Between Two Extremes: Liberalism and Fundamentalism

Veritas Maximus »

Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:25 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 1

Mr. Craven has exposed a real and pervasive problem in the contemporary American church and the uncharitable and sometimes "catty" responses reveal the very thing which Craven's article addresses. I think he offers a fairly clear and thorough explanation of conservative fundamentalism, which is not the same as the "fundamentals" of the faith. The fact that some readers fail to understand his helpful critique is not grounds for condemning his assertions. Perhaps those in question should endeavor to understand the issue more fully before attacking. Unfortunately, attacking other believers is an all-too typical fundamentalist reaction.

pgcfriend »

Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:20 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

This discussion on Fundamentalism in the article is confusing to me. I think his view of it is way too narrow. There are those that do not think like that. He must not have met many 'fundamentalists' that do not approach evangelism in other ways. Maybe he needs to meet more people. Talk about us verses them. That is how this article is sounding to me.

I take the definition of fundamentalism as stated by the Five Fundamentals of the Faith. Many feel that 'we' are trying to force people to do something. I think the issue to many that I know is that when sin is tolerated and legislated it will decrease what the church can do. I know in my mind when I approach legislation dealing with 'sin' issues my issue is not to change anyone's behavior. That can only happen with a heart change. The Bible makes that very clear. However as Christians we are to stand for the truth. It makes it more difficult when our government legalizes sin. Inevitably after that is legislated laws will pass to restrict the speech of those that speak against it. This is my issue when I'm engaging someone about 'sin' issues.

For example the hate crimes legislation that would make illegal 'discrimination' against homosexuals, lesbians, transgender and bixesuals is a major problem. Those in Congress that were asked about this made it clear that if a preacher speaks out against this and someone that heard him hurts another person using his sermon as an excuse, that preacher could be charged with hate speech. They rejected an amendment that would exclude ministers and churches. So it is clear what they want to do. They want to use this so-called hate crime legislation to stop the church from speaking against it. This is the issue and I think this is some of what motivates many in the public arena to speak out on the so-called sin issues.

As all of us continue to seek the Lord we will get to where we need to be. It does not have to be a war as presented in this article.

GreatNW »

Thu Sep 27, 2007 7:04 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

Craven is right on the mark. Fundamentalism is no longer defined by it's original intent, but by what it has become and how it is viewed. It has become a stumbling block. Liberalism has long since exposed it's own weaknesses and is decline, but we are unable able to step in to this vacuum left by the collapse of liberalism for the reasons Craven has outlined

seaport12 »

Tue Sep 25, 2007 4:59 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

Michael's article is about as helpful and perceptive as a legally blind man writing on the extremes of kick-boxing versus WWF wrestling or trying to interpret a theological centrist position on Paul's admonition "But all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner"(1Co 14:40)
Michael: Back to the drawing board on this one. Your view appears to be skewed, your comparison imbalanced and your conclusions are found wanting. Oh, and 'yes' - please answer Gratus (9.24.07), what is your definition of fundamentalism and who are they?
Mike Dixon

vdawg80 »

Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:53 am Agree: 7   Disagree: 0

Churches, seminaries and ministries around the world that are theologically fundamental are lovingly carrying out wonderful work in the name of our Lord. Your article would be improved by carefully distinguishing between these ministries and those that you see as manifesting political, nationalistic and legalistic views to the extreme. Else you truly do a disservice to them. Further, you mislead "unwitting Christians" who have not yet had opportunity to do "a serious survey of history" to learn how the term "fundamental" came about (from The Fundamentals issued in the early 1900's).

RBB »

Mon Sep 24, 2007 5:48 pm Agree: 7   Disagree: 1

Fundamentalism comes from a document called The Five Fundamentals of the Faith. They are:

1) The inerrancy and full authority of Scripture
2) The Virgin Birth and Deity of Christ
3)The Substitutional Atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ
4) The Bodily Resurrection
5) The Literal second coming of the Lord

I for one an definitely a Fundamentalist.

Sorry it's more than one sentence.

Gratus »

Mon Sep 24, 2007 1:13 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 0

Dear Michael Craven, can you please tell me in one sentence what is Christian fundamentalism? And please tell me whether I am a Christian fundamentalist if I accept the Bible as God's Word.