europe needs missionary's more then ever

I agree with InHim2002, as a fellow Brit/European: most of the US style fundamentalist preachers we get over here, either on the GOD Channel courtesy of TBN or 'live' in the flesh tend to be white (very occasionally black) males who shout a lot, sweat a lot, quote Scripture brutally out of context to back up their particular agenda or hobby horse and ask their audience for large sums of money. Now that kind fo stuff may go down well in the States, but most people, even Baptists and other evangelicals over here, just laugh in its face.

If you want to effectively evangelise us ( and we need it as much as the next place) you need to be culturally relevant - come and live and work amongs us first, learn what makes us tick etc

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

Matt,

I would not describe those you detail as fundamentalists, they are certainly not fundamental Baptists. They are charismatics, of the health & wealth genre. They are charlatans. But if the truth be known they have a huge following in the UK and Europe. You may laugh at them, I may disdain them, but a great number of people here follow them. Recently a Joyce Meyer show in Belfast's King's Hall (I wouldn't call it a service) brought hundreds of people from all over the UK. I know this because I was on a flight from London to Belfast with many of them. Europe does need missionaries. The UK needs missionaries, and the presence of such religious gangsters hogging our air waves only heightens the need for sound Bible teachers and preachers from whatever parts to come over and help us in proclaiming the truth.

 

Originally posted by David Moore:

Brother David,

As we say here in the U.S., "You hit the nail right on the head!"

 

I would say, David, that these guys are fundamentalists; indeed, virtually every charismatic I have ever come across has been a fundamentalist (as indeed was I when I was in that movement). I obviously cannot speak for N Ireland but I would say in England that there is a broad conflation in people's minds (Christian and otherwise) of fundamentalism and hyper-charismaticism. This in turn is damaging IMO to the Gospel.

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

so he is not a Christian then? The Archbishop is, in fact, a pagan?!?!?!?

wow. </font>[/QUOTE]I heard the man say that he was a pagan in an interview on the BBC shortly following his being installed in the office as the Archbishop of Canterbury. Additionally, he said that he would be participating in some pagan ceremony held yearly at Stonehenge. Do you not find it distressing that the leader of the Church of England is a self admitted pagan. Don't you think that the fact that this man was even considered for the office of Archbishop says something about the spiritual condition of the nation and the Chruch of England as a whole?

 

Here are two pretty good definitions of Fundamentalism (I copied most of the following material from the Fundamental Forum here on the BB):

Please note that there are five “fundamentals” of the faith. These five distinctives were first defined as “Fundamentalist Doctrine” at the Niagara Conference in 1895. The historic Fundamentals of the Faith are:

1. The Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of God
2. Jesus Christ is virgin born and sinless
3. Jesus Christ died a vicarious substitutionary death
4. Jesus Christ literally (bodily) rose from the dead and ascended into Heaven
5. Jesus Christ will literally (bodily) return for His kingdom

If one holds to all five of the above beliefs then one is a fundamentalist. The reason that most Charismatics are not truly Fundamentalists is that their theology permits them to believe that they can and do receive revelation from God that is outside of the Word of God (the Bible). Some Charismatics will say that they have “received a fresh word from God,” meaning that God has spoken to them as he once spoke to the prophets of the Old Testament (verbally and audibly). For example the Charismatic, Oral Roberts, once said that God told him that if he did not raise one million dollars that He [God] would "call him [Roberts] home." The Charismatic T.V. preachers/evangelists that you are talking about seeing most certainly do not represent Conservative Baptist Fundamentalists here in the U.S.

[ July 24, 2003, 07:48 AM: Message edited by: BibleboyII ]

 

All the hyper-charismatics I've ever come across would subscribe to the 'fundamentals' as delineated by Niagara. Indeed, they tend to be much more fundamentalist than most non- or less-charismatic evangelicals I know

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

Hi Matt, may I suggest that perhaps you need to adjust your definition of "What and who is a Fundamentalist" ?

 

I agree with Arubian Baptist Matt. Your undertsanding of fundamentalism is not right. Whatever Charismatics profess, what they actually practice puts them outside the parameters of Biblical fundamentalism.

 

Er...no - if they subscribe to Niagara, that makes 'em fundamentalists.


Yours in Christ

Matt

 

Brother David,

That is "spot on!"

 

Er... no Matt. The problem is that they go beyond those five fundamentals in their theology and readily accept "revelation" that is outside the fundamental principle of the inspired, inerrant Word of God. The old fight between modernism/post-modernism and fundamentalism takes on a new twist with introduction of Charismatic Theology. Fundamentalists stand their ground on the truth of the Five Fundamentals of the Faith. While modernists/post-modernists, and Charismatics accept truth from sources other than the Word of God.

 

hundreds of people in a country of 60 million do not a 'huge following' make

 

The Free Church of Scotland has a good article on how American missionaries fail to relate with the culture in Scotland
http://www.freechurch.org/robbo/robbobg.htm

 

So, InHim, are you trying to have us believe that the GOD channel, TBN and others are broadcasting night and day throughout the UK satellite stations to entertain a half dozen Charismatics? You know as well as I do that the Charismatic movement is one of the few areas of modern religious life in Europe which has experienced growth. But fundamentalism as a movement and theological identity is not the same as the Charismatic movement.

 

Speaking as an American of Scots heritage I see a lot of Scottish Pride in that article. By all rights the Scots do have a lot to be proud about. The vast majority of the great pioneer missionaries were Scottish. Likewise, the author did raise some good points about being culturally sensitive and the need for proud American missionaries not to come across with an air of superiority (especially when dealing with proud Scots).

However, I also read a bit of sour grapes between the lines of that article. I have friends who are Southern Baptist missionaries in Scotland right now. They are having a major impact among the urban youth of Glasgow. They are working with a postmodern generation that is fed up with dead cultural Christianity and who wants to see a spiritual life that is real, that produces a changed life, and that has meaning. My missionary friends are living out the vibrant Christian life before these youth. They allow these youth to see what a real personal relationship with a living Jesus Christ looks and feels like. They most certainly are not targeting dissatisfied church hopping Church of Scotland members as the author of that article implies. They are reaching a radically unchurched generation of youth that wants nothing to do with the irrelevant dead Christianity of their parents and grandparents.

Finally, the author of the article demonstrates that he has a great misunderstanding (or no knowledge at all) of the Southern Baptist Cooperative Program (the way our International Mission Board funds our Missionaries). Because of the SBC Cooperative Program SBC Missionaries do not have to worry about making reports of great success to churches back home to generate more/continued funding for their missions work.

Like I said the author raises some valid points; however, he also appears to be blowing off a little personal steam over what looks like a bit of dented Scots pride.

 

I think that is incorrect - to put the statement in its context - David said:

I stand by my assesment - a few hundred people from a country of sixty million do not a 'huge following' make.

maybe not half a dozen but no more than a few thousand I would guess - I don't get tbn or the God channel and I have cable - the channels are not included in any package that I could buy. Anyhow, do you have any viewing figures?

aside from Islam