Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

2297Re: coercion to join ex-gay ministries?

Expand Messages
  • calldon2k
    Jun 6, 2002
      --- In exexgayministry@y..., "nojam75" <nojam75@y...> wrote:
      > According to Bruce Bawer's book, Stealing Jesus, the
      > term 'fundamentalist' was coined in 1920 by the editor of a Baptist
      > publication to refer to the anti-modernist group of Baptists.

      That definition is only partially correct. Bawer leaves out WHAT a
      fundamentalist is. The term was used because, unlike the growing
      trend, this group still believed the fundamentals of the faith, i.e.,
      the virgin birth, the sufficiency of the Scriptures, the
      substitutionary atonement, the bodily resurrection, etc.

      Obviously, embracing those ideas has nothing to do with war, murder,
      and such.

      >When
      > I use the term, I refer to the fundamentalist vs. modernist debate
      > within Christianity regarding the approaches to understanding the
      > Bible and the message of Christianity. I would consider myself a
      > fundamentalist to modernist convert.

      I would not consider "modernist" the opposite of fundamentalist.

      >Bishop John Shelby Spong even
      > calls evangelism a form of violence.

      That can go both ways. I have been on the receiving end of the
      verble wrath and condescending attitudes from "modernists/liberals"
      simply because I took a stand (political or religious) that was
      slightly more "conservative" then the majority in the room.
      The "violence" goes both ways. Those who were supposed to
      be "liberal" or open-minded were as closed minded as those they were
      accusing!

      >So, I've never quite
      > understood the distinction some would like to make between
      > Evangelism and what you call 'Legalism'.

      Legalism has nothing to do with Christianity. Librarians are
      legalistic. Anyone who emphasises the letter of the law over the
      spirit of the law is legalistic. Evangelism and legalism are not
      even related. Norm, read up on it.

      >However, Evangelism was developed as
      > the more marketable form of fundamentalism in our consumer
      culture.

      "Developed" by whom? That comment is based upon a lack of
      understanding of BOTH!

      > It's interesting that although hell is an essential doctrine of
      > Evangelism, it seems to be rarely mentioned -- kinda like the way a
      > drug commercial downplays the potential side effects.

      Actually, Jesus spoke ALLOT about hell and spoke of it often. Rather
      than post pages and pages of scripture, I will invite you to check
      this web site. There are many others but this will give you an idea
      of how often Jesus mentioned hell.
      http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Shores/2800/JesusonHell.html

      Or, just read a few of these to see what Jesus himself said about
      hell.

      Matt 7:19, 13:40, 25:41
      Matt 18:8, 25:41
      Mark 3:29
      Matt 5:22, 18:9, Mark 9:47
      Matt 23:14, Mark 12:40, Luke 20:47
      Matt 23:33
      John 5:29
      Matt 13:42, 50
      Mark 9:43, 45
      Mark 9:44, 46, 48
      Mark 9:44, 46, 48
      Matt 13:42, 50
      Matt 8:12, 22:13, 25:30
      Luke 16:23
      Luke 16:24
      Luke 16:28
      Matt 8:12, 22:13
      Matt 25:46

      >I know, I know "It's not me -- IT'S GOD'S WORD.
      > Therefore, I'm not responsible for the message."

      I don't like it either when people target gay folks or any other
      group, while ignoring the 50% of the congregation that is divorced as
      if God has focused on those "nasty homos."

      Norm, you seem to have lumped all non-"modernists" into the same
      category. Believe me, they are not the same.

      I used to be an ultra-right-wing-fundamentalist-legalist, bible-
      banger. Everyone else was going to hell, period! Fortunately, I
      realized that the "legalists" application of scripture simply did not
      gel with real life. After 20-more years, I would say that I still
      hold most of the fundamentals of the faith, but my application of the
      scriptures is certainly what some would call liberal...but they did
      that 20-years ago, too.

      Liberal, fundamentalist, evangelical, legalist, modernist...all
      different terms not usually related. I know liberal evangelicals and
      ultra-conservative, legalistic evangelicals. The terms are not
      interchangable.

      D*
    • Show all 16 messages in this topic