Evangelical/Fundamentalism.

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12235
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Evangelical/Fundamentalism.

Post #1

Post by Elijah John »

-The Gospel of John is most far removed form the events of Jesus life and teachings.
-It is an outlier Gospel, differing from Matthew, Mark and Luke in very significant ways, both in theology and in narrative detail.

Yet Evangelicals put the most emphasis on the divisive and unreliable Gospel of John.

Their salvation tracks (like Bill Bright's Four Spiritual Laws) recommend the new convert begin their Bible readings with the Gospel of John.

This presumably so they will read the rest of the Bible with a Johannine lens.

Only Evangelicals emphasize praying in Jesus name. Ending pretty much all their prayers with the expression "in Jesus name we pray". (mainline Christians seldom do this.)
Only the Gospel of John teaches people to pray "in Jesus name".

Only Evangelicals emphasize the Johannine doctrine of being "born again"

Only Evangelicals invoke the divisive verse John 14.6 and loudly proclaim that Jesus is "the only way" to God, but what they really seem to be saying is that "no one comes to the Father but by us."

Only Evangelicals (among Christians) warn that those who don't believe like they do will be tortured forever in hell, a form of spiritual terrorism.

Only Evangelicals emphasize John 3.16 with it's imperative to "believe in order to be saved", belief over practice.

Only Evangelicals derisively refer to other faiths as "religion". ("Christianity teaches thus, religion teaches that".)

Despite their proclamations and preachings in the public square, Evangelicals are a loud but clear minority in the Christian world. The creedal and liturgical Churches, (Roman Catholicism, Lutheranism, Eastern Orthodox, Anglicanism, Episcopalians, Methodists, etc) far outnumber Evangelicals worldwide.

Only Evangelicals (and perhaps Jehovah's Witnesses) take the Bible literally.

Usually it is only Evangelicals that push their views on others.

They arrogantly refer to themselves as "Christians" with clear implications that non-Evanglelicals like Catholics etc are not.

Now I am speaking in generalities and I realize there are exceptions.

But it seems to me that when Christianity is attacked here on these boards, it's detractors are usually attacking Christianity as represented by the Evangelical/Fundamentalist variety.

But is this fair?

Should Evangelical Christianity be given the status of representing normative Christianity?

Or is Evangelical Christianity simply a loud aberration?

Overall, does Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism give Christianity a good or a bad name?
Last edited by Elijah John on Fri Feb 24, 2017 3:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 6443
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 353 times
Been thanked: 324 times
Contact:

Post #11

Post by tam »

Peds nurse wrote: [Replying to post 2 by tam]
Tam wrote:But Christendom does not represent God (or Christ), and does not get its authority from Christ.
Hey Tam!!

Didn't God give authority to Christ?

Yes, He did.



To Christ.



That is not the same thing as saying that He gave His authority to Christendom. Otherwise, aren't some saying that all those things that Christendom does and teaches in the 'name of God' is being done (and has been done) with His authority. How can THAT be true?


Peace to you!
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12235
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Post #12

Post by Elijah John »

tam wrote: Oh, I'm fairly certain that Catholics and Protestants have all done (more than) their fair share to give "christianity" a bad name.

Peace to you and to your loved ones,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy
Tammy, while I agree that the RCC and mainline Protestants are not above reproach, (though we may disagree on particular examples) this here thread is about Evangelical intolerance, their abberant form of Christianity and their threatening people with eternal hell for not believing like they do.

No other form of Christianity does this. At least not in the here and now. Even JWs don't do this.

If you want to attack the RCC and others, please, start another thread.
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 6443
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 353 times
Been thanked: 324 times
Contact:

Post #13

Post by tam »

Peace to you, EJ.


Are you attacking evangelicals on this thread?

Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12235
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Post #14

Post by Elijah John »

tam wrote: Peace to you, EJ.


Are you attacking evangelicals on this thread?
Call it what you will.... if the shoe fits. I prefer to say "criticizing" their doctrine, their dogma and their odd and rigid interpretation of the Bible which they attempt pass off as "mainsteam".

One Evangelical preacher on TBN went so far as to call Catholicism, an"abberant" form of Christianity.

Like it or not, the RCC is not an "aberrant" form of Christinaity. They, along with the Eastern Orthodox, Anglicanism and their offshoots are normative, not aberrant.

It is the Evangelicals who are "aberrant".

It is not some TBN preacher who speaks for most Christians, but rather the Pope, the Patriarchs, and the Archbishop of Cantebury...by far.

And I say this as one who disagrees with their theology, and am a distinct minority myself!

But I don't claim my views are "mainstream".
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 6443
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 353 times
Been thanked: 324 times
Contact:

Post #15

Post by tam »

Elijah John wrote:
tam wrote: Peace to you, EJ.


Are you attacking evangelicals on this thread?
Call it what you will.... if the shoe fits. I prefer to say "criticizing" their doctrine, their dogma and their odd and rigid interpretation of the Bible which they attempt pass off as "mainsteam".

Then why did you call it attacking when I hold the RCC up to the Light of Christ (as I have also done in the past on this forum with the evangelicals or with any other doctrine/teaching that people state is true about or from Christ and God)?


You are critiquing, but I am attacking?



***

You spoke of normative and aberrant, so lets look at these words.


Normative:

of or relating to a norm, especially an assumed norm regarded as the standard of correctness in behavior, speech, writing, etc.


Norm:

a standard, model, or pattern.



http://www.dictionary.com/browse/normative



Aberrant

departing from the right, normal, or usual course.


Word origin:

1798, originally in natural history, from Latin aberrantem (nominative aberrans), present participle of aberrare "to wander away, go astray" (see aberration ).



http://www.dictionary.com/browse/aberrant




So a couple questions:


What or who supplies the standard (the NORM) for a Christian?


Is it the RCC, the Popes, the Archbiships, the TBN preachers, the evangelicals, the WTS, the LDS, the Baptists, Martin Luther, etc?


Or is it Christ?


Did He not set the example for us (His sheep, His disciples, His Bride) to follow? Are we not to obey HIS word? Is He not the One to whom God said we must listen?


Is He not the standard, the norm, the LIGHT? And if one wants to know if something is from Him or not, would not one hold that thing (teaching, religion, doctrine, example, etc) up against that Light?




If HE is the norm, then if one "wanders away from, goes astray from" HIM, are they not aberrant from HIM (the Truth, the Light)?




If you are simply testing for aberration against the RCC, then everything outside the RCC is an aberrant (from the RCC), because it has wandered away from the RCC. But is the RCC the norm for a Christian? How can that be when the RCC clearly wandered away from Christ (as evidenced by history)?


Is it not Christ who is the Truth, the example, the Light... for His sheep, His disciples, His Bride?

So that we must test all things (including the inspired expressions) against HIM and His word... for it is HE who is the Truth and the Light and the example for Christians to follow.


We can't test for truth against the religion that Christ started, because He did not start a religion. And even if - as some mistakenly claim - the RCC had been set up by Him (though it was not), it did not remain in Him, but went astray from Him. (evidenced by its history). Making it aberrant, by definition of the word, from Christ. And that doesn't mean that any of the other denominations (including evangelicals or anyone against the RCC) are normative or true or from Christ.


If you want to know what (doctrine or teaching or deed or word or command or example or inspired expression) is from Him and what is not from Him, you have to hold these things up against HIM. Against the Light. It is the Light that reveals the darkness.


What good does holding the darkness up against another darkness do?




Peace again to you, EJ, and to your loved ones,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12235
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Post #16

Post by Elijah John »

[Replying to post 15 by tam]

Yeah, I am attacking Evangelical/Fundamentalism. It deserves to be attacked for threatening good people with hell simply for not believing the way they do.

Again if you want to "criticize" the RCC fair enough. But please do it on another thread.

Otherwise I think we are just talking past each other.
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

User avatar
amptramp
Student
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:34 pm

Post #17

Post by amptramp »

I don't believe anyone has yet mentioned evangelical and fundamentalist control of right-wing political parties, which, on the face of it, makes for strange bedfellows. The original church was described in Acts as "they owned everything in common" yet this is socialism, a polar opposite of conservatism. The attitude of the evangelicals and fundamentalists is that they are seeking political control to eliminate sex education, women's rights, homosexuality, addiction treatment, science in schools and their showcase topic, abortion.

There was a movie called "The Last Temptation of Christ" which purported that the final temptation was to get married, have children and live a normal life. But that was not the Biblical last temptation; the Bible said that the final temptation was for Jesus to set up his own country and run it according to his rules but Jesus did not accept it because he was aware that this temptation came from Satan. The modern Evangelical churches want the power Jesus rejected and don't care if this is a temptation from Satan.

I would agree with Tammy that all of Christianity has given Christianity a bad name because it has a blind spot for the evils of coercion. Part of coercion has been the establishment of religious schools including the odious residential schools. The Catholic school system is quite large where I live in Canada and there are other schools where any deviation from religious dogma loses marks.

And beliefs have not been shown to drive proper behaviour - the minister who conducted our wedding was defrocked nine years after we were married for having sex with three of the married women in our congregation. The church then picked another minister who did the same thing. The RCC does not have a monopoly on sinful behaviour.

Post Reply