Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31
  1. #1 "What Separates Biblical Christiananity from Liberalism?" 
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Liberal-Bane – The Real Truth About Christian Fundamentalism

    snip

    "This notion that G-d has fixed ideas on political issues is what Islamic fundamentalists believe, not us. — Andrew Sullivan, The New Republic " ..Andrew Sullivan's 'Daily Dish' .
    "

    http://www.nanowrimo.org/es/node/3036208

    The above quote displays the thinking that lies at the heart of the continuing slander and deconstruction of Christian Fundamentalism. Sullivan ´s quote lumps anyone who believes that G-d´s ideas are fixed and unchangeable with the Islamic terrorists who crashed airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Since Christian Fundamentalists do believe that G-d´s ideas are ‘fixed´ (‘I am the Lord; I change not. –Malachi 3:6; et al), Sullivan is making the not-so-subtle inference that Christian Fundamentalists are just as violent and apt to commit such heinous deeds as Osama Bin Laden and his murderous zealots. The fact that Sullivan is a nominal Conservative reveals just how pervasive liberal Christian theology has become. In fact, it was in response to that so-called theology that Christian Fundamentalism first arose, early in the 20th century.

    Until the Civil War, Protestantism had been the predominant American expression of faith. After the war, though, science, technology, and business began replacing the traditional Protestant faith with industrialism, historicism and secularism. The flood of central and eastern European immigrants at the beginning of the 20th century, mostly Catholic and Jewish, furthered the trend toward religious pluralism. Religion was gradually becoming relegated to the private, family, and leisure spheres, leaving political, scientific, and economic affairs to the secular experts. Christians, already concerned that Biblical principles were being corrupted by these developments, saw the encroachment of liberal Christian theology as the last straw in what they perceived, quite rightly, as an assault on their beliefs.

    What were the objectionable points of that liberal theology? Theologian and author J.I. Packer wrote (Fundamentalism and the Word of G-d, London, Inter-Varsity Press, 1958), ‘The characteristic tenets of liberal faith in America in the early years of [the 20th] century may be summarized as follows:

    G-d's character is one of pure benevolence, that is, without standards . All men are His children, and sin separates no one from His love. (In other words, we´re all bound for heaven, no matter what.) Due to the divine spark in every man, all men are good at heart , and need nothing more than encouragement to allow their natural goodness to express itself.

    Jesus Christ is man's Savior only in the sense that He is man's perfect Teacher and Example. He was not divine, not born of a virgin, did not work miracles and did not rise from the dead.

    Just as Christ differs from other men only comparatively, not absolutely, so Christianity differs from other religions not generically, but merely as the best and highest type of religion that has appeared so far. All religions are forms of the same religion. The Bible is not a divine record of revelation, but a human testament of religion, thus Christian doctrine is not the G-d-given word. Doctrine is simply experience recalled, and will vary from age to age and place to place, according to the variation of cultural backgrounds.´

    http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/toogood.htm
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    12,445
    As a liberal christian, I'd say that's a pretty accurate assessment, especially as pertains to questions of whether or not the Bible is the literal Word of God. Most liberal christians do believe that Jesus was divine and that he was resurrected, though, especially those denominations like the UCC, UMC or PBUSA, churches which are very liberal, but still have liturgical statements that state those beliefs.


    Where I'm different from a lot of other liberal christians is that I grew up in a community strongly influenced by fundamentalists and evangelicals. I participated in a few different groups, Young Life in particular. I liked my neighbors and the people who I met through those groups, even if I don't share the same theological beliefs at this point in my life. I appreciate the insight of anyone who studies the Bible seriously, even if I don't agree with everything they say.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Far from being some late-coming, ‘new´ splinter group with radical or terrorist foundations, Christian Fundamentalists simply adhere to the long-held foundational truths of the Christian faith. Liberal theology sought to replace those traditional beliefs with those of 19th century secular science and humanist philosophy. The irony is that because Christians refused to, in effect, renounce their faith, ‘liberals´ try to characterize Christian Fundamentalists as usurpers, some new and dangerous cult, when it is, in fact, the ‘liberals´ who are the late-comers, the ones who are assaulting traditional, long-standing beliefs.
    That's a good little essay on the subject. Since I actually know what the tenets of Christian Fundamentalism are, I've never understood why it became such a pejorative term. People don't seem to understand that the Fundamentalist Movement was largely a reaction to creeping Theosophy, universalism, and the type of biblical criticism that was wholly concerned with archeology and linguistics.

    Much of what those prominent scholars "discovered" about historical biblical events, source languages, and Jewish sects has since been proven wrong by modern scholarship. Since they were unconcerned with spiritual truths, their entire life's work has simply been pitched out on the academic dust heap.

    The efforts of the leaders of the Fundamentalist Movement, however, live on. The growing Confessional and Creedal Movements reflect those same "fundamentals". ;)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member Rebel Yell's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    South GA
    Posts
    5,181
    What separates Biblical Christianity from Liberalism?




    The Bible acknowleges God, liberalism doesn't.

    The Bible holds Jesus up as messiah, with no mention of Obama.
    I feel that once a black fella has referred to white foks as "honky paleface devil white-trash cracker redneck Caspers," he's abdicated the right to get upset about the "N" word. But that's just me. -- Jim Goad
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Redondo Beach, CA
    Posts
    1,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Gingersnap View Post
    That's a good little essay on the subject. Since I actually know what the tenets of Christian Fundamentalism are, I've never understood why it became such a pejorative term. People don't seem to understand that the Fundamentalist Movement was largely a reaction to creeping Theosophy, universalism, and the type of biblical criticism that was wholly concerned with archeology and linguistics.

    Much of what those prominent scholars "discovered" about historical biblical events, source languages, and Jewish sects has since been proven wrong by modern scholarship. Since they were unconcerned with spiritual truths, their entire life's work has simply been pitched out on the academic dust heap.

    The efforts of the leaders of the Fundamentalist Movement, however, live on. The growing Confessional and Creedal Movements reflect those same "fundamentals". ;)
    Ginger:

    Do you see archeology/linguistics and spiritual truths as being mutually exclusive endeavors?

    I read the bible first in church, then later in life, as English-Lit major, I studied the individual books in their historical context, looking at authorship, imagery, symbolism, etc. It was during that time that I began to see the bible not as a single book but as a collection of writings including gospel, histories, poetry and prose.

    I can say, for me, that insight only deepened my feelings about the profound truths revealed in scripture.

    Question: Today, what is the Fundamentalist take or feeling toward the Catholic Church? -- I ask because I have encountered some pretty negative beliefs in the past. (Jack Chick's anti-Catholic tracts, pagan influence etc.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Super Moderator BadCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In your dreams
    Posts
    15,616
    The Bible holds Jesus up as messiah, with no mention of Obama.
    Except perhaps in the 1st and 2nd Epistles of John.

    rm -rf obama*
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Power CUer FlaGator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    The Swamps of N. Florida
    Posts
    22,268
    Quote Originally Posted by Rebel Yell View Post
    What separates Biblical Christianity from Liberalism?




    The Bible acknowleges God, liberalism doesn't.

    The Bible holds Jesus up as messiah, with no mention of Obama.
    Actually many liberals do acknowledge god, their version of him. They acknowledge Christ Jesus too, their version of him. Just look at what is going on in the Episcopal Church. Liberal leadership has taken over and they have redefined God and Christ recreating them in their image. They toss out Scripture that doesn't agree with their philosophy (and that is what Episcopalianism is becoming, a secular philosophy based on appealing to secular interests) and pervert much of what remains to co-exist with their world view. They have created a weak and impotent god that actually appeals to no one and then wonder why people, parishes and dioceses are leaving for more fundamental Biblical pastures.
    Last edited by FlaGator; 04-16-2009 at 12:41 PM.

    I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.
    C. S. Lewis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Quote Originally Posted by FlaGator View Post
    Actually many liberals do acknowledge god, their version of him. They acknowledge Christ Jesus too, their version of him. Just look at what is going on in the Episcopal Church. Liberal leadership has taken over and they have redefined God and Christ recreating them in their image. The toss out Scripture that doesn't agree with their philosophy (and that is what Episcopalianism is becoming, a secular philosophy based on appealing to secular interests) and pervert much of what remains to co-exist with their world view. They have created a weak and impotent god that actually appeals to no one and then wonder why people, parishes and dioceses are leaving for more fundamental Biblical pastures.
    It Proves that liberalism isn't new.It's been around for many years under many different names.It's main objective is to undercut GOD'S Holy words and replace them with mans,The demon never rests !
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Power CUer FlaGator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    The Swamps of N. Florida
    Posts
    22,268
    Quote Originally Posted by megimoo View Post
    It Proves that liberalism isn't new.It's been around for many years under many different names.It's main objective is to undercut GOD'S Holy words and replace them with mans,The demon never rests !
    The word in theological circles for Christian liberalism is apostasy. Eventually that leads to the theological word for far left Christian liberalism, heresy.

    I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.
    C. S. Lewis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    Ginger:

    Do you see archeology/linguistics and spiritual truths as being mutually exclusive endeavors?
    No, but neither do I think these investigations have any spiritual merit. I'm almost entirely uninterested in attempts to prove or disprove various points of biblical "truth" using science or linguistics. I'm completely uninterested in imposing a 21st century view of moral ambiguity on my own religion.

    Question: Today, what is the Fundamentalist take or feeling toward the Catholic Church? -- I ask because I have encountered some pretty negative beliefs in the past. (Jack Chick's anti-Catholic tracts, pagan influence etc.)
    That would be impossible to answer; there is no Fundamentalist Church. Some Protestants continue to view Catholicism as a depraved version of Christianity that is almost entirely unbiblical. I'm sure those people have some fairly negative things to say about it. By and large, traditional Protestants see themselves having more in common with traditional Catholics than they do with prosperity preachers or universalists. They aren't likely to have any special regard for the Pope and they would strongly disagree with the Catholic take on Apostolic Succession but they'd be a lot more relaxed about bingo nights than they used to be.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •