Any Fundamentalists here?

[JonMiller]

I think that fundamentalism can be a positive thing, however, I Define it differently.

JM

 

[StormyOne]

And that is what I have been saying all along and that is whats important...truth!

But what you find in many and a host of others here is relativism. You find theories. Nothing is absolute unless it seems true to ones perspective of morals and values and ethics...this personal truth or subjective truth has to come from a persons mind and senses. The bible is no good for people like this unless it appeals to their emotions and mind. Their sufficiency is wrapped up in their emotion, feelings and senses and not in the bible and surely can't be wrapped up in all that Christ has said as found in the bible.

I was told of the words of Friedrich Nietzche (1844-1900) who said

" Since there is no God to will what is good, we must will our own good. And since there is no eternal value, we must will the eternal recurrence of the same state of affairs."

Many are saying the same when they deny the objective truth of the bible.






AT

objective truth of the bible? A bible NOT written by God, compiled by men, editorialized by men, revised by men....You can't be serious but I suspect you are.... no need to reply we are not going to agree..... for the record....you are wrong.....

 

[BrotherAtArms]

I'm interested to know what a true Fundamentalist is. I'm a little confused on that even after reading what everyone has had to say.

I do believe that there are some things... trying to word this right... not perfect with the Bible.
I believe all the stories are true, and I believe in God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and I believe that what the Bible says about salvation and what lies in wait for us in the future is true.
Though, not through my own study, I've come to learn that the book of Esther has some historic inaccuracies to it, and there are, from what I've studied, some things that are improperly translated.
However, I think it would be safe to say that it would be a good decider for a any view that a Christian has. It was written by Godly men, and inspired by God.
If you believe what the Bible says, then I think it would be safe to say that you can definitely rely in the books written by Moses (who had a face-to-face relationship with God) and by Paul (who Jesus spoke to directly). In those two aspects, we could safely rely on their writings for a 'final decision'.
Anything else, however, I believe you should let the Holy Spirit counsel you to know what is truth enough to believe in and follow.

 

[sentipente]

I do wonder if some would go to the Bible with God standing in the room.

They would and at the end of the visit they would suggest that they have a word of prayer before He left.

 

[sentipente]

I think that fundamentalism can be a positive thing, however, I Define it differently.

JM

Ooooh! That's so mysterious.

 

[sentipente]

Many are saying the same when they deny the objective truth of the bible.

No one denies the objective truth of the bible. What is denied is that you have it.

 

[Adventtruth]

objective truth of the bible? A bible NOT written by God, compiled by men, editorialized by men, revised by men....You can't be serious but I suspect you are.... no need to reply we are not going to agree..... for the record....you are wrong.....

And who's record would that be??? Hitler thought he was correct...He displyed his subjective truth....it could be that you are doing the same, and thats for the record, but no need to reply.


AT

 

[Avonia]

They would and at the end of the visit they would suggest that they have a word of prayer before He left.

That's too good!

 

[Avonia]

I do believe that there are some things... trying to word this right... not perfect with the Bible.

It is perfect if you understand what it is and use it in a way fitting, but often not even relevant to what it is used to explain.

Anything else, however, I believe you should let the Holy Spirit counsel you to know what is truth enough to believe in and follow.

This would make a good thread. In the past, I have asked Red and others to explain how this counsel is received, recognized, and interpreted. I am still waiting for an answer - maybe you are up to the task!

 

[Byfaithalone1]

In every way that God makes itself known - which is looking everywhere and questioning everything. Fundamentalists sometimes mistake one source for The Source.

Avonia,

Are there ways to search for truth that actually lead to error?

BFA

 

[BrotherAtArms]

It is perfect if you understand what it is and use it in a way fitting, but often not even relevant to what it is used to explain.

Well it's perfect in the sense that everything is true and we can live our lives based on it's teachings, but like I said, some historical inaccuracy in one book and some slight translation errors are the only things... However, I do agree that it is perfect through and through.

This would make a good thread. In the past, I have asked Red and others to explain how this counsel is received, recognized, and interpreted. I am still waiting for an answer - maybe you are up to the task!

I'm still learning myself, but from what I've come to learn, it's a lot of letting go of your own logic and holding onto a promise of believing in a higher power that I can't see and opening my mind to something 'bigger' than myself. That's the best way I can word it but I'll keep that thread idea in mind. (Which section would it go under?)

Are there ways to search for truth that actually lead to error?

I've always thought that science was it. Not that science is wrong, but isn't it a lot of trial and error?

 

[StormyOne]

And who's record would that be??? Hitler thought he was correct...He displyed his subjective truth....it could be that you are doing the same, and thats for the record, but no need to reply.


AT

For the record here of course.... Now you compare me to Hitler? For one who doesn't wish to offend, you seem to do so quite often... Slave owners believed as you do, and had no problems owning slaves, perhaps you are displaying the same misguided zeal as they?

 

[Avonia]

Avonia,

Are there ways to search for truth that actually lead to error?

BFA

A good analogy is a piece of holographic film. Each piece, no matter how small, contains information about the whole. But with only a small piece, you can't get a very clear sense of the whole. The search for truth is about getting larger pieces of the film.

Error--or incompleteness--is intrinsic to inquiry.

 

[StormyOne]

Avonia,

Are there ways to search for truth that actually lead to error?

BFA

the assumption is that what you now hold is free from error.... that is a huge leap... as Avonia suggested, all we have is small pieces of the whole and unfortunately some of us have proclaimed that the little piece we hold is the whole "truth." Arrogant and wrong.... and a hindrance to further truth... the error is ceasing to look for more "truth."

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I do believe that there are some things... trying to word this right... not perfect with the Bible.
I believe all the stories are true, and I believe in God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and I believe that what the Bible says about salvation and what lies in wait for us in the future is true.
Though, not through my own study, I've come to learn that the book of Esther has some historic inaccuracies to it, and there are, from what I've studied, some things that are improperly translated.
However, I think it would be safe to say that it would be a good decider for a any view that a Christian has. It was written by Godly men, and inspired by God.
If you believe what the Bible says, then I think it would be safe to say that you can definitely rely in the books written by Moses (who had a face-to-face relationship with God) and by Paul (who Jesus spoke to directly). In those two aspects, we could safely rely on their writings for a 'final decision'.
Anything else, however, I believe you should let the Holy Spirit counsel you to know what is truth enough to believe in and follow.

All the stories are true? Meaning they actually happened or that some truth is revealed through the stories? For instance the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus. The story was not used to tell people what life after death is like, but to express the unbelief of some, who would ultimately not believe if someone came back from the dead...which is what Jesus actually did. But if that story is true then the concept that God is love cannot be true, because love would not act like that (unless you redefine love to be cruelty).

Do you really believe what it says of the future is true literally? That is do you believe that the locusts in the future will have faces like men and sting like scorpions with the pain lasting for 5 months.

(Rev 9:3-10 NIV) And out of the smoke locusts came down upon the earth and were given power like that of scorpions of the earth.

They were told not to harm the grass of the earth or any plant or tree, but only those people who did not have the seal of God on their foreheads.

They were not given power to kill them, but only to torture them for five months. And the agony they suffered was like that of the sting of a scorpion when it strikes a man.

During those days men will seek death, but will not find it; they will long to die, but death will elude them.

The locusts looked like horses prepared for battle. On their heads they wore something like crowns of gold, and their faces resembled human faces.

Their hair was like women's hair, and their teeth were like lions' teeth.

They had breastplates like breastplates of iron, and the sound of their wings was like the thundering of many horses and chariots rushing into battle.

They had tails and stings like scorpions, and in their tails they had power to torment people for five months.

How do you know what books were written by Moses? Is Jewish tradition reality, Did Moses write about his own death?

What you wrote above sounds good but it produces a lot of questions about why and how you really accept the stories, the predictions and even the traditions about who wrote something.

 

[sentipente]

the error is ceasing to look for more "truth."

Or greater understanding.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

the assumption is that what you now hold is free from error....

Indeed, that is not my assumption. In fact, I am 100% certain that my understanding of God and the Scriptures currently contains errors and omissions. I take that as a given. However, even though such errors exist, the errors are mine and not God's or the Scripture's.

that is a huge leap...

It would be a big leap if you had accurately articulated my position. Will you be willing to notice that you've misread me, or will you simply continue with your assumptions about me?

as Avonia suggested, all we have is small pieces of the whole and unfortunately some of us have proclaimed that the little piece we hold is the whole "truth."

I am not among that "some."

Arrogant and wrong.... and a hindrance to further truth... the error is ceasing to look for more "truth."

Well, since most of us have been SDAs at one time or another, we know a thing or two about "arrogance" and "hindering further truth!"

However, I can't help but notice that neither Stormie or Avonia answered my question. So let me take a step back and ask a different question:

Q: Is there such a thing as error? If so, how do we know what it is?

BFA

 

[sentipente]

Q: Is there such a thing as error?

BFA

When it is properly understood the answer is No. For starters, How far does one have to deviate from the original for one to be in error?

 

[Byfaithalone1]

When it is properly understood the answer is No. For starters, How far does one have to deviate from the original for one to be in error?

And what is "the original?" Consider the following:

"That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. "Teacher," they said, "Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and have children for him. Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother. The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh. Finally, the woman died. Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?" Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. But about the resurrection of the dead—have you not read what God said to you, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living. When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at his teaching."
​

Is the original "God" (or, in this case, "the power of God")? Do "the Scriptures" provide any information about the original? Can the Scriptures dispel error?

BFA

 

[sentipente]

And what is "the original?" Consider the following:

"That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. "Teacher," they said, "Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and have children for him. Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother. The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh. Finally, the woman died. Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?" Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. But about the resurrection of the dead—have you not read what God said to you, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living. When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at his teaching."
​

Is the original "God" (or, in this case, "the power of God")? Do "the Scriptures" provide any information about the original? Can the Scriptures dispel error?

BFA

This text does not address the issue. They were wrong in their conclusions because they did not appreciate the full power of God. This does not mean they were in error as we mean it here. The original is whatevery existed before humans arrived on the planet. It includes all the laws of nature.