Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
It is a false premise that this is a healthy approach to life. God did not necessarily promise something simply because we find words that could indicate that in the Bible.
We don't take drive our cars off the cliff hoping that they will act as aeroplanes.
change according to the person... I am not referring to changes in the members here, but how people approach finding "the truth." If a person believes that the bible is error free and infallible as an adventist, if they leave adventism, do they leave the belief that the bible is error free and infallible? Probably not.... that is what I am talking about when I speak of core beliefs....
you are saying something I have not said nor implied... there are more than 2 ways to search for truth.... unless you are equating scripture with truth? God desires that we be fully human, to live out our potential as the humans he created..... I desire that.... don't you?So if a person approaches Scripture the way that you do, he is on the right path? And if a person approaches Scipture differently, he is a fundamentalist? Are you certain that the things that you desire for people are the same things that God desires for them?
BFA
You do realize that in each of these instances there was personal communication. None of the principals in those stories acted based on conclusions they drew after reading an ancient document.And I suppose we don't drive our staff into the sea, hoping that it will part.
And I suppose we don't build an ark on dry ground, hoping that it will one day rain.
And I suppose we don't march around a city seven times, hoping that the walls will fall.
BFA
before getting to the sea, God showed Moses that the staff he held could be transformed into a snake....And I suppose we don't drive our staff into the sea, hoping that it will part.
Before the building commenced God provided proof and a promise that he was the Creator of all....And I suppose we don't build an ark on dry ground, hoping that it will one day rain.
before the walls fell, the sea was parted..... evidence was given so that they would have enough to believe....And I suppose we don't march around a city seven times, hoping that the walls will fall.
BFA
Claim:
Faith leaps. (BFA)
Three counterclaims:
1. Faith is based on relationship. (sentipente)
2. Faith is based on true nature. (AzA)
3. Faith is based on evidence. (StormyOne)
I don't think any of the counterclaims suggest that faith requires complete knowledge. That would be silly.
But they all suggest there is, after all, a sound basis for faith.
you are saying something I have not said nor implied...
there are more than 2 ways to search for truth....
unless you are equating scripture with truth?
God desires that we be fully human, to live out our potential as the humans he created..... I desire that.... don't you?
That is a strange claim when we consider that God, whom you claim you wish to know, decided to make us human. Do you think He made an error in judgment?I know what the phrase "being human" means to me, and I don't particularly desire that.
BFA
Perhaps.Hopefully, folks reading my posts have not concluded that I believe that one negates the other. Even though there may be circumstances to prepare a person to take a leap, that doesn't minimize the fact that faith leaps.
<snip>
The stories of Scripture were not specifically targeted to me. My name is not mentioned in Scripture. Rather, Scripture contains helpful lessons and principles. Perhaps some folks may be reading more into what I've written than I actually meant? I'm not sure.
Faith does not leap. Faith is a context. Humans leap based on faith.
That is a strange claim when we consider that God, whom you claim you wish to know, decided to make us human. Do you think He made an error in judgment?
Do we always know where we're going? I think we rarely do. But the journey is not a blind grope if we trust the basis (Basis) for our walk.
I hate to have to tell you this, but you have bought into a lie. Being human does not mean being sinful."Being human" carries with it a connotation that you may not have meant. In my mind, "being human" carries with a connotation of being sinful. That's why I said "I know what the phrase "being human" means to me."
I hate to have to tell you this, but you have bought into a lie. Being human does not mean being sinful.
BFA, Stormy -- I'm apparently not talking about the same thing you are. For me the issue is not measuring posters, nor limiting fundamentalism to one's concept of a particular book.
We have fundamentalist Adventists, fundamentalist nondenominational Christians, fundamentalist atheists, fundamentalist humanists, fundamentalist spiritualists... Fundamentalism doesn't label any one domain or a system of belief; it describes an approach to ideas, the search for meaning, and one's relationships with Others.
What else but human should we be?
I recall having to learn the saying "Godliness -- God-like-ness -- is the goal to be reached."
Is it?
On the one hand, we were made like God from the very beginning.
And on the other hand, according to the edenic story, grasping to be what we were not began our farce here.
So... what else but human should we be?
I understand the distinction you're making. Am possibly coming at it more loosely with the back-up of history and political science, not just Christian or religious sociology. As a result, I think subbing "fundamentalist" with "radical" also has issues, more or less the same ones as you say accrue to "fundamentalist": "radical" has its own very specific meaning but is easily misapplied. But let's move beyond the label to the mindset... we could get bogged down in labelling discussions for a very long time, lol!Actually all those other fundamentalist "isms" are based upon the concept of fundamentalist Christians who are intolerant of other beliefs or interpretations based upon the publication of the pamphlets called the "Fundamentals" around 1910. So saying a fundamentalist Islam is merely attaching the derogatory fundamentalist term without having any historical or linguistic merit. Which is one reason that people have moved away from using that term to such terms as radical Islam etc.
<snip>
So when we say fundamentalist we say that they hold to presuppositions which they have historically held with the publication which gave them their name. Anything contrary is assumed to be error. And that is how we use it however improperly for other things that some people call fundamentalist.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?