Search This Blog

27 November 2013

You might like to call me a fundamentalist...


...not because I love guns (I don't), or because I think the KJVis the only Bible (it isn't), but because I believe the Scriptures. If the Bible says that God created the world in six days, then I believe it. I f the Bible says that a boy was raised from the dead, then I believe it. If the Bible saysThis  that a man walked on water, then I believe it. Do these things happen all the time? Of course not; that's why they're called miracles. The Bible has proven itself reliable in more historically-verifiable matters, so I have no reason not to trust it.
I'm not stupid; I read books on theoretical math for fun. I'm no Neanderthal; unless you're an actual astrophysicist, I probably know astrophysics better than you do. I also have an open enough mind to accept the thinhs listed above.
Is "fundamentalist" the right word? Probably not; the Muslims, along with certain professing Christians who wish to remain ignorant, have given it a bad rap. Yet I can't think of anything more fundamental than believing what I claim.

3 comments:

  1. Chris, I love you, but your "I believe the Scriptures" comment can't be something Fundamentalists believe. Otherwise, why do Fundamentalists not believe these:

    1) calling the mother of Jesus "the mother of God" (John 10:30, John 12:45)
    2) calling the mother of Jesus "Blessed" (Luke 1:48)
    3) consuming the body and blood of Christ gives eternal life (John 6)

    I could go for hours with examples, but I'll start you off with those three. Fundamentalists, in my honest opinion, don't "believe the Scriptures"; instead, they choose the Scriptures that are most comforting to their lives and call the rest "Popish nonsense" and "human traditions". To me, it's shocking that Fundamentalists believe in a literal 24-hour 6-day creation of the Earth and all its inhabitants; but they don't believe that simple bread and wine can, through the power of God, become the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ.

    Here's a question or thought for you--Who or what determines what Scriptures are meant to be taken as literal and what Scriptures are meant to be taken as figurative? I know that Catholics would say "the Church Magisterium", but what do Fundamentalists say?

    Looking forward to your comments, and more nuggets from you...it's been a long time, my friend.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr. Davis, context is the idea that should be used in interpretation of a text, regardless if I am calling Mary the "mother of God" - a stretch, since to equate the Father and Son in the temporal sense of Mary, wife of Joseph, is irrational, and to equate Them in the eternal sense creates a contradiction in your "Mary, mother of God" - studying Scripture, or reading your post on this blog. The best part of having such abundant copies of the Bible is that the 'individual' enjoys access that has long been unavailable in the context of human history.

      Here's a thought, brother, for you: how am I supposed to take your post above? Who is to determine, for me, what is to be taken as literal and what is to be taken as figurative?

      Delete
    2. Hello mashmouth,

      My post above should be taken however you like. As one who was born and raised an independent Baptist Christian and then converted as an adult to the Catholic Christian faith, I've both seen and experienced my share of different Christian styles. As a Navy veteran, I also have seen my share of other faiths. With both of those things said, ultimately the topic boils down to faith, and usually it's pointless to talk about faith-related topics, since my audience tends to have their mind already made up. Nevertheless, since I love a good debate, I carry on!

      Here's my take for your second question. At my Catholic confirmation, I recited this very life-altering sentence: "I believe and profess all that the holy Catholic Church believes, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God."

      Now I know from having lived and breathed the non-Catholic denominations that this "submission" to an earthly entity is simply horrifying. The Roman Catholic Church, after all, is made up of sinners just like me, so how can they have the corner market on the teachings of Christ? Was it not they who watered down the Apostle's teachings with pagan traditions? Am I to submit to the same teacher that hosted the Pornocracy and the Inquisition? The simple answer, in my sincere opinion, is "Yes."

      Now you might say, "But I rely on the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and I get good counsel from my local Pastor." And this self-made Christian lifestyle is right in line with good 'ol American values of not bowing to any king (especially one who thinks of himself as the Vicar of Christ). But this type of mindset is conceptually flawed.

      When Jesus ascended to the Father, He didn't leave the 11 to debate it out over which direction to take His flock; they already were given that info. And this info was passed down to others by both written and oral means. This logic doesn't eliminate the need for the Holy Spirit; in fact, the Catholic Church continually credits the Holy Spirit working through the Church, guiding it to its present location.

      Sadly, the same cannot be said about the non-Catholic denominations. Many will flock to one man's teaching or charisma. A local church will be founded around him. Perhaps after he dies, they'll even name a denomination after him. But there is no firm foundation. The "Holy Spirit" that fundamentalists claim guides them is nothing more than their own consciences peppered with teachings from the latest Joel Osteen or Jack Hyles book they just got done reading. Have you ever seen "Jerry Maguire"? "I ate two slices of bad pizza, went to bed, and grew a conscience!"

      I can go on and on with the flaws of the non-Catholic traditions: swerving from one "rock-solid" doctrine to the next, distorting history to paint the Catholic Church as the friendly confines of the Antichrist, and bad-mouthing the Catholic doctrines as "traditions of men" while following--wait for it--traditions of men themselves. And those are just three of many. The point I'm trying to make is that the Catholic Church is to determine what is to be taken as literal and what is to be taken as figurative. She has been guided by the Holy Spirit for the last 2,000 years. She, not "abundant copies of the Bible" as you put it, is the pillar of the truth as written by Paul to his apprentice Timothy. She, under Peter's leadership, was the one promised by Christ to survive even an onslaught from the gates of Hell.

      Look to the Catholic Church for your guidance. No, it's not American, but it's the best choice you can make for your eternal soul this side of heaven.

      Delete