Fighting Fundamentalism

Love without doctrine is satanic in nature.
A Christian must have both.
There is a command in the Scripture given in the book of Jude.
"Contend for the Faith." Take it seriously.

 

I don't. I don't believe in the heresies of the RCC, and Baptists existed before the Reformation. I am not a Protestant.

 

Come on folks.....let us put the FUN back into fundamentalism:thumbs::1_grouphug:

 

Protestants existed before the Reformation. Most scholars would say that groups like the Hussites and the followers of Wycliffe were predecessors to the Reformation. I believe substantial evidence of the Waldensians as being more protestant (no evidence of them being Baptist) exists. Augustine's writings were extremely influential to that of the Reformers.

Protestant theology did not merely come about during the Reformation, as it seems some wish to label. Rather, Protestant theology only found the most dramatic rise during the Reformation.

To be frank, I am more Protestant than I am Baptist. The term Baptist includes both heretics and orthodox beliefs. It includes mystics, Baptismal Regeneration believers, modernists, and even many who have denied the trinity. That is only people we know about in the 1500's and before. Protestants is a theology that is more defined theologically.

If I was asked, "Give up the name Baptist or Protestant", I would give up the name Baptist. Why? Besides believers Baptism, there is little else that is defined by the name "Baptist."

 

How do you define fundamentalism?

 

Would Paul's words in Galatians 1:8-9 toward his oppoents be regarded as unloving in your view?

Would Paul's actions and words in Acts 13:10 be regarded as unloving in your view:

And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?

Would Paul's instructions in 2 Thes. 3:6,14 toward a "brother" be re regarded by you as unkind and unloving.

Would Paul's choice of terms in Philippians 3:2 be regarded by you as a lack of charity toward his opponents:


Php 3:2 Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision.

Do you think that He could have been more loving and charitable in his responses above or were these reactions Spirit directed words and reactions?

 

Do you really want to fight this?

Or do you want to fight the mentality of what is common to Elitist? This is common in Judaism where Juvenal states in his satire

Which seems reincarnated in Christian seperatist congregations (known as fundalmentalist) fearing further involvement in the "world" but behaving as Juvenal describes above.

 

Of course you claim that you "wholeheartedly believe in ALL of the fundementals" but it is that claim that is being challenged in regard to essential salvation, which, must be regarded as a fundemental or nothing else really matters as everything is then reduced to theoretical debate.

 

You know very well, that is but one version of it.

 

I am a fundamentalist, specifically an Independent Fundamental Baptist. I believe that the further clarification is necessary because of the way the media uses or misuses the term "fundamentalist" today. I am not a Muslim fundamentalist or even a Charismatic fundamentalist. I am Baptist.

Furthermore, the first time I heard the term "fighting fundamentalist" was on this board and only in relation to a particular website, which oft times had nothing good to say about this board. So I have only a negative connotation about that term.

Since a fundamentalist is one who believes in the fundamentals of the faith, and practices them, I would assume that you are not, especially since you come on this board and hold such disdain for them. But that is a pity. I don't know how one can even be saved without clinging to the very fundamentals of our faith, such as justification by faith.

 

Was Jesus in agreement with you?

John 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

 

No, it is contrary to YOUR teachings not Paul's. You keep asserting this but have yet been able to defend it from the cheif teacher of it in the scriptures - Paul.