So why are the old Fundamentalist mad at the young ones?

[Salamander]

Originally posted by Gold Dragon:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MikeinGhana:
True, but sometimes the outside is a reflection of what is on the inside. "Out" of the heart flows the issues of life.

Agreed. And when someone's heart is totally in love with Christ and praising His grace to a sinner, the outside often reflects it whether it is done to hymns, rock music, chanting, quoting scripture, dancing for joy or however they chose to externally express it. The pure inside of the cup overwhelms what the cup appears like on the outside to the Pharisees. But some only see the outside of the cup. </font>[/QUOTE]I've seen a few cups on the inside that seemed to be white inside, but everyone that was white on the inside is just as white on the outside.

By your estimation of "however anyone wants to externally express their praise, I think i'll start praISING hIM FOR hIS GRACE BY playing tarot cards, next, blackjack, according to what the tarot cards say, then i'll do some more stupid things that reproach Christ and all in the name of christ

(Forgive me, Lord, I just had to.)

 

[MikeinGhana]

As I said on another post, there must be a line drawn in the sand that when one crosses it he has gone too far and it is sin. I cannot draw that line, neither can you. But just because we cannot draw the line does not mean that it is not there.

The problem with this mentality is that it is left to the individual believer to determine just how far he or she wants to push the envelope. Like it or not, that is the case. I think it is highly hypocritical and unfair for someone to blast another person for holding to a Biblical standard for living. When every man does that which is right in his eyes so he can just "Praise Jesus" in his own way, we leave the suthority of the Word of God behind.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

If all you older ones had gotten a pm like the one I got tonight from a BB member, you would be mad at the younger ones too.

Calling my wife ungodly because her hair is not long enough to meet his standards.

And then has the nerve to tell people the only thing one has to do to get to heaven is believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.

From the PM, it looks like he is adding to the requirements by stating his own doctrine as well.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

This is part of the destructive nature of some in fundamentalism, judging other spiritual standing because the look or do things differently from personal standards.

We cannot judge a man's heart by the way he looks or because he may do something we don't like, but which is not covered by the word of God.

I fear both sides are guilty of the same sin at times.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

I know I have said some things on this board, but have never told anyone that they were unsaved because of participating in something I see as unbiblical... or for what they wear.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

However judging one's spirituality based on personal preferences can also cause offence. It goes deeper than just questioning salvation.

 

[Paul33]

Does it help that the schools and colleges and churches mandate certain behaviors to be fully acceptable to the leaders/pastors/deacons?

Where one person must refrain from a certain activity because of disposition and temptation, another believer may be free.

I remember a man who got saved out of pornography. Needless to say, the beach scene was out for him. Others could take their families to the beach and not have a problem.

So the "no mixed swimming" mantra preached at some schools and colleges is a blanket attempt to solve "some" people's problems with lust.

So we all have to live the same regardless of temptations we struggle with individually.

 

[MikeinGhana]

Paul, you make a good point. We do have liberties as individuals and as individuals we will all stand at the Judgment Seat. C4K also makes a good point about the attitude we have toward others who do not believe as we do. That being said, there must be a line somewhere that God has drawn that a person can cross and just plain go too far. Here is a question I think has yet to be answered: Can we know what that line is? Is it a matter of a person setting that line himself according to his interpretation of Biblical principle? OK, so I lied, two questions!

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by MikeinGhana:
Paul, you make a good point. We do have liberties as individuals and as individuals we will all stand at the Judgment Seat. C4K also makes a good point about the attitude we have toward others who do not believe as we do. That being said, there must be a line somewhere that God has drawn that a person can cross and just plain go too far. Here is a question I think has yet to be answered: Can we know what that line is? Is it a matter of a person setting that line himself according to his interpretation of Biblical principle? OK, so I lied, two questions!

I would say that there are certain lines that a more clearly drawn in scripture, other lines that are fuzzier and other issues that have no line at all.

Cultural style of music and dress (aside from men wearing men's clothing and women wearing women's clothing) appropriate to worship are issues which there has been no line at all drawn in scripture, and yet many see otherwise because they eisegete scripture to support their cultural biases against other cultural styles.

 

[Paul33]

Which "clear" commands of Scripture need to be obeyed and which can be ignored?

I think the Bible is clear that children are a blessing from the Lord and a heritage. I haven't seen anything in Scripture that nullifes the command to "be fruitful and multiply."

Yet many fundamentalists ridicule this attempt by my wife and I to be obedient to this command. Not that we are trying to have as many children as we can, but that we are allowing the reproductive system that God has created in humans to work without interverence, which includes breastfeeding on demand which suppresses ovulation, etc.

Now these same fundamentalists are quick to tell me how I should raise these children, where to send them to school, how to dress them, and what activities they can participate in, etc.

So which command is "clear" and which is not?

Somehow, each Bible-believing Christian should be challenged by others to think deeply about the Scriptures within the context of historic orthodox doctrine. But it seems that each person must be given grace and freedom to apply the commands of Scripture to one's self and his or her family. How I seek to be in obedience to the commands of Scripture might look different from another's attempt. Within orthodox faith and morality, why can't we give each other that freedom without neglecting to challenge each other kindly to consider other applications, all without threat of separation?

 

[bapmom]

Paul, dealing with your specific example above, Id say that attitude is not a function of Fundamentalism, but rather it is the fact that our Christian circles have allowed a worldly influence to color their thinking in the area of how many children we "ought" to have.

Ive thought alot about this, too, as we often have gotten the same response from people as you and your wife seem to have gotten.

I do believe that this is a particular "blind spot" which Fundamentalism has, right along with the other Christian labels. Though I have seen it start to turn around in some groups.....my church in particular is one of them.

 

[MikeinGhana]

Cultural style of music and dress (aside from men wearing men's clothing and women wearing women's clothing) appropriate to worship are issues which there has been no line at all drawn in scripture, and yet many see otherwise because they eisegete scripture to support their cultural biases against other cultural styles. [/QB][/QUOTE]


I would almost agree with you Gold Dragon, except for the statement, "appropriate for worship." The Bible does clearly teach modest dress, I believe for both men and women. To a point, this is subjective. No one would disagree that nudity would constitute inappropriate or immodest dress. But how much nudity is acceptable? Where does the line get drawn? Above the knee? Below the knee? To the ankle? I am not trying to be a smart alec here or start a debate about women's dress. My wife has her convictions and I support them. What I am saying is that there must be a line that when crossed it becomes a sin.

I really do believe this same argument can be made for music. I live in Africa where the drums are everywhere and in everything.There is some cultural based music which is pleasant to loisten to, but there is no way it is either appropriate or acceptable for a worship service. Its not because I do not like this music but it crosses a line that I think is drawn by scriptural principles.

Certainly you would agree with me that verses such as:

"Make no provision for the flesh"
"Do all to the glory of God."
"Abstain from all apearance of evil."

(And others that talk about our liberty becoming a stumblingblock and causing a weaker brother to sin.)

These could "possibly" weigh in on this discussion.

 

[John of Japan]

Originally posted by Paul33:
Which "clear" commands of Scripture need to be obeyed and which can be ignored?

I think the Bible is clear that children are a blessing from the Lord and a heritage. I haven't seen anything in Scripture that nullifes the command to "be fruitful and multiply."

Yet many fundamentalists ridicule this attempt by my wife and I to be obedient to this command. Not that we are trying to have as many children as we can, but that we are allowing the reproductive system that God has created in humans to work without interverence, which includes breastfeeding on demand which suppresses ovulation, etc.

Now these same fundamentalists are quick to tell me how I should raise these children, where to send them to school, how to dress them, and what activities they can participate in, etc.

So which command is "clear" and which is not?

Somehow, each Bible-believing Christian should be challenged by others to think deeply about the Scriptures within the context of historic orthodox doctrine. But it seems that each person must be given grace and freedom to apply the commands of Scripture to one's self and his or her family. How I seek to be in obedience to the commands of Scripture might look different from another's attempt. Within orthodox faith and morality, why can't we give each other that freedom without neglecting to challenge each other kindly to consider other applications, all without threat of separation?

Paul, you will be happy to know (I hope!) that John R. Rice taught the exact same thing you are talking about here and have mentioned in other places on the BB. My wife and I also followed this position, but though we prayed for 12 kids, God in His wisdom only gave us one.

And I agree with what you are saying about giving each other freedom--an area that some in all segments of Christianity have trouble with, as witness the mentoring controversies in various groups.

 

[Paul33]

Hi John,

Thanks. It really is an issue of trust (in regards to children). Now that you mention it, I do recall reading John R. Rice's book on the home!

He was a kind and caring man.

 

[John of Japan]

Originally posted by Paul33:
Hi John,

Thanks. It really is an issue of trust (in regards to children). Now that you mention it, I do recall reading John R. Rice's book on the home!

He was a kind and caring man.

Thanks for the compliment to Grandpa. He was kind and caring, but he also stood for the right. I am privileged to be one of the few people who knew him who was spanked by him.

 

[Salamander]

Originally posted by MikeinGhana:
Cultural style of music and dress (aside from men wearing men's clothing and women wearing women's clothing) appropriate to worship are issues which there has been no line at all drawn in scripture, and yet many see otherwise because they eisegete scripture to support their cultural biases against other cultural styles.

I would almost agree with you Gold Dragon, except for the statement, "appropriate for worship." The Bible does clearly teach modest dress, I believe for both men and women. To a point, this is subjective. No one would disagree that nudity would constitute inappropriate or immodest dress. But how much nudity is acceptable? Where does the line get drawn? Above the knee? Below the knee? To the ankle? I am not trying to be a smart alec here or start a debate about women's dress. My wife has her convictions and I support them. What I am saying is that there must be a line that when crossed it becomes a sin.

I really do believe this same argument can be made for music. I live in Africa where the drums are everywhere and in everything.There is some cultural based music which is pleasant to loisten to, but there is no way it is either appropriate or acceptable for a worship service. Its not because I do not like this music but it crosses a line that I think is drawn by scriptural principles.

Certainly you would agree with me that verses such as:

"Make no provision for the flesh"
"Do all to the glory of God."
"Abstain from all apearance of evil."

(And others that talk about our liberty becoming a stumblingblock and causing a weaker brother to sin.)

These could "possibly" weigh in on this discussion. [/QB][/QUOTE]I suppose discernement between what is worldly and what is godly and modest has no place in any discussion on these "issues"?

 

[Paul33]

Why is nudity a sin?

A woman in a bikini is much more likely to become an object of lust than a nude woman.

But back to my original question. Why is nudity a sin?

 

[MRCoon]

I think that Peter's vision of the unclean animals coming out of the sky and God's guidance regarding this vision should be the template for our relationship with others. There are somethings that other Christians have not been convicted of by the Holy Spirit and for me to attack them because they are not on the same "Spiritual Level" as I am is contrary to what Christ taught but to ignore them and not disciple them is also contrary to the teachings in the Bible.

I would say that those who instantly criticize another or want to argue a point (or counterpoint) is a sign of being as guilty as the Jews that hurt the first Church by focusing not on Christ but on the "rules" that they brought into the Church. While I attend a Church that has standards more in line with what I believe God expects of us as Christians, I am also sensitive (without compromising my standards) to not burden a younger brother or sister with my standards and to encourage them in their growth as a Christian first and foremost.

I sum all of this by saying, I would not force my 11 month old daughter to eat steak just because she has teeth but I would encourage her to use her teeth by chewing things at her level and this will better prepare her for the steak someday and will be certain to allow her system to handle it and digest it.

 

[MikeinGhana]

I am sure most people involved in this discussion would agree that we are not talking about forcing our convictions on a new convert or a younger Christian. We are not even talking about making "rules" that are applied across the board. I believe what we are asking is, "Are there lines that one can cross where these issues become a sin?" Can every man determine what is right and what is wrong?

Paul, nudity is a sin for several reasons. God clothed Eve when she realized she was naked. That was a sin to her. Secondly, women have a responsilbility not to tempt men sexualy with their bodies. That is what modesty is all about. God has set standards by which we are to dress. Please do not get me wrong here. I am not the dress police and neither are you. I am simply saying that there is a line, where is it?

 

[MRCoon]

I think that line is where we do not put a stumbling block in front of another brother or sister.

My wife doesn't wear pants because of a modesty issue because some dresses are less modest than pants...my wife dresses a certain because of her testimony. We could argue modesty, history, cultural, and many other points but ultimately if my wife and I feel the Lord leading a certain way and calling attention to our testimony then we must follow that testimony. Now I encourage my youth group to dress a certain way for testimony of them and the church but I also don't refuse or treat any differently because of their dress.

I am often reminded of a man & woman who I feel demonstrated the working of the Holy Spirit best. They were involved in a traffic accident (a fender bender) with our Assoc Pastor who was able to witness to them over the few times that they had to meet to resolve the accident issues and the Lord blessed the faithfulness of the Assoc Pastor by allowing him to lead them to the Lord. Well, needless to say they started to come to church and then started to get involved with some of the ministries. Now when they first started to come to church he wore shorts, had long hair in a ponytail, and wore an earring...but through the Holy Spirit's leading not preaching or counselling as far as "Baptist or Church" standards go...you could see them changing as they were convicted to have a testimony and demonstrate a change from the old creature to the new creature with a testimony for the Lord. I think this is the goal and purpose of discipleship!!