Do you affirm the fundamentals?

Do you believe in the fundamentals?

  • Yes

    Votes: 42 67.7%
  • No

    Votes: 20 32.3%

  • Total voters
    62

Tallguy88

We shall see the King when he comes!
Supporter
Jan 13, 2009
32,459
7,737
Parts Unknown
✟240,396.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Regardless of your denominational affiliation, do you affirm and believe the five so-called fundamentals?

Here they are:

1. That the Bible is inspired and without error.

2. That Jesus Christ is God.

3. That Jesus was born to a virgin.

4. That Jesus died as a substitutionary atonement for our sins.

5. That Jesus literally died, rose from the dead, ascended to heaven, and will return to earth.
 

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,168
16,008
Flyoverland
✟1,223,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Regardless of your denominational affiliation, do you affirm and believe the five so-called fundamentals?

Here they are:

1. That the Bible is inspired and without error.

2. That Jesus Christ is God.

3. That Jesus was born to a virgin.

4. That Jesus died as a substitutionary atonement for our sins.

5. That Jesus literally died, rose from the dead, ascended to heaven, and will return to earth.
Actually I do. I don't like the wording of number four but I'm able to track with all five. J. Gresham Machen and the other founders of the movement got some things right.
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,168
16,008
Flyoverland
✟1,223,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Which bible? to number 1 and yes to the others.
The original texts, which of course we can only approximate with textual criticism, as the originals are long since gone. But Biblical textual criticism is pretty solid stuff in working out what the original texts were. So I don't have to worry if I read the RSV Catholic Edition for example because I know it's actually close enough in almost every sense to the original texts.
 
Upvote 0

tulc

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!
May 18, 2002
49,401
18,801
68
✟271,570.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
what if you believe in the fundamentals but they aren't the ones you list? for instance I believe in these fundamentals:
Luke 10: 25-37 said:
25And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? 26He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? 27And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. 28And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live. 29But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour?

30And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. 31And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. 32And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side. 33But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him, 34And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee. 36Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves? 37And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.
And I believe in this fundamental as well:
Matthew 25: 31-46 said:
31When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: 32And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 33And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

34Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 36Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 37Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? 38When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? 39Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 40And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

41Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 42For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. 46And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
or here:
1-4 My dear friends, don’t let public opinion influence how you live out our glorious, Christ-originated faith. If a man enters your church wearing an expensive suit, and a street person wearing rags comes in right after him, and you say to the man in the suit, “Sit here, sir; this is the best seat in the house!” and either ignore the street person or say, “Better sit here in the back row,” haven’t you segregated God’s children and proved that you are judges who can’t be trusted?

5-7 Listen, dear friends. Isn’t it clear by now that God operates quite differently? He chose the world’s down-and-out as the kingdom’s first citizens, with full rights and privileges. This kingdom is promised to anyone who loves God. And here you are abusing these same citizens! Isn’t it the high and mighty who exploit you, who use the courts to rob you blind? Aren’t they the ones who scorn the new name—“Christian”—used in your baptisms?

8-11 You do well when you complete the Royal Rule of the Scriptures: “Love others as you love yourself.” But if you play up to these so-called important people, you go against the Rule and stand convicted by it. You can’t pick and choose in these things, specializing in keeping one or two things in God’s law and ignoring others. The same God who said, “Don’t commit adultery,” also said, “Don’t murder.” If you don’t commit adultery but go ahead and murder, do you think your non-adultery will cancel out your murder? No, you’re a murderer, period.

12-13 Talk and act like a person expecting to be judged by the Rule that sets us free. For if you refuse to act kindly, you can hardly expect to be treated kindly. Kind mercy wins over harsh judgment every time.

Faith in Action
14-17 Dear friends, do you think you’ll get anywhere in this if you learn all the right words but never do anything? Does merely talking about faith indicate that a person really has it? For instance, you come upon an old friend dressed in rags and half-starved and say, “Good morning, friend! Be clothed in Christ! Be filled with the Holy Spirit!” and walk off without providing so much as a coat or a cup of soup—where does that get you? Isn’t it obvious that God-talk without God-acts is outrageous nonsense?

18 I can already hear one of you agreeing by saying, “Sounds good. You take care of the faith department, I’ll handle the works department.”

Not so fast. You can no more show me your works apart from your faith than I can show you my faith apart from my works. Faith and works, works and faith, fit together hand in glove.

19-20 Do I hear you professing to believe in the one and only God, but then observe you complacently sitting back as if you had done something wonderful? That’s just great. Demons do that, but what good does it do them? Use your heads! Do you suppose for a minute that you can cut faith and works in two and not end up with a corpse on your hands?

21-24 Wasn’t our ancestor Abraham “made right with God by works” when he placed his son Isaac on the sacrificial altar? Isn’t it obvious that faith and works are yoked partners, that faith expresses itself in works? That the works are “works of faith”? The full meaning of “believe” in the Scripture sentence, “Abraham believed God and was set right with God,” includes his action. It’s that mesh of believing and acting that got Abraham named “God’s friend.” Is it not evident that a person is made right with God not by a barren faith but by faith fruitful in works?

25-26 The same with Rahab, the Jericho harlot. Wasn’t her action in hiding God’s spies and helping them escape—that seamless unity of believing and doing—what counted with God? The very moment you separate body and spirit, you end up with a corpse. Separate faith and works and you get the same thing: a corpse.
those are the fundamentals I believe in. :wave:
tulc(is just sayn') :sorry:
 
Upvote 0

Gregory Thompson

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.
Supporter
Dec 20, 2009
28,362
7,742
Canada
✟721,286.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
The original texts, which of course we can only approximate with textual criticism, as the originals are long since gone. But Biblical textual criticism is pretty solid stuff in working out what the original texts were. So I don't have to worry if I read the RSV Catholic Edition for example because I know it's actually close enough in almost every sense to the original texts.
We don't have the original texts, and then there's the protestant canon, the catholic canon, the eastern orthodox canon, and then the ethiopian orthodox canon all having different book numbers. So I believe the scripture to be inspired, but with the textual variants available I don't worry too much about it being without error, so long as God is without error, that's good enough for me.
 
Upvote 0

Tallguy88

We shall see the King when he comes!
Supporter
Jan 13, 2009
32,459
7,737
Parts Unknown
✟240,396.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
The original texts, which of course we can only approximate with textual criticism, as the originals are long since gone. But Biblical textual criticism is pretty solid stuff in working out what the original texts were. So I don't have to worry if I read the RSV Catholic Edition for example because I know it's actually close enough in almost every sense to the original texts.
Even when it translates Isaiah as young woman, rather than virgin? That was a pretty big issue when it first came out. Or did the Catholic version fix that?
 
  • Useful
Reactions: St_Worm2
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Tallguy88

We shall see the King when he comes!
Supporter
Jan 13, 2009
32,459
7,737
Parts Unknown
✟240,396.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
what if you believe in the fundamentals but they aren't the ones you list? for instance I believe in these fundamentals:

And I believe in this fundamental as well:

or here:

those are the fundamentals I believe in. :wave:
tulc(is just sayn') :sorry:
Stick to the OP please
 
Upvote 0

Tallguy88

We shall see the King when he comes!
Supporter
Jan 13, 2009
32,459
7,737
Parts Unknown
✟240,396.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Which bible? to number 1 and yes to the others.
Whatever bible you like, as long as it's a solid translation. Or if you can read the original languages, that
 
  • Informative
Reactions: St_Worm2
Upvote 0

Gregory Thompson

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.
Supporter
Dec 20, 2009
28,362
7,742
Canada
✟721,286.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Whatever bible you like, as long as it's a solid translation. Or if you can read the original languages, that
I think I'm too honest to say no errors, (textual variants giving different versions of verses) but definitely inspired by God. The original is in the spiritual realm anyway, so whenever a bible is opened up no matter how badly it is translated, God can speak through it.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Tom 1
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,110
19,006
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,173.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
1. That the Bible is inspired and without error.

Inspired, yes. "Without error" - if by that you mean literal readings of it trump complex understandings of science or critical readings of history - no. But without error in what it teaches us of God and salvation, yes.

4. That Jesus died as a substitutionary atonement for our sins.

As one metaphor among a range of valid metaphors for salvation, yes.

Yes to the rest.
 
Upvote 0

Tallguy88

We shall see the King when he comes!
Supporter
Jan 13, 2009
32,459
7,737
Parts Unknown
✟240,396.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Inspired, yes. "Without error" - if by that you mean literal readings of it trump complex understandings of science or critical readings of history - no. But without error in what it teaches us of God and salvation, yes.



As one metaphor among a range of valid metaphors for salvation, yes.

Yes to the rest.
What do you mean?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,168
16,008
Flyoverland
✟1,223,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Even when it translates Isaiah as young woman, rather than virgin? That was a pretty big issue when it first came out. Or did the Catholic version fix that?
I use the online version found at The Holy Bible. RSVCE most of the time.

That has 'young woman' and there is an asterisk at that spot. But the notes are not included with this online version. Not ideal. But an adequate translation of the Hebrew 'almah' even if it misses the sense of the Septuagent 'parthenos' which I follow. This is a translation problem and not an issue with the Bible being inerrant. I tend to think the Septuagent captured something of the intent of the Hebrew text which doesn't otherwise carry over. There are lots of places where we wonder about meaning. Most of them are of very small consequence. This is bigger. But again, it's a translation issue, compounded by a suspicion that some translators translate out the miraculous.

Ignatius Press has a RSVCE second edition which actually passed muster with the Vatican approving it as in accord with Liturgiam authenticam. I wonder how they translated Isaiah 7:14 there?
 
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,110
19,006
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,173.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
What do you mean?

I mean that substitutionary atonement (which is a forensic-legal metaphor) is not a wrong way to talk about what Christ accomplished on the cross. But it's also not the only valid way to talk about it, and other ways might also be valuable. For example, redemption (which is a metaphor of buying a slave's freedom) is another way of talking about the same reality. There are many in Scripture; Christ as the victorious warrior who incorporates us into and leads us in victory procession is another; recapitulation is another, and so on. All of these look at the same reality from a different angle, and so allow us to appreciate it more fully.

Basically I'm saying penal substitutionary atonement isn't wrong, but it's wrong to narrow our language and thinking around salvation to that one metaphor.
 
Upvote 0

Tallguy88

We shall see the King when he comes!
Supporter
Jan 13, 2009
32,459
7,737
Parts Unknown
✟240,396.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
I use the online version found at The Holy Bible. RSVCE most of the time.

That has 'young woman' and there is an asterisk at that spot. But the notes are not included with this online version. Not ideal. But an adequate translation of the Hebrew 'almah' even if it misses the sense of the Septuagent 'parthenos' which I follow. This is a translation problem and not an issue with the Bible being inerrant. I tend to think the Septuagent captured something of the intent of the Hebrew text which doesn't otherwise carry over. There are lots of places where we wonder about meaning. Most of them are of very small consequence. This is bigger. But again, it's a translation issue, compounded by a suspicion that some translators translate out the miraculous.

Ignatius Press has a RSVCE second edition which actually passed muster with the Vatican approving it as in accord with Liturgiam authenticam. I wonder how they translated Isaiah 7:14 there?
I've got an RSV-CE on the shelf at home, I'll have to check it when I get back
 
Upvote 0

Tallguy88

We shall see the King when he comes!
Supporter
Jan 13, 2009
32,459
7,737
Parts Unknown
✟240,396.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
I mean that substitutionary atonement (which is a forensic-legal metaphor) is not a wrong way to talk about what Christ accomplished on the cross. But it's also not the only valid way to talk about it, and other ways might also be valuable. For example, redemption (which is a metaphor of buying a slave's freedom) is another way of talking about the same reality. There are many in Scripture; Christ as the victorious warrior who incorporates us into and leads us in victory procession is another; recapitulation is another, and so on. All of these look at the same reality from a different angle, and so allow us to appreciate it more fully.

Basically I'm saying penal substitutionary atonement isn't wrong, but it's wrong to narrow our language and thinking around salvation to that one metaphor.
Isn't that the primary way that St. Paul uses in his writings? I'm thinking Romans in particular. Not saying those other ways are wrong, just that they don't seem to get the "air time" as substitutionary atonement.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Truthfrees
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,110
19,006
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,173.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Isn't that the primary way that St. Paul uses in his writings? I'm thinking Romans in particular. Not saying those other ways are wrong, just that they don't seem to get the "air time" as substitutionary atonement.

Paul has a really rich vocabulary of metaphors and images, and I don't see this one as predominating in his writing. It does seem to predominate in some Christian traditions, though.
 
Upvote 0