The errors in the Fundamentalist Movement

[evangelist6589]

http://gracelifepulpit.media.s3.amazonaws.com/pdf/deadright_.pdf

First let me say that I am not saying that all IFB churches and people are bad. There are plenty of good and Godly people in the movement. Second this is not to say that the SBC, CBA, Missionary Alliance, and other denominations have got it together because they do not. I have criticized those denominations as well, just in different areas. However since we are speaking of the IFB movement let me say that as a former BJU seminary student & staff member and having been in Greenville, SC for 6 years I will say I believe there is allot of legalism in the movement, and Phil did an excellent job presenting that and MOST of his points were spot on. No he is not perfect and may have had his information on John R. Rice backwards and some other details, but suffice to say he did a good job with this presentation and refutation of the Fundamentalist movement.

So am I a hypocrite? Yes as I used to preach Fundamentalist and separation to the T at one time and caused waves in Way of the Master camps because they listened to contemporary worship, drunk alcohol, danced, and had other Fundamentalist taboo's that BJU taught me to separate from. But God has shown me the error of my ways, and I see know that plenty of God honoring Way of the Master evangelists drink alcohol, dance, listen to contemporary worship, have long hair, wear shorts, and go to movie theaters. God is interested in the heart more than the traditions of "religious people."

Just because someone drinks alcohol, dances, goes to the movies, and listens to CCM does not make them a bad person. The HUGE PROBLEM I saw in the IFB movement in Greenville was that ones righteousness and standing before God was not about their walk with God, but more about what they did and who they hung out with. This is Arminian theology no question and goes against the Bible. My righteousness and standing before God is not about me, but about God and what he did for me (Eph 2:8-10).

Many IFB will frown upon "New Evangelical" because of how they dress to church, and who they hang out with, but perhaps God frowns upon the Fundamentalist and religious person because they think dressing up to church, not drinking alcohol, not dancing, going to the movies, and such are what earns their favor before God. This is not true!!!

Jesus himself did things that many Fundamentalist would frown upon. For example.

He ate with tax collectors and sinners

Matthew 9:10-12
While Jesus was having dinner at Matthew’s house, many tax collectors and “sinners” came and ate with him and his disciples. When the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, “why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?” On hearing this, Jesus said, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor but the sick…”

He was relevant with the culture

Does that mean that we become like old fogies, cast into the culture of a generation and look as if we have not had a modern thought in years? No, it’s not about the methods or the style but the substance and the message. When we believe what the Word of God says then we will be relevant in our culture, but will not alter the message.

David Jeremiah-- Hope in the Midst of Future. Radio Broadcast, June 6, 2008

Jesus showed people grace

John 8:3-11 (KJV)
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

Once again I am not saying that all IFB Churches and people are bad, because thats not true. I am broad-brushing the movement which I believe for the most part has sunk into legalism.

 

[agedman]

http://gracelifepulpit.media.s3.amazonaws.com/pdf/deadright_.pdf

First let me say that I am not saying that all IFB churches and people are bad. There are plenty of good and Godly people in the movement. Second this is not to say that the SBC, CBA, Missionary Alliance, and other denominations have got it together because they do not. I have criticized those denominations as well, just in different areas. However since we are speaking of the IFB movement let me say that as a former BJU seminary student & staff member and having been in Greenville, SC for 6 years I will say I believe there is allot of legalism in the movement, and Phil did an excellent job presenting that and MOST of his points were spot on. No he is not perfect and may have had his information on John R. Rice backwards and some other details, but suffice to say he did a good job with this presentation and refutation of the Fundamentalist movement.

So am I a hypocrite? Yes as I used to preach Fundamentalist and separation to the T at one time and caused waves in Way of the Master camps because they listened to contemporary worship, drunk alcohol, danced, and had other Fundamentalist taboo's that BJU taught me to separate from. But God has shown me the error of my ways, and I see know that plenty of God honoring Way of the Master evangelists drink alcohol, dance, listen to contemporary worship, have long hair, wear shorts, and go to movie theaters. God is interested in the heart more than the traditions of "religious people."

Just because someone drinks alcohol, dances, goes to the movies, and listens to CCM does not make them a bad person. The HUGE PROBLEM I saw in the IFB movement in Greenville was that ones righteousness and standing before God was not about their walk with God, but more about what they did and who they hung out with. This is Arminian theology no question and goes against the Bible. My righteousness and standing before God is not about me, but about God and what he did for me (Eph 2:8-10).

Many IFB will frown upon "New Evangelical" because of how they dress to church, and who they hang out with, but perhaps God frowns upon the Fundamentalist and religious person because they think dressing up to church, not drinking alcohol, not dancing, going to the movies, and such are what earns their favor before God. This is not true!!!

Jesus himself did things that many Fundamentalist would frown upon. For example.

He ate with tax collectors and sinners

Matthew 9:10-12
While Jesus was having dinner at Matthew’s house, many tax collectors and “sinners” came and ate with him and his disciples. When the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, “why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?” On hearing this, Jesus said, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor but the sick…”

He was relevant with the culture



Jesus showed people grace

John 8:3-11 (KJV)
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

Once again I am not saying that all IFB Churches and people are bad, because thats not true. I am broad-brushing the movement which I believe for the most part has sunk into legalism.

"It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace."

By your own post you state you were a believer - unlike the publicans and tax collectors Christ ate.

YOU attempt to excuse your own behavior by assigning permission to it seeking justification from Scriptures that do not apply to believers.

If you were really serious about a pure life and testimony, then you would abstain from the lusts of the flesh and the pride of life. You would set no wicked thing in front of you. You would not take counsel from the ungodly, You would not stand in the way of sinners. You would not sit in the seat of the scornful.

But by your own admission, you live as worldly and ungodly as the heathen - you are what Paul referred too Demus.

I cannot find where the "way of the master" program give you that permission.

Below is a quote from the way of the master web:

"There is nothing wrong with sex, power, money, or material things, but when these become predominant in God's sight, the Bible calls this "inordinate affection" (Colossians 3:5). We are told, "Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him." "Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God." (1 John 2:15, James 4:4).

The second enemy is the devil. As we have seen, he is known as the "god of this world." He was your spiritual father before you joined the family of God (John 8:44, Ephesians 2:2. Jesus called the devil a thief, who came to kill, steal and destroy (John 10:10).

The way to overcome him and his demons is to make sure you are outfitted with the spiritual armor of God listed in Ephesians 6:10-20. Become intimately familiar with it. Sleep in it. Never take it off. Bind the two-edged sword to your hand so that you never lose its grip. The reason for this brings us to the third enemy.

The third enemy is what the Bible calls the "flesh." This is your sinful nature. The domain for the battle, is your mind.

If you have a mind to, you will be attracted to the world and all its sin. The mind is the data-processing control panel for the eyes and the ears. It is the center of your appetites. All sin begins in the "heart" (Proverbs 4:23, Matthew 15:19). We think before we sin. This happens because we don't think before we sin. The Bible warns that lust brings forth sin, and sin when it's conceived brings forth death. Every day we have life, we have a choice. To sin or not to sin -- that is the question. The answer to the question of sin, is the fear of God. If you don't fear God, you will sin to your sinful heart's delight."​

 

[Van]

"It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace." (Hebrews 6:4-6)

What is this verse actually teaching?

What does it mean to be enlightened? To have heard and understood the gospel of Christ? I think so.

Who have tasted the heavenly gift. Tasted but not swallowed, or embraced. So not necessarily a complete rejection, but certainly not a wholesale commitment to Christ. The heavenly gift is the gospel message.


Who have shared in the Holy Spirit. The work product of the Holy Spirit is the gospel of Christ, thus to have tasted the gospel is to have shared in the Holy Spirit, at least to the level of considering the gospel.

Who have tasted the goodness of the word of God. Again this refers, I believe, to hearing and considering the gospel of Christ.

Tasted the powers of the coming age. This refers to those who brought the gospel, the believers who will reign with Christ.

Who have fallen away. Here we confirm the idea of initial and superficial acceptance, like the second soil of Matthew 13. However, as John puts it, they went out from us because they were not of us, i.e. God had not credited their faith as righteousness and put them in Christ.

To be brought back to repentance. We have just the one message, and if that message is rejected, it is impossible to provide a differing message to bring someone back to humility before God. So the idea is not that a person who falls away is lost forever, but that they must change, because it impossible to change the call of the gospel.

They are crucifying again refers to their continuing rejection of Jesus, and as long as people continue to reject Jesus, it is impossible to bring them to repentance.

We are to continue to cultivate, plant and water, being in the world but not of the world.

 

[evangelist6589]

Was I not clear in my post? I do watch movies, but I have discernment for what I watch. I did drink at one time, but it was only for the enjoyment of the beverages, and never ever to get drunk. I do read my Bible, attend church, and strive to do evangelism.

MY POINT is that someone is not holy and righteous before God by what they do. One is set right by God by the Holy Spirit and we cannot earn our justification. We are to strive for sanctification. Perhaps Agedman is very old schooled and thinks that dancing and playing cards are of the world. yes there are some dances that are of the world and I avoid them. But I wont say all dancing is.

"It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace."

By your own post you state you were a believer - unlike the publicans and tax collectors Christ ate.

YOU attempt to excuse your own behavior by assigning permission to it seeking justification from Scriptures that do not apply to believers.

If you were really serious about a pure life and testimony, then you would abstain from the lusts of the flesh and the pride of life. You would set no wicked thing in front of you. You would not take counsel from the ungodly, You would not stand in the way of sinners. You would not sit in the seat of the scornful.

But by your own admission, you live as worldly and ungodly as the heathen - you are what Paul referred too Demus.

I cannot find where the "way of the master" program give you that permission.

Below is a quote from the way of the master web:

"There is nothing wrong with sex, power, money, or material things, but when these become predominant in God's sight, the Bible calls this "inordinate affection" (Colossians 3:5). We are told, "Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him." "Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God." (1 John 2:15, James 4:4).

The second enemy is the devil. As we have seen, he is known as the "god of this world." He was your spiritual father before you joined the family of God (John 8:44, Ephesians 2:2. Jesus called the devil a thief, who came to kill, steal and destroy (John 10:10).

The way to overcome him and his demons is to make sure you are outfitted with the spiritual armor of God listed in Ephesians 6:10-20. Become intimately familiar with it. Sleep in it. Never take it off. Bind the two-edged sword to your hand so that you never lose its grip. The reason for this brings us to the third enemy.

The third enemy is what the Bible calls the "flesh." This is your sinful nature. The domain for the battle, is your mind.

If you have a mind to, you will be attracted to the world and all its sin. The mind is the data-processing control panel for the eyes and the ears. It is the center of your appetites. All sin begins in the "heart" (Proverbs 4:23, Matthew 15:19). We think before we sin. This happens because we don't think before we sin. The Bible warns that lust brings forth sin, and sin when it's conceived brings forth death. Every day we have life, we have a choice. To sin or not to sin -- that is the question. The answer to the question of sin, is the fear of God. If you don't fear God, you will sin to your sinful heart's delight."​

 

[agedman]

I am not only old school, but long time ago graduate.

Modern dancing is submitting the body to the elements of music - any such submission is not of God nor to the glory of God. This goes far beyond foot tapping, or even hand clapping. Modern dancing is a whole body / mind experience.

Drinking has been discussed ad nauseam and my views are clearly stated.

But you have freedom.

Little challenge:

Next time your out drinking and dancing, stand in the midst of the crowd and preach Christ. You'll have to shout loud enough to be heard above the mind-numbing sounds, but you have a ready crowd the needs to hear the gospel - after all your supposed to be an evangelist.

 

[evangelist6589]

I am not only old school, but long time ago graduate.

Modern dancing is submitting the body to the elements of music - any such submission is not of God nor to the glory of God. This goes far beyond foot tapping, or even hand clapping. Modern dancing is a whole body / mind experience.

Drinking has been discussed ad nauseam and my views are clearly stated.

But you have freedom.

Little challenge:

Next time your out drinking and dancing, stand in the midst of the crowd and preach Christ. You'll have to shout loud enough to be heard above the mind-numbing sounds, but you have a ready crowd the needs to hear the gospel - after all your supposed to be an evangelist.

I am against modern dancing that is unbiblical. However when I have square danced or exercised danced I found no problem with it. Perhaps we are not on the same page.

Note that I do mot drink beer nor wine, nor would I drink and have a bad testimony. What I have done is had a Mikes Hard Lemonade (light) in the comfort of my home, or at a social family party and have never been drunk. If you want to call that a sin then you are adding to the Bible.

I would never do anything that would lead anyone to stumble and if I were to drink a Mikes lemonade when preaching I would be a bad testimony and would be leading people astray. I do not do this as I proclaim the word of God. If someone on the streets asked me about alcohol I would tell them plainly that I do not go to bars, nor drink beer, wine, or hang around with those that do. I have only said it was okay to have a beverage in the comfort of ones home and away from any sinful pleasures.

Regarding dancing I am against sexual dancing and am for old fashioned dancing of an earlier time period such as going back to the 1930's and such.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

I can appreciate a lot about your position Evangelist....but this floors me:

have long hair,

The long hair issue (I assume you mean for a man) is very SPECIFICALLY and in DETAIL spoken against in the New Testament. I do not see how the un-scriptural injunctions against all use of alcohol, dancing, all movies et... can be lumped in with this one. The Scriptures are ABUNDANTLY clear on this issue. Not only is it mentioned by name, but it is also implied that it is effiminacy, and effiminacy is also clearly a sin in the New Testament. I think you are making a category mistake by o-k-ing this one.

 

[John of Japan]

http://gracelifepulpit.media.s3.amazonaws.com/pdf/deadright_.pdf

...Phil did an excellent job presenting that and MOST of his points were spot on. No he is not perfect and may have had his information on John R. Rice backwards and some other details, but suffice to say he did a good job with this presentation and refutation of the Fundamentalist movement.

I really, really don't want to participate in this thread. It's just more IFB bashing, and there is already a ton of that on the BB, so I don't want to encourage it. But I have to say Phil got a LOT wrong, not just his libel (yes, libel, actionable in court if JRR were still alive--though he always ignored personal attacks) against my grandfather. But I'm only going to mention one thing, and that is a huge error of Phil makes concerning the movement.

In his whole diatribe, Phil did not mention one time evangelism, soul-winning, missions, missionary, etc. Yet this is a central characteristic of the IFB movement.

1. Many of the early leaders were evangelists or missionary statesmen: R. A. Torrey, A. T. Pierson, Jonathan Goforth in China, Charles Cowman in Japan, Bob Jones Sr., John R. Rice, Monroe Parker, etc. etc.

2. The Fundamentals edited by Evangelist R. A. Torrey had seven different articles on evangelism and missions.

3. In both the North and the South, a major part of the battle when Baptists came out to be independent was missions. In the SBC, the cooperative program was supporting liberal missionaries, and in the NBC was doing so in the North. (See Southern Baptists and Wolves in Sheep's Clothing by Rice on the SBC, and The Case Against Modernism in Foreign Missions by Chester Tulga on the NBC). My own mission board was formed out of the wreckage of the Northern Baptist missionary effort.

4. To this day fundamentalists have a very strong emphasis on mass evangelism, personal evangelism and foreign missions. In fact, arguably the only evangelical group in which the missionary force is currently growing is the IFB missions force. All other mission boards are seeing a decrease in missionary personnel.

5. Fundamentalism has focused on evangelism and church planting and thus avoided the traps which hinder evangelical missionary work: institutionalism, charity efforts, etc. Many who are called missionaries in evangelical circles are only charity workers or institutional workers, not soul-winning missionaries. (I am not opposing charity and institutions, I am opposing misnaming them as mission work. They are not done in obedience to the Great Commission.)

For this reason alone, which Phil Johnson totally misses, I would remain a fundamentalist.

 

[evangelist6589]

I really, really don't want to participate in this thread. It's just more IFB bashing, and there is already a ton of that on the BB, so I don't want to encourage it. But I have to say Phil got a LOT wrong, not just his libel (yes, libel, actionable in court if JRR were still alive--though he always ignored personal attacks) against my grandfather. But I'm only going to mention one thing, and that is a huge error of Phil makes concerning the movement.

In his whole diatribe, Phil did not mention one time evangelism, soul-winning, missions, missionary, etc. Yet this is a central characteristic of the IFB movement.

Easy-believism is a common characteristic of IFB Evangelism and Phil speaks of that. Did you miss it? I refute easy-believism in this message.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P6U-Ec0FQo

 

[John of Japan]

Easy-believism is a common characteristic of IFB Evangelism and Phil speaks of that. Did you miss it? I refute easy-believism in this message.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P6U-Ec0FQo

To oppose easy believeism (whatever that is in Phil's mind) is not, ergo, to discuss evangelism and missions. To oppose easy believeism is to simply be negative about the Great Commission unless you then tell the right way to do it. But then, no, Phil did not discuss, refute, or even explain easy believeism, he simply mentioned it one single time with no further mention. My point thus stands.

And I'm very sorry, but I have no desire to listen to your short sermon mentioning easy believeism. I have a bunch of sources that I trust (books, sermons, scholar friends, my own grad school teachers) without listening to you.

 

[Don]

Easy-believism is a common characteristic of IFB Evangelism and Phil speaks of that. Did you miss it? I refute easy-believism in this message.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P6U-Ec0FQo

"Easy believism" (commonly referred to as "say this prayer and you'll be saved) is a common characteristic of some ifb camps.

 

[evangelist6589]

"Easy believism" (commonly referred to as "say this prayer and you'll be saved) is a common characteristic of some ifb camps.

EXACTLY. But they do so probably in ignorance as I do not interpret IFB to be mean people. Buts it a common practice in MOST IFB camps not "some".

 

[Salty]

... Buts it a common practice in MOST IFB camps not "some".

Is that just an opinion - or do you have actualy have facts to back that up?

and is you belief only for IBF'ers - what about other Baptist groups ?

 

[Don]

EXACTLY. But they do so probably in ignorance as I do not interpret IFB to be mean people. Buts it a common practice in MOST IFB camps not "some".

"Most"? Really? What numbers do you have to back that up? For instance, during one of these "bash ifb's" threads, we guesstimated that there are at least 9,500 ifb churches from all different "camps"; so, how many of those constitute "most"? And then, what's your proof that that number of ifb churches employ this practice?

 

[Winman]

EXACTLY. But they do so probably in ignorance as I do not interpret IFB to be mean people. Buts it a common practice in MOST IFB camps not "some".

Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Are you telling me this scripture is a lie? Are you saying that a person cannot simply call upon Jesus to save them from their sins and be saved?

What about the publican Jesus spoke of?

Luk 18:13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

I don't see the publican "repenting" of all his sin, or promising to make Jesus "Lord" in this parable, he simply cries out to God to have mercy upon him, a sinner.

Jesus said this man went down to his house justified. Did Jesus lie? Was Jesus being misleading to make us believe all this man had to do to be saved was cry out to God for mercy?

Tell me, are these scriptures a lie?

 

[Salty]

I think what it amounts to - is the extremes we have heard.
I remember a story told by Jack Hyles. He stated that he went to this one mans house numerous times - finally the man said if you come back I will shoot and kill you. A week later Hyles was back - the man asked "why are you here". Hyles answered "to get shot" - Hyles stated that the man got saved. OR did he say he got saved just to shut him up.
To add to that some churches proclaim that hundreds get saved every month - even baptized- but there is no similar increase in church membership.

So - yes a few do - but the critics thinks that if one IFB church does it - then all must do it as well.

and that thinking is not only about religion - but race, creed gender - ect
-think of lousy women drivers- of course there are some - but overall they are actually safer drivers.

Moral of the story - look at the entire picture.

 

[Winman]

This thread would be comical if it were not tragic.

The folks that are trying to live a holy life are the bad guys, the folks that go out dancing, drinking, and smoking cigars (and worse) are the good guys living the true Christian life. WOW.

In another thread we are talking about folks having a lack of assurance. Well, if you are going out and living like the heathen, don't be surprised when you have no assurance.

 

[jonathanD]

Tell me, are these scriptures a lie?

No, they just aren't comprehensive (Matt 7:21 for example).

And evangelist, drinking Mike's Hard lemonade is WAY more effeminate than having long hair!

 

[preacher4truth]

No, they just aren't comprehensive (Matt 7:21 for example).

And evangelist, drinking Mike's Hard lemonade is WAY more effeminate than having long hair!

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[Winman]

No, they just aren't comprehensive (Matt 7:21 for example).

And evangelist, drinking Mike's Hard lemonade is WAY more effeminate than having long hair!

The reason these persons aren't saved is because they are trusting in their works. Read again.

Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Here are some Lordship Salvationists if ever there were some. Notice how twice Jesus emphasizes these folks say, Lord, Lord.

And what did these folks claim for salvation? Works, they prophesied in Jesus's name, they cast out devils in Jesus's name, and in Jesus's name they did MANY WONDERFUL WORKS.

You guys just don't get it. This is the same claim the Pharisee made.

Luk 18:9 And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:
10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.
11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.
12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

Like those in Matthew 7, this Pharisee was not an athiest, he believed in God, but he trusted in his own works. He boasted that he was not a sinner like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or like the publican. He fasted twice a week and gave tithes of all that he had.

And he was absolutely lost.

The publican made no such claims, but simply cast himself on God's mercy. This is saving faith, casting one's self on Jesus and depending on him alone to save you.

So, you can read your Bible all you want and resolve to be nicer to folks, good luck with that.