Skip to main content

Reply to "MY Way or Hell!"

Originally posted by kresge:
Originally posted by shebakoby:
Originally posted by Vox:
No wait, I want to understand this. Shebakoby, what is the difference between your beliefs and those of a fundamentalist? From your use of the capital F, I gather you distinguish yourself from a specific organized movement. But is there a difference between you and a fundamentalist with a little-F? Little-F meaning a person not aligned with a traditional evangelical movement, but who nevertheless fits the definition of a person who insists on the literal word of the Bible being the literal truth, who insists that any other way, and any other belief, leads to hell? That sounds a lot like you to me, and to Kweli and Oshun, so I'm curious what the difference is, from your perspective.

No, that is NOT the definition of fundamentalist. The term has been distorted by the media.

THIS is the REAL definition of fundamentalist:

-the doctrines of a fundamentalist church are based on certain "fundamentals"--_WHICH DO NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO DO WITH WHAT IS TAUGHT IN SCRIPTURE_. An example of a "fundamentalist" doctrine that is not based on what the Bible actually says is the idea that the bread and wine of the sacrament of holy communion are ONLY SYMBOLS. Whereas, the Roman Catholics beleive in transubstantiation (transformation from bread and wine to body and blood) while LUTHERANS ALONE believe that both bread and wine and body and blood are present (after the pastor is done "sanctifying" it. We call this the "real presence."

"Legalism" is a hallmark of fundamentalism. Fundies also usually reject infant baptism (if they are Baptists).

You seem to be confused as to what 'literalism' actually entails. Some people do not have a common-sense idea of it. Most people accuse fundamentalists of beleiving that everything in the Bible is literally literal, including clear instances of metaphor. If a PLAIN READING indicates plain language (meant to be taken "literally"), then that's what it says. Cases of metaphor are easily identified and taken into context.

For instance:

In Psalms, Job, and other places, metaphoric language is clearly used. In these cases (such as the "storehouses of ice and snow" (Job 38:22, NIV; the KJV has a better translation, rendering "treasures" instead of "storehouses"), what God is saying makes a point but does not indicate (at least in regards to the NIV translation) that there are literal buildings filled with ice and snow.

Your definition of fundamentalist clearly falls flat especially considering that "fundamentalists" DON'T take Christ literally when he says "this IS my body." They rationalize it away. This is a clear indication that the fundamentalists DON'T always take every piece of scripture "literally"!

And the belief that Christ is the only way to Heaven hardly makes one a "fundamentalist." Other churches who do not have fundamentalist doctrines also believe this.

I think you'd better read up on Lutherans before you decide to start flinging around the "fundamentalist" moniker.

Are you Missouri or Wisconsin Synod?

Neither. LCC (Lutheran Church-Canada), baby. (Closest to Missouri, that's what we used to be).