Can Fundamentalists Be Saved?

Great Debates
21

Hmmm. I would agree with those who have stated that fundamentalists can be saved- I have friends who have moved to a more PLT (Polycarpian-Libertarian-Triskademian) viewpoint from fundamentalism.

The question I would ask, then, is- is it our responsibility to attempt to ‘save’ fundamentalists? That is, when faced with someone espousing fundamentalist viewpoints, is it our duty in loving our fellow man to try and guide the fundamentalists to a better path by showing them the errors or their ways and logic?

I cannot truly think of a definite answer for that question. After all, if one loves others, shouldn’t that love be evinced in trying to help someone who is slowly destroying themselves? I can’t see letting a fundamentalist bask in his own hatred and judgementalism as being a loving act. But by that same token, to confront and try to show him the error of his ways- isn’t that showing the same arrogance and self-righteousness as he shows to others?

BTW- I cannot even begin to express the respect with which I hold all of those who have so far posted to this thread, and the beauty I have seen in their words. As Lib feels of Trisk, so do I feel of Poly, Gaudere, Lib, Trisk, and Jeff.

22

No, I just wasn’t thinking that far ahead. Assuming there is an afterlife, perhaps God will do some serious butt-kicking of those who got His message all wrong and they will realize they may have misinterpreted His statements. OTOH, there are some few people who I suspect wouldn’t believe that homosexuality is not a horrific evil if God Himself came down and told them. I can just see them in the afterlife, covering up their ears and stomping their feet: “No, it says it right there in the Bible! Next you’re going to tell me that the creation wasn’t in six days! You must be Satan!” Anyhow, my corrected statement should read: “…they will never know while alive on earth.”

Lib:

Maybe someday you will realize that I am not broken. :slight_smile:

23

OK, Lib, really, it isn’t me, you know. I get these little fits, you see, and commence to speaking out about very simple things. It isn’t for one moment true that I AM as beautiful as the sentiments I bring up here. It’s just that I know this guy, see. And He is that beautiful. I just tell you what I see.

Thanks to all that express their appreciation for those things, though, because it really is the way the true good news gets out.

Now, about a duty to bring the word to the heathens. (No offense meant to you heathens out there, of course.) I find it very hard to explain a theological defense for things I say about the Lord. I don’t do a lot of theology. I used to. I was very smart once upon a time. It didn’t help me much. Logic never gave me more answers than it did questions. Arguments never brought me closer to feeling that I was not all alone in the universe.

But when someone tells someone else that Jesus doesn’t love them, I have to object. Out loud. I don’t have proof, I don’t even care for any. But I have unquestioning and unencumbered faith that Jesus does in fact love them very much. Individually, personally, eternally, and inclusive of every wart and freckle. I find it so sad that some must dredge through the bible for tattletale ammunition to snitch on others for their sins. I almost never hear people discussing the depths of their own wretched sinfulness. I do hear people saying “Jesus loves me.” What I want to make clear is that while that is true, the far more important message is Jesus loves you.

Creationism, Homophobia, Political Conservatism, Authoritarianism, Evangelism, and a whole bunch of capitalized isms are just human interest groups, clinging to the importance of our opinion on the nature of eternity. No doubt God gets a snicker or two out of it from time to time. Like we have so much experience creating infinite cosmoses all the time. Get over yourself.

You want to know the world, study the world. Good tools are things like Mathematics, and the Scientific Method. You want to understand God, look in your heart, and see if it looks like the sort of place God might want to visit, or maybe even hang out for a while. Clean it up a bit, you know, like you wanted company. Then use the bible for what it is. A description of how some other people got to know God. You might get to know him too.

However that might turn out, I believe HE IS, and I know He came here once, to be among us. He loves you. It’s personal. I had nothing to do with it.

Tris

24

Gaudere

Not broken, my dear, just not finished yet. Like me.

Tris

Have you seen Kiss of God - The Wisdom of a Silent Child?

25

No.

But I think I saw the play. :smiley:

26

The following passage seemed relevant to “butt-kicking”.

This speaks to the “Love others” injunction that Polycarp mentioned and the “Butt-kicking” that Gaudere mentioned.

Whether or not there is a real Hell or merely non-existence, one point of this passage is that many so-called Christians (Fundamental or not), are misguided as to their purpose.

Then from the Jewish Bible

I think these passages speak to the fundamentalist (in the pejorative sense) condition of any persuasion. That is, the adherence to rules and regulations at the expense of people.

Tinker

27

Polycarp,

As it appears that you are referring to my earlier posting (in your earlier response you delved into the issue of civil law), I would like to clarify my earlier point.

We all believe that some things are wrong. And we judge those who commit them accordingly. This applies to you, me, and the esteemed free thinkers who populate this message board. What distinguishes the fundamentalists is only in where they draw the line; they include other “wrongs” that you and others do not include. But there is a basic underlying equation. If you genuinely believe that something is wrong, then it follows that it is wrong when someone else does it as well.

It appears that certain self-described fundamentalists on this board have decided to be non-judgemental about their fundamentalist beliefs. This seems illogical. Are they so non-judgemental about their other beliefs? But these people do not wish to think ill of people that they have come to know and respect, so they have modified their attitudes accordingly.

The fact that fundamentalist are convinced that they are right seems to rub many people here the wrong way. And yet, these same people are equally convinced that they themselves are right in their own opinions. The only difference is that fundamentalists owe their beliefs to their total faith in the bible, while free thinkers put their trust in their own intellectual prowess. Free thinkers have contempt for total faith in the bible. Fundamentalists have contempt for the total faith in intellectual prowess.

It should go without saying that none of this has any bearing on the laws of a secular democracy.

And one’s obligation to be civil and pleasant in dealing with one’s fellow man must also be borne in mind. Apparently many fundamentalists fall short in this regard. So do many free thinkers. Let’s save them all.

28

I think what Poly is trying to point out is that the fundamentalists are focussing on minor wrongs to the point that they are ignoring the main basis of their religion: love your neighbor and love God. Their actions are therefore wrong in a big way, not because he or I say so, but because the One they follow does. Their judgementalism about certain specific things is not what Jesus taught. (Disclaimer: IANAC :smiley: )

29

Quoting my earlier post:

'S not my business what you, or Gaudere, or Uncle Beer or Imthecowgodmoo choose to do with your lives. If I can be any help, I will. But it’s not my job to judge you.

Nor is it mine to judge John Q. Fundamentalist, e.g. Jeffery. But if somebody arrogates to themselves exclusive rights to something I believe in strongly, and then makes assertions that place my statements about what I believe in a bad light, hey, suddenly it’s my ox that’s gored. And this would be true whatever category of philosophical/theological school of thought I belonged to. Notice how bent out of shape Lib. got (although we’re friends) at my apparent misrepresentation of Libertarianism, until I clarified it?

“Christians” have a bad rep. on this board, simply because
(1) many are “True Believers” in the pejorative sense, meaning that they compartmentalize their beliefs separately from any effort at logic that they may choose to make – the term is not religious but refers to anybody who has attitudes of this style; one could have a “true believer” atheist who would not accept the idea of a God if presented with a theophany with all the trappings in the classic Cecil B. DeMille Mount Sinai format, or someone so convinced of the benefits of, say, homeopathy that arguments that demonstrate its lack of beneficience are rejected out of hand; and
(2) the “true Christians” attempt to barricade off the title from others who may believe as strongly as they but not to the same doctrine. FriendofGod, for example, all but accused me of “watering down the Gospel” over in the “Christianity and Love” thread – never mind that it is a whole lot harder to identify how best to show love of God and fellow man on a daily case-by-case basis and in a non-judgmental way (especially when you enjoy argumentation and casuistry as much as I do!) than it is to whip out the old Holy Rulebook and look up what Moses or St. Paul had to say that can be twisted to fit the case. I’m not “watering down” the Gospel – I’m proclaiming it. What they have to say is not Good News to anybody except a natural-born masochist.

But none of this addresses your basic point. Who am I to judge? Nobody. But by the fact that the fundamentalists claim to be followers of Jesus, what He had to say is a valid criterion for judgment. And their legalistic contortions in place of the simple law of love say to me that they are not following Him, despite their claims. Operating on their rules, it’s my duty to call them to account on this. Operating on mine, the only proper way to show them love and to follow the law of loving God foremost is to alert them to their failure to do what their, and my, Lord commands, and to show them, if possible, how this impedes their opportunity to proclaim the Good News. Because the idea that the Divine Weasel demands adherence to a tortured legalistic code on penalty of eternal torture is not “good news” – even if he did provide a sort of escape hatch by torturing his son and allowing us to hide behind him. That’s not the God I know, and I am as repelled as I imagine a fundamentalist must be at seeing me defend Esprix’s love life in Jesus’ name, to hear them do it.

30

Thus:

“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices–mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law–justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.” — Jesus

Here’s a coupla gifts to you, Gaudere, to assist you in future research.

Great Bible Search Tool

When Only Greek or Hebrew Will Do

31

Gaudy, what pray tell does IANAC mean? My best guess is I Am Not A Christian.

As to the question John asked, I think we do make an effort, but we must be careful.

Example, Adam when he was ARG220 was very vocal on his beliefs and he lacked some of the love your fellow man in his posts (not saying he did not love his fellow man, but some of his posts came across as him being intollerant) Poly, Lib, myself, and others tried to discuss calmly his actions with him and ask him to think about his posts and what purpose he was trying to accomplish vs. the actual outcomes of his posts. When he came back as Zion, he was much more flexible about others beliefs.

Getting into big arguments does not solve anything. But thoughtful discussion can do wonders. A big thing in a lot of folks minds at my church, is the prayer in school. I understand their need to pray and their need to allow their children to pray, but they need to understand that no one can keep their child from praying. The bible says prayer should be a personal thing between you and God, so why do they need a specific time to pray. Also, they should understand that they would not want a Buddist, or Muslim or any other non-Christian religion reading from their scriptures or praying their prayers to the Christian’s child, so why should they do those things to the non-Christian’s children.

I am a Sunday School teacher, I try to get the adults in my class to think. I cannot tell them what to think, but I can try to get them to think about their beliefs. To bring up points of discussion to help them see others viewpoints.

I believe the Internet and places like this message board (not places like the LBMB) that allow strangers to talk and hopefully learn from each other, can allow us to get folks to think for themselves.

Poly, it saddens me to see the televangelists and the messages they spread and to see the abortion fanatics and the homophobes and the messages that they preach. If folks spent as much time loving those around them as they do trying to make laws that will never get passed (mostly because they should not be laws), then this world would be a better place.

Do I agree with the homosexual lifestyle, no, that’s why I married a woman not a man. But since they are not hurting me or anyone else, I do not care what they do in the privacy of their own homes. Some would make laws that would make some of the things I might wish to do with my wife illegal, it is no more of their business what anyone does sexually as it is what they eat for dinner.

I am probably getting seriously into the rambling mode here, but I do so want to give Poly and others hope that these folks can be converted.

Yes, as the bible says before you try to remove the speck of dust from your brother’s eye please remove the plank from your own eye.

Also, anything can become someone’s god, a car, a job, a house, a spouse, even the Holy Bible, but there is but one true God (from the Christian POV) everything else should be used in trying to better understand Him.

Jeffery

32

Thanks for all the responses to my post. Excellent points were made by all.

In sum: all agree that one may have beliefs about right and wrong. All agree that one may consider those who are doing wrong to be wrongdoers. This may or may not include gays and people who have abortions etc. But the feeling of the posters is that Christian theology requires a greater emphasis on unconditional love for your fellow man as compared to “condemn your fellow man’s wrongdoing” than is currently being given by many fundamentalists.

As this discussion now becomes one of Christian theology, I must bow out, as I am unfamiliar with this terrain, not being a Christian myself.

I still take exception to this statement “if somebody arrogates to themselves exclusive rights to something I believe in strongly, and then makes assertions that place my statements about what I believe in a bad light, hey, suddenly it’s my ox that’s gored. And this would be true whatever category of philosophical/theological school of thought I belonged to.”

What does “exclusive rights” mean? Why are you defining the opinion of these people as “arrogating to themselves exclusive rights”? You could make the same statement about anyone who disagrees with you about anything.

33

Thanks, Lib. Those are much better than the Bible website I usually use.

Bingo. :slight_smile: (Under the most commonly accepted definition of the term, Lib <g> )

34

Unless, of course, you’re explaining why that last post sounded like a flame, in which case it stands for “I Ate Nachos And Chilis” (Dragon breath, y’know) :smiley:

35

Sorry, Izzy. I have a feeling that Deceased Equine will drop by and post if I don’t wrap these rewordings of my thinking fairly quickly. But what I meant is:

If it is important to me to consider myself as an X, and I meet some variation of the commonly accepted definition of what an X is, a member of some subgroup Y of X is not entitled to say, “only Ys are true Xs; you are not.”

I am a Christian. It is at the core of my identity that I try to follow Jesus and have accepted him as Savior and Lord. Unfortunately, He neglected to turn off my brain when He accepted me as His, as He seems to have done with some others. :slight_smile: So I work with a reasoned understanding of how God works in His Creation, what the Book He inspired has to say, and so on. For those who would restrict the term Christian to people who take the Bible, interpreted their way, as sole arbiter of conduct and the literal Word of God (contrary to its own definition of the term, by the way), understanding that four traditions appear to have contributed to the Torah as we know it, that at least one of the Gospels (Matthew) is a recasting of older material in a structured format, that Paul giving advice to a church in some Greek city was not laying down laws for all Christians in every time and place, etc., as I do, is enough to rule me out of the club. And I feel that they are beyond their bounds in doing so. Especially when intelligent reading of their Book shows that they are doing precisely what the guy they claim as Lord told them not to do.

We’ve made allusions above to Libertarian’s practice of redefining words to meet his lines of thinking. I am not disturbed by it (except when I have trouble understanding him, a problem genitive to me which I do not extend ablatively to him ;)), but I inserted a clause above to suggest that “common usage” should play a part in who has the right to a name. E.g., Libertarian and I have committed ourselves to God and consider ourselves as His servants. We are therefore entitled, viewed from an Arabic language “map,” to call ourselves Muslims, “servants of God.” However, any actual member of Islam who challenged us on praying five times a day, fasting during Ramadan, etc., to say nothing of considering Mohammed a valid prophet as “real Muslims” do, would certainly have “common usage” on his side. Likewise, without making a major issue out of a side note, the Latter Day Saints understanding of the nature of God differs from the “other” to such a radical degree that those who like to play word games would deny the term Christian to them. As has been argued on threads before, I say BS to that – whatever their theology may be, Snark, Monty, PLG, and the other LDS posters are as committed to God as known in Jesus as Tris., Lib., and I are. So “they’re entitle.”

I hope that little discourse makes clear what my point is.

36

I must admit that this sounds a little strange to me. Maybe it’s inappropriate of me to ask this, but when I was on LBMB, I found Ghoti to be an intensely childish and unlikeable person, and it was a little weird to me that people would treat him like a living saint when he was making such a public spectacle of himself.

Anyway, I won’t go into the messy details, but I was wondering if it’s just a problem with me, or if other people have felt that opinion over Ghoti is, uh, divided.

-Ben

37

Ben, I don’t want to be uncharitable to Ghoti, never having met him. Based solely on his posts at LBMB, I would not characterize him as “a Christian after [Polycarp’s] heart.” I have found Jon’s and Pariah’s posts to be much more in keeping with a theology (and practice) of love than Ghoti’s.

But again, I have not interacted with Ghoti, and I do not presume to know Poly’s heart.

38

Are you criticising ghoti’s theology, or his personal behavior?

-Ben

39

Let me just try to make it clear that I’m not trying to put ghoti on trial here. That’s why I’m not going to give any details about my interaction with him, because I want there to be room for people to decide that he didn’t do anything, and that the real problem is me, not him.

What I am trying to do is to get some idea of what people around here think of him. My interactions with him turned very, very sour very, very quickly, and I found it strange since on the LBMB it seemed like every day I saw new threads saying, “Thank you, Ghoti, and I only hope one day I can walk with the LORD as closely as you do.” So, I was hoping to gain some perspective from SDMB’ers.
-Ben

40

Poly

:smiley: :smiley: :smiley:

Thank you for being you.