S/O -- Christian, but not a Fundy?

[kalanamak]

 

Just saying, it goes both ways. Just because someone says they don't believe in God does not mean they are not religious, zealous or fanatical.

 

I knew a br*astfeeding zealot who worked it into every conversation and would not let it drop.

 

People who try to convert you are big bores, and I stay away from them. The worst trouble I've had hasn't been religion at all, but people who want to talk about the latest "smash hit" movie and won't rest until you agree to go (I never do, so they don't rest) or until you say you LUUUUUUUUV'd it, which I don't, either.

 

If find very, very few people who care enough about anything but pop culture to try and convert me to anything. Now when I was young, and on college campuses, I got it a lot. Most respond to "not interested" and turning away by leaving one alone. I did threaten one young man with swear words if he didn't stop, and once, after 3 Saturday morning stops at my house to wake me and talk about religion, let my robe slip a bit to get rid of them, but these are certainly benign hassles in life. I'll take that over car-jacking or vandalism any day.

[Marylou]

 

God does call some to be evangelists, teachers, pastors, etc. But I think that for the average Christian we are simply called to live godly, loving, compassionate lives and by doing so we will draw others to Christ. Then, if anyone express an interest, I am more than happy to share my faith.

 

 

 

But don't even "Fundamentalists" take some and leave some? The message of James 2 makes it absolutely clear that faith without works is "dead". In fact that it is not "faith" at all.

 

Yet it is common (from what I understand) for those who identify as Fundamentalists to argue for "justification by faith alone" when the New Testament in James clearly states that a person "is justified by works and not by faith alone."

 

So there is "selective" literalism and fidelity to plain-text meanings of Scripture. Or am I wrong?

 

Bill

 

Read this for clarification

[kmacnchs]

One can believe what one wants, but one should teach one's children some manners.

 

:iagree::iagree:

definitely agree with that one!

[kmacnchs]

But, I just have to ask. . . have you read the entire Bible?

 

I have read the entire Bible many times. I have not studied the entire Bible thoroughly (not a scholar or anything).

 

I mean, gosh, there are quite a few parts that I'd like to forget. You know, my 10 yo son was having a lot of trouble with the whole parting of the Red Sea scene last week. . . he was just disturbed and disgusted that God could be so vengeful and destructive. . . you know. . . the part how God set out to lure the bad guys into the sea so he could drown them. . . I had to take that same son to meet with our (Episcopal) priest when he was about 5 because he was so darn upset with God for having allowed Jesus to be crucified. . . it was just too horrible for him to accept. . . Father Jim was so thoughtful and reassuring. . . and my ds was still not particularly impressed with God at that point. He just was convinced that God was a cruel God and so he "didn't like Him". How could I argue? I couldn't. . . So, I enlisted a pro. . .

 

I am sorry your son is having such a hard time seeing that God is a loving God AND a just God...it can be a hard thing to grasp. However, he is...both! (that sounds snarky - sorry, don't mean it that way - I am really sorry! these concepts are difficult for children and adults alike!)

 

Not only are there many horrible passages in the Bible. . . but there are many, many, outright contradictions of fact, let alone contradictions in principle. I think it wouldn't take any of you long to google up a dozen seeming contradictions in the Bible. If you are to try to follow the teaching of the Bible, you would have to, in the case of inconsistencies within the Bible, presumably, choose ONE of these teachings and disregard the other, using your judgment and conscience to determine which was more truthful. So, in each case, every Christian is "taking some parts of the Bible and leaving other parts. . ." Right?

 

If you study the Bible in its entirety (not proof-texting), I do not think you will find any contradiction. For example, I was raised Presbyterian (we baptize infants). When I was joining my church (non-denom but I guess closest to Baptists?), I learned in the new member's class that in order to join, you would need to be baptized after you were saved (I was not saved when I was an infant) - because it is an act to symbolize that you are saved (not that it makes you saved). Well, I am not going to do what someone says just b/c so I searched every passage in the Bible about baptism and all but 2 (?) came up that people believed and THEN were baptized. Well, I was not going to discount these 2 so I went to the pastor. We (as a church) studied Deuteronomy for 5 yrs and were just finishing up at that time and he showed me that the 2 (?) times it talked about being baptized 1st and then later saved, it was referring to when the red hefer was cleansed outside the camp in Deuteronomy (which had to happen B4 the salvation of Israel). It did not make sense to me until I read it within the context of the WHOLE Bible (OT & NT). If you want verses, I will look them up - this was a LONG time ago so my memory is fuzzy about spec. verses right now...

 

Anyhow, scripture is a mystery to me. . . to my kids. . . to our priests. . . to many, many, thoughtful Christians.

 

Just because I don't understand it now, does not mean that I will never understand it. But if I discount it, how will I ever learn? And if I never understand some things, I am okay with that. It doesn't mean that it is not the Truth (the Word of God). So, I agree with you in a way...

 

HTH you understand how someone can "claim to be" a Christian but not agree with many of the Fundamentalist, Conservative, or Evangelical principles that are proposed by many who wear those labels as the defining characteristics for a "true Christian."

 

I have never claimed to be a Fundamentalist until this thread when a PP gave those Wikipedia definitions (otherwise I hadn't given the title any thought). What I was not understanding was how someone can only believe in part of God's Word and still believe in God (ie. be a Christian)...

[kmacnchs]

I appreciate your candor and your clarity in expressing your position. I know that there are many people who do have trouble with these things.

 

But while it may shock you, I do believe that God was perfectly righteous in drowning the Egyptian army, in the things described in the book of Judges etc. I do see the historical books of the Bible as fact. I do see them as telling us things about God's character and attributes. So why do I accept them and why do I accept the God that it reveals?

 

I'll take just one example (the drowning of the Egyptians at the Red Sea). I believe that God is sovereign. He is the creator of the universe. He has the right to determine who lives and dies in a way that no man has the right to do. The Egyptians did have an opportunity to accept God as presented to them by Moses. Everyone in Egypt was told how to avoid the angel of death by painting blood on their doorways etc. I do not know if any Egyptians joined the Hebrews in the Exodus. But I know that God gave them the opportunity in grace. And then later, He did execute judgment against those who did not respond to Him. I'm only giving one example of a difficult historical fact.

 

I know that by explaining how I think about this, I probably won't sway you to my way of thinking. But just as you were candid in your objections to the Bible as factual truth, I wanted to be candid as to why a person who is not blood-thirsty, who is kind to small children and tolerant of people with other views, can actually accept these stories in the Bible. (And yes, I've read the Bible through many times, including the 'begats').

 

well said and :iagree:

[Jenny in GA]

I'm the person who posted the original question and started this thread.

 

The whole thread suddenly reminded me a scene in the [excellent] classic cartoon, "Yes, Virginia, There is a Santa Claus":

 

Little Virginia tells her father a lot of the kids in school don't believe in Santa, and she isn't sure what to believe. She asks her father if Santa is real.

 

The dad gives a kind, lengthy, intelligent speech, involving props, discussing Christopher Columbus, etc. At the end, he says, "Have I answered all your questions, Virginia?"

 

"All, but one, Papa," Virginia says.

 

"Which one is that?"

 

"Is there a Santa Claus?!"

 

:001_smile:

Jenny

[Crimson Wife]

If you believe that God is all-knowing then God IMHO must have known that man would sin. For God to know that man would sin and then punish man eternally for the same, makes God into a wrathful and not a loving God IMHO.

 

As a parent, I can foresee that if my children make certain decisions, they will suffer negative consequences. I love my children and do not want to see them hurting. Should I therefore swoop in each and every time to prevent them from making bad choices? How will they ever develop good judgment if I do that?

 

I don't see the story of the Fall as God being wrathful and out to "get" us. I see it as a loving Father who is heartbroken that His children chose the wrong path. That is why He sent His only Son to be our Redeemer :)

[Jean in Newcastle]

I'm the person who posted the original question and started this thread.

 

The whole thread suddenly reminded me a scene in the [excellent] classic cartoon, "Yes, Virginia, There is a Santa Claus":

 

Little Virginia tells her father a lot of the kids in school don't believe in Santa, and she isn't sure what to believe. She asks her father if Santa is real.

 

The dad gives a kind, lengthy, intelligent speech, involving props, discussing Christopher Columbus, etc. At the end, he says, "Have I answered all your questions, Virginia?"

 

"All, but one, Papa," Virginia says.

 

"Which one is that?"

 

"Is there a Santa Claus?!"

 

:001_smile:

Jenny

 

This is a conversation (albeit a written one taking place over days:)) and they tend to amble away from the main topic sometimes. I think the main reason this one did is that there isn't a definitive answer to your original question.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

As a parent, I can foresee that if my children make certain decisions, they will suffer negative consequences. I love my children and do not want to see them hurting. Should I therefore swoop in each and every time to prevent them from making bad choices? How will they ever develop good judgment if I do that?

 

I don't see the story of the Fall as God being wrathful and out to "get" us. I see it as a loving Father who is heartbroken that His children chose the wrong path. That is why He sent His only Son to be our Redeemer :)

 

I can see that view as well. As you can see, I have not really firmed up my thoughts;) I guess I have trouble with the whole salvation, original sin themes. Instead I like to believe Jesus saved us in the sense that he showed us how to live and pray and worship instead of saving us from the eternal fires so to speak:)

[IsabelC]

I'm confused - which Christians don't agree with these? I am Catholic and believe them!

I think that most Christians (outside of the US) do not believe in 'inerrancy' of the Bible.

 

There's definitely a difference between the dictionary definition of fundamentalism and the popular understanding (which is very negative, viewing a fundamentalist as a person who is inflexible, intolerant and willing to to ignore the rights of others).

[justamouse]

 

I mean, gosh, there are quite a few parts that I'd like to forget. You know, my 10 yo son was having a lot of trouble with the whole parting of the Red Sea scene last week. . . he was just disturbed and disgusted that God could be so vengeful and destructive. . . you know. . . the part how God set out to lure the bad guys into the sea so he could drown them. . . I had to take that same son to meet with our (Episcopal) priest when he was about 5 because he was so darn upset with God for having allowed Jesus to be crucified. . . it was just too horrible for him to accept. . . Father Jim was so thoughtful and reassuring. . . and my ds was still not particularly impressed with God at that point. He just was convinced that God was a cruel God and so he "didn't like Him". How could I argue? I couldn't. . . So, I enlisted a pro. . .

 

Not only are there many horrible passages in the Bible. . . but there are many, many, outright contradictions of fact, let alone contradictions in principle. I think it wouldn't take any of you long to google up a dozen seeming contradictions in the Bible. If you are to try to follow the teaching of the Bible, you would have to, in the case of inconsistencies within the Bible, presumably, choose ONE of these teachings and disregard the other, using your judgment and conscience to determine which was more truthful. So, in each case, every Christian is "taking some parts of the Bible and leaving other parts. . ." Right?

 

Anyhow, scripture is a mystery to me. . . to my kids. . . to our priests. . . to many, many, thoughtful Christians. Mystery is not a bad thing, IMHO. Fact does not equal Truth. Fact can obscure Truth. Truth can obscure Fact. Fact is immutable but Truth is subject to interpretation. . . So, personally, I believe that the Bible is indeed a source of Truth, but much of it may not be Fact. That is perfectly fine by me. I like complexity just fine.

 

I think I love you. I'm at least crushing on you. ;)

 

I guess I am definitely a heretic;)

 

Where does the line form?

 

The Bible says in Isaiah that our righteousness is like filthy rags, "literally like dirty menstrual cloths" that is what our best attempt at being good is!!

 

 

Nothing like a little Old Testament patriarchal misogyny. They couldn't pick anything else filthy? Nothing? They had no manure pits back then?

 

 

.

 

But while it may shock you, I do believe that God was perfectly righteous in drowning the Egyptian army, in the things described in the book of Judges etc. I do see the historical books of the Bible as fact. I do see them as telling us things about God's character and attributes. So why do I accept them and why do I accept the God that it reveals?

 

This is the reason I had to answer again in this post. I was JUST having a conversation with a Jewish person about this story. (she converted for her husband so that all of her sons could be fully Jewish ) ANYWHO, she told me that she was taught (in the school she went to to convert) that God admonished the Israelites for partying it up when the Egyptians were drowned, that they should be somber, the Egyptians were His children, too.

 

Just say'n. We could not understand everything, you know?

Edited March 15, 2010 by justamouse

[Ibbygirl]

Nothing like a little Old Testament patriarchal misogyny. They couldn't pick anything else filthy? Nothing? They had no manure pits back then?

 

LOL I'm sure they had lots of things they could have used as an analogy. I didn't write it, just quoted what it says. :)

[justamouse]

LOL I'm sure they had lots of things they could have used as an analogy. I didn't write it, just quoted what it says. :)

 

I know, I wasn't poking at You. It just galls me to read that. And then we wonder why our girls self esteem is wounded. Because even God, their loving Father and maker sees the workings of their body as filthy! :glare: Burns me something fierce. The feminine wound runs deep. Especially when it's your Religion that is telling you you are less than.

[Ibbygirl]

I know, I wasn't poking at You. It just galls me to read that. And then we wonder why our girls self esteem is wounded. Because even God sees the workings of their body as filthy! :glare: Burns me something fierce. The feminine wound runs deep. Especially when it's your Religion that is telling you you are less than.

 

Oh I didn't take what you said personally. :) No worries. :) Wow! You really read a lot into the verse. I didn't even think of it that way at all. More like, it's bloody, smelly etc. Yes it's natural but so is pus. :ack2: Personally it doesn't bother my self esteem at all, but I can see where you would have an issue with it.

[kmacnchs]

I know, I wasn't poking at You. It just galls me to read that. And then we wonder why our girls self esteem is wounded. Because even God, their loving Father and maker sees the workings of their body as filthy! :glare: Burns me something fierce. The feminine wound runs deep. Especially when it's your Religion that is telling you you are less than.

 

It IS gross! I wish we could have babies w/o it :tongue_smilie::D

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

I know, I wasn't poking at You. It just galls me to read that. And then we wonder why our girls self esteem is wounded. Because even God, their loving Father and maker sees the workings of their body as filthy! :glare: Burns me something fierce. The feminine wound runs deep. Especially when it's your Religion that is telling you you are less than.

 

:iagree: I agree 100% and the sad part is I think Jesus intended quite opposite and I tend to think of Mary Magdalene as the Apostle to the apostles;)

[justamouse]

:iagree: I agree 100% and the sad part is I think Jesus intended quite opposite and I tend to think of Mary Magdalene as the Apostle to the apostles;)

 

 

I 100% agree.

[justamouse]

Hmmm, I can't combine answers...crud. Sorry

 

Oh I didn't take what you said personally. :) No worries. :) Wow! You really read a lot into the verse. I didn't even think of it that way at all. More like, it's bloody, smelly etc. Yes it's natural but so is pus. :ack2: Personally it doesn't bother my self esteem at all, but I can see where you would have an issue with it.

 

Lol! I know it's gross, but it was the first analogy they reached for, you know? that was their mindset. I mean, how bout our sin is like a case of the trots? Or, our sin is like a festering pustule? You know? :D No, they gotta slag the women. It was the first filthy thing they thought of.

 

It IS gross! I wish we could have babies w/o it :tongue_smilie::D

 

Well, it's a pain in the rear, that's for sure and I hate that some women suffer with it. But I see the beauty of the mechanisim and how it ties me to the earth (not in woo woo ways, but in ways that remind me I'm a part of nature, I am a part of the created, and that my body is a shell for my soul). I like having to slow down once a month and just shuffle through my days. I guess I've just come to see the blessing in it.

[lionfamily1999]

This is the reason I had to answer again in this post. I was JUST having a conversation with a Jewish person about this story. (she converted for her husband so that all of her sons could be fully Jewish ) ANYWHO, she told me that she was taught (in the school she went to to convert) that God admonished the Israelites for partying it up when the Egyptians were drowned, that they should be somber, the Egyptians were His children, too.

 

Just say'n. We could not understand everything, you know?

I thought it was the angels that were called down? So wierd, this is exact conversation popped up in a book I was reading last night...

 

From the book (for what it's worth):

They have a legend that, when their forefathers were saved from Eypt and the Egyptians drowned in the Red Sea, the angels joined in the song of triumph sung by the Israelites. And God said to the angels, "[The Israelites] are men and can rejoice about their escape. But from you I expect more understanding. Are the Egyptians not also my creatures? Do I not love them, too? How do you fail to feel my sorrow about their tragic fate?"

 

So strange that the same thing would pop up here...

 

 

Fwiw, I don't think we should rejoice at the deaths of even our enemies. It seems to me that when an enemy dies we (as Christians) should have an even greater grief. If they did not get salvation, then we (as Christians) should lament that loss to them and to God's Kingdom.

[Ibbygirl]

Lol! I know it's gross, but it was the first analogy they reached for, you know? that was their mindset. I mean, how bout our sin is like a case of the trots? Or, our sin is like a festering pustule? You know? :D No, they gotta slag the women. It was the first filthy thing they thought of.

 

:lol::lol::lol::lol: Oh please tell me that you are English. I can so hear what you wrote in my head in an English accent. hehehe Well, the one thing I can say for the poor menstruating women is that it seems they were in pretty good company "outside of the camp" hehe There were a lot of other folks out there too according to Levitical law including men. I was thinking about what it meant to be "outside of the camp" and of course I can only look through my eyes at it, but to me it seems I guess it would be how you look at it. On the one hand, one could see it as banishment and as of something of shame, but on the other hand I guess you could see it as a time of respite and a break from your ordinary duties and responsibilities. I mean if you're "outside the camp" you're not in there performing your normal activities for spouse and family and at that time of the month that might just be a blessing in disguise. :) With all of those menstruating women together though it would make for some interesting conversations/interactions I would think. ;) :D