedia)
 

quietthinker

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2018
11,846
7,752
113
FNQ
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Fundamentalism is right to insist on the divine inspiration of the Bible, the inerrancy of the word of God and other biblical truths included in its five fundamental points. But its way of presenting these truths is rooted in an ideology which is not biblical, whatever the proponents of this approach might say. For it demands an unshakable adherence to rigid doctrinal points of view and imposes, as the only source of teaching for Christian life and salvation, a reading of the Bible which rejects all questioning and any kind of critical research.

The basic problem with fundamentalist interpretation of this kind is that, refusing to take into account the historical character of biblical revelation, it makes itself incapable of accepting the full truth of the incarnation itself. As regards relationships with God, fundamentalism seeks to escape any closeness of the divine and the human. It refuses to admit that the inspired word of God has been expressed in human language and that this word has been expressed, under divine inspiration, by human authors possessed of limited capacities and resources. For this reason, it tends to treat the biblical text as if it had been dictated word for word by the Spirit. It fails to recognize that the word of God has been formulated in language and expression conditioned by various periods. It pays no attention to the literary forms and to the human ways of thinking to be found in the biblical texts, many of which are the result of a process extending over long periods of time and bearing the mark of very diverse historical situations.

Fundamentalism also places undue stress upon the inerrancy of certain details in the biblical texts, especially in what concerns historical events or supposedly scientific truth. It often historicizes material which from the start never claimed to be historical. It considers historical everything that is reported or recounted with verbs in the past tense, failing to take the necessary account of the possibility of symbolic or figurative meaning.

Fundamentalism often shows a tendency to ignore or to deny the problems presented by the biblical text in its original Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek form. It is often narrowly bound to one fixed translation, whether old or present-day. By the same token it fails to take account of the "re-readings" () of certain texts which are found within the Bible itself.

In what concerns the Gospels, fundamentalism does not take into account the development of the Gospel tradition, but naively confuses the final stage of this tradition (what the evangelists have written) with the initial (the words and deeds of the historical Jesus). At the same time fundamentalism neglects an important fact: The way in which the first Christian communities themselves understood the impact produced by Jesus of Nazareth and his message. But it is precisely there that we find a witness to the apostolic origin of the Christian faith and its direct expression. Fundamentalism thus misrepresents the call voiced by the Gospel itself.

Fundamentalism likewise tends to adopt very narrow points of view. It accepts the literal reality of an ancient, out-of-date cosmology simply because it is found expressed in the Bible; this blocks any dialogue with a broader way of seeing the relationship between culture and faith. Its relying upon a non-critical reading of certain texts of the Bible serves to reinforce political ideas and social attitudes that are marked by prejudices—racism, for example—quite contrary to the Christian Gospel.

Finally, in its attachment to the principle "Scripture alone," fundamentalism separates the interpretation of the Bible from the tradition, which, guided by the Spirit, has authentically developed in union with Scripture in the heart of the community of faith. It fails to realize that the New Testament took form within the Christian church and that it is the Holy Scripture of this church, the existence of which preceded the composition of the texts. Because of this, fundamentalism is often anti-church, it considers of little importance the creeds, the doctrines and liturgical practices which have become part of church tradition, as well as the teaching function of the church itself. It presents itself as a form of private interpretation which does not acknowledge that the church is founded on the Bible and draws its life and inspiration from Scripture.

The fundamentalist approach is dangerous, for it is attractive to people who look to the Bible for ready answers to the problems of life. It can deceive these people, offering them interpretations that are pious but illusory, instead of telling them that the Bible does not necessarily contain an immediate answer to each and every problem. Without saying as much in so many words, fundamentalism actually invites people to a kind of intellectual suicide. It injects into life a false certitude, for it unwittingly confuses the divine substance of the biblical message with what are in fact its human limitations.
Pontifical Bible Commission
The term 'fundamentalism' is loose and covers anything from unstable fanaticism to clear headed folk who won't take the traditions of man as the last word.

It was the traditions that undercut God's Laws and according to Jesus added burdens on the people the proponents of traditions used to feather their own nests both in wealth and power.

Why would it be any different today? and why are not the scriptures sufficient?
It was the scriptures that Jesus relied on.....would you also call his fundamentalist approach dangerous??
 

epostle

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2018
859
289
63
72
essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
The term 'fundamentalism' is loose and covers anything from unstable fanaticism to clear headed folk who won't take the traditions of man as the last word.

It was the traditions that undercut God's Laws and according to Jesus added burdens on the people the proponents of traditions used to feather their own nests both in wealth and power.

Why would it be any different today? and why are not the scriptures sufficient?
It was the scriptures that Jesus relied on.....would you also call his fundamentalist approach dangerous??
Why is it that anti-Catholics highlight the bad traditions we must ignore, and censor the good traditions we are to follow? Jesus didn't abolish good traditions, He followed them and fulfilled them to the end of His life. Is Passover a bad tradition? Please, grow a brain cell.

Jesus didn't "rely" on scripture. Whenever He quoted scripture, He taught what it meant because the Scriptures don't speak for themselves.
 
Last edited:

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Uh...… Declaring that Jesus said we have to hate our entire families in order to be a disciple of His is "Biblical." And some people would call that infallible.
I call it mistaken interpretation.
It's ironic that I grew up believing that the "hate" one has for their family was hyperbole; just figurative, and I understand that interpretation as well as it's value.

However, and I'm sure this is probably much more rare than those who convert from a fundamentalist literal perspective to seeing figurative speech being used by the biblical authors; I am beginning to see this as literal. Here's why. Let's say that someone discovers the kingdom. Christ's parables point out that this is what happens, and when they do , they rejoice, they sell everything so that they can buy the field with the treasure.

As soon as someone discovers the kingdom, they see that everything else is just garbage by comparison. So they go to their spouse, children, etc. and point out that it's time to take a trip into the kingdom, but their family doesn't want to take a trip that requires them to sell all their belongings and follow Christ. They think their husband/father has lost his mind, and he hates them.

I have seen this happen. They literally will say, "He hates us".

What's the guy to do? He's discovered the kingdom. He's not going to just forget about that, and hang out with a family that prefers hanging out in a garbage dump rather than in God's kingdom. They're free to do as they please, but he doesn't hate them for not wanting to let go of their precious possessions.
 

Willie T

Heaven Sent
Staff member
Sep 14, 2017
5,869
7,426
113
St. Petersburg Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It's ironic that I grew up believing that the "hate" one has for their family was hyperbole; just figurative, and I understand that interpretation as well as it's value.

However, and I'm sure this is probably much more rare than those who convert from a fundamentalist literal perspective to seeing figurative speech being used by the biblical authors; I am beginning to see this as literal. Here's why. Let's say that someone discovers the kingdom. Christ's parables point out that this is what happens, and when they do , they rejoice, they sell everything so that they can buy the field with the treasure.

As soon as someone discovers the kingdom, they see that everything else is just garbage by comparison. So they go to their spouse, children, etc. and point out that it's time to take a trip into the kingdom, but their family doesn't want to take a trip that requires them to sell all their belongings and follow Christ. They think their husband/father has lost his mind, and he hates them.

I have seen this happen. They literally will say, "He hates us".

What's the guy to do? He's discovered the kingdom. He's not going to just forget about that, and hang out with a family that prefers hanging out in a garbage dump rather than in God's kingdom. They're free to do as they please, but he doesn't hate them for not wanting to let go of their precious possessions.
I have found it so profitable, more and more, to turn to TPT:
Bible Gateway passage: Luke 14:26 - The Passion Translation
 

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
I have found it so profitable, more and more, to turn to TPT:
Bible Gateway passage: Luke 14:26 - The Passion Translation


I find it interesting that Jesus doesn't compare God to Satan when he says that one cannot serve God and Mammon. He knows where our hearts are. He knows who we really rely upon. If we were to say that one must set aside Satan for the kingdom, or that it isn't that we can't use or employ Satan's power, it's just that we need to prioritize correctly and place God first in our lives, etc., it begins to sound a bit ridiculous, doesn't it?

When we think about not being able to serve God and Satan, it seems like a no-brainer, but as soon as money comes into the mix, we start making excuses why it's okay to rely on money to get our needs met.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Willie T