PDA

View Full Version : What do Fundamentalist Christians think of non-fundamentalist Christians?



Ana Dragule
04-16-2015, 05:59 PM
What do Fundamentalist Christians think of non-fundamentalist Christians?

thewriteranon
04-16-2015, 06:00 PM
Generally? That non-fundamentalist Christians are not Christian.

That has been my experience.

Christianbookworm
04-16-2015, 06:06 PM
I thought that only cult groups think they're the only True Christianstm? There may be overlap though between fundies and cults.

thewriteranon
04-16-2015, 06:08 PM
At the very least most fundamentalists I've encountered well think Catholicism is a great apostasy.

Catholicity
04-16-2015, 06:22 PM
I grew up Fundamentalist and I was trained to believe that people who didn't believe like me or worship like my church (especially the baptist church which was founded by God) were not Christians. Christians were hard to find in other denominations, and all denominations that were liturgical never preached "the Gospel" Obviously this isn't true.

mossrose
04-16-2015, 06:26 PM
I thought that only cult groups think they're the only True Christianstm? There may be overlap though between fundies and cults.

:no:

Please read the op in thread I started in the Rolling Pin regarding this.

Ana Dragule
04-16-2015, 06:31 PM
:no:

Please read the op in thread i started in the rolling pin regarding this.

idgi..

mossrose
04-16-2015, 06:35 PM
idgi..

I don't know what that means.

Chrawnus
04-16-2015, 06:38 PM
I don't know what that means.

I don't get it, is my guess.

Ana Dragule
04-16-2015, 06:44 PM
I don't know what that means.

idgi. I don't get it.

That said,..

Oh, I get it now. Use the definition of fundamentalist from your thread to answer the perspective question in mine. I would like another source for yours first, either from your or from another poster. ARe there perhaps different groups of fundamentalists that would hold different views?

I am assuming from your response that you would say that they are Christian?

Jedidiah
04-16-2015, 06:45 PM
There is a serious confusion here as to what a fundamentalist really is. The term is not a clear one.

Ana Dragule
04-16-2015, 06:51 PM
Generally? That non-fundamentalist Christians are not Christian.

That has been my experience.

Why would they not be?

mossrose
04-16-2015, 06:52 PM
idgi. I don't get it.

That said,..

Oh, I get it now. Use the definition of fundamentalist from your thread to answer the perspective question in mine. I would like another source for yours first, either from your or from another poster.

Please also feel free to answer the question.

My source is my own observation of the fundamentals that a Christian should believe in. Found in scripture. And brought into the light by the Holy Spirit.

:nsm:

Ana Dragule
04-16-2015, 07:00 PM
My source is my own observation of the fundamentals that a Christian should believe in. Found in scripture. And brought into the light by the Holy Spirit.

:nsm:

You would say that a non-fundamentalist Christian is a Christian or probably not a Christian?

Ana Dragule
04-16-2015, 07:01 PM
There is a serious confusion here as to what a fundamentalist really is. The term is not a clear one.

Given that different groups would identify as fundamentalist, and sometimes the definitions change a little, yes. Ok, so, same questions, but please also include source of answer, definition, etc.

mossrose
04-16-2015, 07:02 PM
You would say that a non-fundamentalist Christian is a Christian or probably not a Christian?

I would say probably not a Christian. Or, at the very least, a weak, immature believer who hasn't got the "fundamentals" down pat, yet.

Catholicity
04-16-2015, 07:36 PM
The modern use of the term Fundamentalist has long strayed from the published pamphlet "the Fundamentals"

Christianbookworm
04-16-2015, 07:38 PM
Wait. Are we talking about the primary importance doctrines? Like the Resurrection? I guess fundy is code for wacky cultist on the internet.

Catholicity
04-16-2015, 07:44 PM
I also tend to think there is a dividing line between fundamentalist Christian and say one who identifies via Lutheran, Methodist, Orthodox, Baptist, Presbyterian etc. they do not identify strictly the pamphlets guidelines (which for intents and purposes is a very modern definition of what constitutes a Christian) but none the less are still Christian. Putting the term Christian into a neat little box isn't fair to believes who hear Jesus in their respective ways.

KingsGambit
04-16-2015, 07:46 PM
Wait. Are we talking about the primary importance doctrines? Like the Resurrection? I guess fundy is code for wacky cultist on the internet.

The movement called "fundamentalism" named five fundamentals:

*Inerrancy
*Virgin birth
*Atonement
*Resurrection
*Jesus's miracles as historically real

Christianbookworm
04-16-2015, 08:02 PM
The movement called "fundamentalism" named five fundamentals:

*Inerrancy
*Virgin birth
*Atonement
*Resurrection
*Jesus's miracles as historically real

I think inerrancy might be the only one that gets debated. In that some make it a primary and others make it a secondary. I believe the original documents of Scripture were inerrant, but I'm not dogmatic about it. I don't hold to the idea that God told the writers exactly what words to write, but who does?

KingsGambit
04-16-2015, 08:14 PM
I think inerrancy might be the only one that gets debated. In that some make it a primary and others make it a secondary. I believe the original documents of Scripture were inerrant, but I'm not dogmatic about it. I don't hold to the idea that God told the writers exactly what words to write, but who does?

In Sunday school as a youth my teacher suggested that the writers put their hands out and God moved them with pen in hand, and I went along with it. :no:

Catholicity
04-16-2015, 08:29 PM
I would be inclined to believe scripture is spiritually inerrent, as well as correct as opposed to precise. It is God's word written through the pen of man. therefore it will contain some "error" that does not negate its spiritual inerrent nor its correctness of account.

DesertBerean
04-16-2015, 08:46 PM
In Sunday school as a youth my teacher suggested that the writers put their hands out and God moved them with pen in hand, and I went along with it. :no:

That's called auto-something, and....yeah, no.

Jedidiah
04-17-2015, 01:10 PM
The movement called "fundamentalism" named five fundamentals:

*Inerrancy
*Virgin birth
*Atonement
*Resurrection
*Jesus's miracles as historically real

I believe those. I must be a fundamentalist. Oh wait, I already knew that.

ETA: I believe that inerrancy (while I accept it as true) is not a requirement for being a Christian. I would also add the Trinity.

Catholicity
04-17-2015, 06:34 PM
One serious issue I have with the five fundamentals they left out baptism. Jesus was pretty clear to the disciples that they were to do it.

KingsGambit
04-17-2015, 06:35 PM
I personally don't understand why some people get hung up on the virgin birth. I know Dietrich Bonhoeffer had a major problem with the concept. If God can raise Jesus from the death, why would the virgin birth be a problem?

Chrawnus
04-17-2015, 06:37 PM
I personally don't understand why some people get hung up on the virgin birth. I know Dietrich Bonhoeffer had a major problem with the concept. If God can raise Jesus from the death, why would the virgin birth be a problem?

If God can create the universe out of nothing, why would either the virgin birth or the resurrection be a problem? :shrug:

Paprika
04-18-2015, 12:12 AM
I personally don't understand why some people get hung up on the virgin birth. I know Dietrich Bonhoeffer had a major problem with the concept. If God can raise Jesus from the death, why would the virgin birth be a problem?
A little googling reveals that Bonhoeffer didn't affirm the physical resurrection either.

Bonhoeffer, child of German liberal theology, held precisely the type of views that Christian fundamentalism reacted against.

Thoughtful Monk
04-20-2015, 03:37 PM
The modern use of the term Fundamentalist has long strayed from the published pamphlet "the Fundamentals"

I hesitate to call a 4 volume set of books just a pamphlet. http://www.theopedia.com/The_Fundamentals Even if it is a group of pamphlets, its like calling the Federalist Papers a pamphlet.

I would want to read the volumes before I comment on how far the straying has gone...

Cow Poke
04-20-2015, 06:02 PM
The movement called "fundamentalism" named five fundamentals:

*Inerrancy
*Virgin birth
*Atonement
*Resurrection
*Jesus's miracles as historically real

Even some of my liberal Christian friends would say :thumb: