My first pit: Judgmental (Typical?) Fundamentalists

The BBQ Pit
1

Heh, immagine my surprise at the topic of my first Pit Thread. Let me explain.

(After I wrote it, I realized that some of you may not want to read it, so I moved it below. See Introduction if you want to know about me in more detail. In order to explain the sentence above, I’ll just say…)

I am a devout fundamentalist Christian.

That said, I was reading and responding to this thread, and I discovered who Mr. Phelps is.

As I said in that thread (page 2 toward the end), let me apologize from my heart, as a fundamentalist for the attitudes and actions of some (most) of the fundamentalists who are idiots. Makes me sick and angry. So angry I could curse, but I try not to.

Anyway, where was I. Oh yeah, listen, everyone, but especially those of you here that are gay or lesbian, I am VERY sorry for idiots like him. We don’t have to agree in order to treat each others decently. In fact, when I joined this board, I didn’t expect to find many people to agree with me. I did expect to find people who were decent human beings deserving of respect and kind treatment.

Now, I don’t expect any fast and furious friends, I really don’t expect any of you to even like or trust me. However, when I read the brief description provided of Phelps, it really made me sick. He has the rights to his beliefs, but to be so mean spirited and evil towards others is not the image of Christ that he is supposed to be projecting.

I am and probably will always be a fundamentalist, but please, please, please, don’t make the mistake of lumping me in with the rest of the self-righteous, arrogent, judgmental idiots just because they have stolen a label that I wear.

My Introduction is below. It is rather graphic and free with my opinions. Proceed with caution:

I am a devout fundamentalist Christian. Yes, I said fundamentalist. I believe the Bible. I believe every word is verbally inspired by God and infallible. I believe that it was preserved to modern English speaking generations by the protective hand of God.

I believe that anyone who doesn’t accept Jesus Christ’s payment for their sins will die and spend an eternity in a literal burning Hell. Those who do (sincerely and in faith) accept that payment will be taken to a literal Heaven.

I believe in a literal 7 day creation of this world. I believe it happened less than 10,000 years ago. I believe in a literal Adam and Eve as the first parents of all mankind. I believe that among other things, gossip, gluttony, homosexual acts, extramarital sex, stealing, lying, and murder are all sins.

Please don’t misunderstand. I chose that list purposefully. There are things that I do on that list, and I’m not judging anyone else, I’m simply saying what I believe. I further believe that you have the right and liberty, granted to you by the very God of the universe to do what you want with your life regardless of whether I think it is a sin or not.

I am at a crossroads in determining how these two ideas (my beliefs and your freedoms) should meet in the place of governments and laws. I honestly don’t have an answer that satisfies me yet.

End of Introduction.

2

It’s certainly your privilege to believe as you choose. And though you may get flames for some of what you’ve said, count me out on them. I’ll happily share with you what I believe on the creedal assertions you’ve made, if and when you wish.

But there are two premises I believe you will find extremely useful and which do not contravene your beliefs that I think will be immensely helpful to you as you work out your answers to that antinomy that you face.

  1. It’s a longstanding formula among conservatives and in particular literalists to “let the Bible interpret the Bible.” You’ll notice in the Sodom and Gomorrah GD thread that we gave the evidence from Ezekiel (and Isaiah and Jeremiah back him up, though not so clearly) as to what “the sin of Sodom” for which they were condemned was. Granted that you could stop 100 people on the street and ask “What was Sodom condemned for in the Bible?” and get the answer “homosexuality,” that’s somebody’s opinion, not what the Bible itself says.

It’s also very helpful, and not at all unBiblical, to get all available information about cultural customs, legal standards, and social mores regarding the time and place written of in Scripture. Then you know why X swearing an oath to Y placed his hand on Y’s thigh, you know why Abraham and Isaac kept playing the “She’s not my wife, she’s my sister” game, you know why “high places” and “standing stones” are matters that piss off any randomly chosen O.T. prophet. All they do is add to your understanding of the Bible story, in the same way as knowing that a male character in a tense situation in a historical novel is taking off his gloves means that he’s about to challenge someone to a duel, adds to your appreciation of what’s going on in that novel.

  1. Scripture says a lot of things, and while they can be interpreted into conformity with each other, sometimes that takes bending the story all out of shape. But there is one thing regarding moral theology, and in particular your feelings of live-and-let-live vs. sinfulness, that has always been key to my understanding. Four times in the Gospels Jesus says that something “is” (encapsulizes) all the Law and the Prophets (i.e., all the Old Testament). Three times it’s the two commandments he describes as first and greatest and second to it: Love God with your total self, and love your neighbor as ourself. The fourth is the Golden Rule. Repeatedly He and Paul say that in judging others you incur judgment on yourself, that we are all guilty, all entitled to forgiveness, and that we are forgiven in the same way as we forgive, and condemned in the same way as we condemn. And He said that whatever we do or not do towards our fellow man, He will regard as done or not done towards Him.

That you may have grounds for believing some things that most people believe patently false about the world is one thing, and purely your business. That you follow His commandments in your behavior toward others, and resist the all-too-human temptation to judge and condemn others, is something different. That’s where you cross the line between your private business and what is not only not commanded but forbidden in the Gospels.

Live according to what Jesus said was most important, behave towards others as if you saw Christ in them, and believe what you wish. (But don’t forget my offer to discuss those issues you set forth as “I believes” in your OP; most of them are capable of several interpretations, including ones that don’t conflict with our understanding of the natural world. I mean it sincerely and not argumentatively, and I do hope you’ll take me up on it.)

3

One of the most interesting OPs I’ve seen here, if for no other reason than it is surprising and different. Regarding this:

When Jesus met with His governor, Pilate, what law did He call upon him to make? You should do what Jesus did.

4

“Separation of Church and State” has always worked for me. You have your beliefs, I have mine, and the government and laws don’t take sides for either of us.

5

What Rjung said. As long as you recognize that the secular sphere and that of religion should not impinge on each other.

6

Good luck. Just remember that it’s much, much more difficult than finding an answer that satisfies you. It’s finding an answer that satisfies everyone.

7

Get a copy of Heinlein’s first novel “For Us the Living.” Read it. The line is drawn where your religious freedoms start limiting the freedoms of others.

8

But when the government says that a 15 year old girl isn’t old enough to give her consent in order to have sex, they are taking sides with me, but not with some other people in this world. When they say that abortion is legal, they are disagreeing with me and taking sides with someone else.

Not saying that “Separation of Church and State” is a bad ideal; I actually agree with the principle. What I’m saying is that when the government says something is wrong, they are siding with someone. Obviously, they have to side with someone, somewhere. And, since, unlike Christ in the Roman Empire, I have the ability and some would say responsability to vote. Given that, who should I vote for? That is the trouble as I see it. Maybe not as clear as it can be, but hopefully clearer than in my OP.

9

I also dislike abortion, but the choice isn’t (and shouldn’t) be up to me. If you dislike abortion, contribute to groups that adopt children from unwed mothers, or do something that helps reduce abortions, but what you must recognize is that you can’t make people’s decisions for them.

I’m sure you must oppose gay marriage, but you have to recognize that secualr legality doesn’t confer religious legitimacy. You can oppose it in your church because that’s between you and your co-religionists, but you ought not to oppose the secular, non-religious rights to marriage because equality belongs to everyone.

10

Thing is, these are not purely religious issues. There are any number of entirely secular rationales that can be used to support either side of age of consent issues or abortion. The government’s taking a stand on them doesn’t constitute its taking sides on religious issues.

My own understanding of seperation of church and state goes something like this:

The state should never act based on a religious motive. It may (and often does) act in ways congruent with religion, but its reasons should be secular.

The state should never interfere with religious freedom, except where the religious “freedoms” in question constitute felonies. (i.e., laws against human sacrifice are fine)

Religious groups should never attempt to use the coercive power of the state to enforce their religious views.

11

An excellent observation…along with “Render unto Caesar what is his but render unto God what is God’s”

12

You put the Lemon in the SCOTUS test, and drink 'em both togeddah! :smiley:

13

What was created on the 7th day? :slight_smile:

14

It’s nice that you can recognize Phelps for what he is, and I appreciate the apology, but really, taking a stand against Phelps is like taking a stand against Hitler. It doesn’t take a whole lot of insight or courage to do so. I’d be more impressed if you were to take a stand against your co-religionists who mouth sentiments that are similiar in intent, if not intensity. Phelps is on the lunatic fringe of the lunatic fringe of the right. He’s a vicious little rat, but he’s ultimatly impotent in terms of political/social power. It’s the Jesse Helms and the Jerry Falwells who scare me: men who are no less bigotted than Phelps, but canny enough to couch their hatred in terms that make them seem reasonable and persuasive. Speak out against them, and you’ll earn my respect, little as it may be worth.

As for where to draw the line between your beliefs and your politics, I don’t think it’s really that hard. If you can find a valid secular reason to be opposed to something, go ahead and vote against it. If the only reasons you have to stand against something are founded in your religion, then by trying to enshrine it in law you are forcing your religion on others. Abortion, for example, does not require a religious reason to oppose it. If you believe that a fetus is the same as a person, than abortion is murder. You don’t need God to tell you that murder is bad. On the other hand, there is no valid reason to oppose gay marriage that does not stem from religion. No matter what your views on homosexuality may be, you have no right to impose your own religious restrictions on people who do not share your religion.

15

I think of it this way, especially regarding Supreme Court decisions:

The Court is trying to side with the Constitution of the United States. It is we, the people, who take sides on the issue.

I am also a Christian, though not a fundamentalist. You remind me very much of the sweet-natured and generous souls who were the fundamentalists in my youth in the 1940’s and 1950’s. They were not angry and pushy and self-righteous then – not the ones I knew.

I think about some of the girls in my school who had to wear long dresses that came almost to their ankles. They couldn’t wear makeup because that was sinful. And the high school four miles from me didn’t allow dancing of any kind. For some women, cutting their hair was a sin.

How needlessly dull and boring my high school life would have been if their ideas of sin had been allowed to become the law of the county.

Even worse, what if some people decided that St. Paul had intended women to stay out of the church life altogether? What if women had to stay home or ask their husbands or brothers for permission to leave the house – just because that was considered “the right thing to do.”

What if marriage becomes so “protected” that it is just for certain people and you have to get the government’s permission to make your relationship a legal bond? What happens if they say no and you are never ever allowed to marry the person you love with all of your heart? Would Jesus celebrate with the government or weep with the lovers?

16

So you believe that most of us are going to burn in Hell for all eternity, but apart from that you’re not judging us and are prepared to play nice? Big of you. May I ask what you base your beliefs upon - faith?

17

I just want to say that I appreciate the spirit and intent of SCCajun’s statement even if I am his philosphical polar opposite on just about every view espoused. Welcome aboard, SCC.
I would actually welcome your input into any factual debates on a few of the issues you’ve listed. (Evolution/Biblical inerrancy). We have precious few Fundamentalists who are willing to engage very deeply in those discussions and I think you will find that our debates, while rigorous, can be quite civil and mutually respectful. I expect that I will seldom agree with you but that doesn’t mean I won’t welcome you as a member or fairly consider what you say.

18

Shut up until he PAYS, dude! :wink:

Jokes aside, Miller, kaizen. He’s taking his first steps and we must be patient and supportive.

SCCajun, welcome. Though I disagree with some of the specifics of your beliefs you state them so eloquently and politely I cannot help but be impressed.

19

I am a (very) long-time lurker. The civility in this thread pushed me over the edge to pay the $9.95 and sign up.

I am a conservative (which is not the same thing as Fundamentalist) Christian theologian. I’m not particularly fond of debating, but I look forward to participating in this board more.

20

The rest.