Where are you in the spectrum?

That was hard for me to answer! As a Southern Baptist in the deep south, our church is VERY evangelical. I am also VERY conservative! The Fundamental wives in our home school group don't wear pants or make-up and are KJV Onlies so that would prevent me from saying I'm a fundamentalist BUT... I consider my basic beliefs to be very fundamental.

What would YOU call me?

Diane

 

The Fundamental wives in our home school group don't wear pants or make-up and are KJV Onlies

Is that what "fundamental" has come to?

 

My question for the survey would be, in comparison to what? In a Baptist group, I am a liberal, but in the wider church I am a moderate. It all depends on who you are comparing me to.

 

Grasshopper, unfortunately the term fundamentalism has come to take on the negative connotations of legalism that is practiced in several different denominations today. Those who are called fundamentalist often don't realize this, rather, they are still using the original definition of belief that the Holy Bible is fundamental to Christian living and teaching.

As for the poll, it was incomplete. I tend to be evangelical, conservative(in that I don't try to take away or add to God's Word), fundamental in the original usage of the word, and liberal in the extent of giving back to God.
As for anyone that chooses to be moderate, just remember the fate of the luke warm Laodiceans is equivalent to vomit.

 

The terms have little or no meaning in Canada. A liberal can be quite evangelical in approach. We tend to steer clear of the term fundamentalist because these are mostly pentecostal in Canada.

Our group is called The Fellowship of Evangelical Baptists in Canada. When it was first formed in 1953, the term fundamentalist had a distinct meaning; one who believed the Bible to be the Word of God, period. It did not mean premil, dispensational which seems to be an American thing. To Americans, I would prolly be called a liberal. I just don;t like labels, except on my shirts for laundry purposes.

I fundamentally believe the Bible is the word of God in the original documents and we have in our possession reliable copies. I am liberal in application and attitude, but generally considered to be conservative in Canada.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Not really...

Being "moderate" is not the same thing as being "lukewarm" since the terms "liberal" and "conservative" do not correspond to being "hot" or "cold".

 

BB is right. [snip] It has nothing to do with hot or cold.

[ May 07, 2003, 10:56 PM: Message edited by: TomVols ]

 

In my Father's house are many mansions.........

The one on the hill without windows or doors is for some Fundamentalists........they think they are the only ones there.....such arrogance! Such rudeness!

 

You do realize you're killing any shred of credibility you have left, don't you?

 

Ruth, not to trouble yourself. The arrogance of one does not negate the grace and love shown by the vast majority.

You know where you stand, and the Lord loves you for that. God bless.

Cheers,

Jim

A Canadian conservative

 

Questioning a person's salvation is not allowable under BB rules. Besides, if you were really concerned about their salvation, wouldn't you witness to them rather than deride them?

Carry on....

 

Those who wish to redefine God are lost. They have created an idol.

Jim, is it arrogant to say that salvation is in Christ alone? Yes. Do I care? No. It is true either way. So, when a liberal accuses such from me, I am more likely to consider it honor. So, are all American liberals equal to Canadian conservatives?

Daniel David
Rebuke them sharply (still relevant for today)

 

Ruth, a moderate is just another name for a person who either lacks the ability to spine to stand for a position enough to say that those who are of the opposing side are wrong.

Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.

That is exclusive. Do you recognize this?

Moses, the prophets, David, Solomon, Jesus, Paul, Peter, Matthew, Mark, John, Luke and other biblical writers considered Scripture to have divine origin and therefore perfect and absolutely true in every area.

That is exclusive. Do you recognize this?

Jesus claimed to be God. There is no other acceptable view.

That is exclusive. Do you recognize this?

and on and on...

 

1. I wasn't aware that grace and love included pretending that false teachers and bad theology were okay. You are seriously misguided as to what grace and love are. I may come across harsh, but I don't pretend that lost people are saved for the sake of your definition of "grace". What you really mean is tolerance, don't you Jim?

2. I read that also in the Bible. Sincerity will cover a multitude of sins.

3. No doubt.

 

I think I recognize who you are by the tone and sarcasm in the post. You are not worth even reading. I pity any church that gets stuck with you as a pastor. This dear woman did not deserve wot you said to her. You ought to be ashamed. You can shovel your dirt at me cos I can either ignore it or feed it back. The fact is, scripture also says to not pour out the message before swine, but rather to wipe the dust off the sandals and go on one's way.

Your remarks are not worth the time of day.

 

I am amazed (not really) at the lack of love and grace you demonstrate to those who believe you are wrong Jim. Apparently, those who cry for tolerance are not tolerant of those who are not tolerant. Classic.

Btw, that might be a warm blanket at night for you, but I am concerned enough for the souls of people to at the very least, present what I am convinced of. They can of course reject it. That is not my responsibility. I just deliver. Did not Paul seek to persuade?

This is not directed at anyone here, but being old and spineless is not the same as having wisdom.