Baptists and fundamentalism.

[RaylightI]

Hi.

I need to inform you firstly that I don't speak English perfectly, but I'm sure you'll be able to understand me.

Some people claim that Baptists / Evangelicals are fundamentalists. I have to mention that if "fundamentalists" mean that Baptists are holding straight to the basic orthodox fundamental teachings of Christianity such as the divinity of Christ, the Holy Trinity, the virgin birth, the Bible is the word of God, Jesus Christ's death and physical resurrection, then I applause that. But I wonder if it is the other meaning of "fundamentalism", which means, violence, hate, discrimination, attacking those who disagree with, i.e, we all heard of the anti-gay laws in Africa which are supported by some American Evangelicals and Baptists, and these laws punish homosexuality with life in prison. This is just an example.

Are such claims true ? And if not, then why do people think that about Baptists ?

 

[FFSSTC]

Well Baptists are fundamentalists if you use the liberal definition (which is negative). As a Reformed Baptist, when I hear the word fundamentalist, I typically think of the IFB,KJV Only people. But don't even get me started on them.......

 

[RaylightI]

Well Baptists are fundamentalists if you use the liberal definition (which is negative). As a Reformed Baptist, when I hear the word fundamentalist, I typically think of the IFB,KJV Only people. But don't even get me started on them.......

Thank you for replying

I just have to point another question stated above.

What about the claim that Baptists are violent and hateful ( I'm not saying that is true, but I'm just saying what some people claim about Baptists and Evangelicals ). And that they are very hateful people who want to perish homosexuals, seculars, muslims...etc. ?

 

[USCGrad90]

Thank you for replying

I just have to point another question stated above.

What about the claim that Baptists are violent and hateful ( I'm not saying that is true, but I'm just saying what some people claim about Baptists and Evangelicals ). And that they are very hateful people who want to perish homosexuals, seculars, muslims...etc. ?

The answer is NO - we are not violent and hateful, but this opinion may have been shaped by some groups that have gained attention in the media.

Westboro Baptist Church is perhaps the most obvious example that comes to mind, because they have been on the news protesting homosexuality, particular at funerals for the American military. Keep in mind that Westboro is an unaffiliated church that has extreme ideologies, which are not consistent with affiliated groups such as the Southern Baptist Convention or Baptist World Alliance. A lot of us are saddened and disappointed in their actions and don't feel that they are acting in a manner that Christ would desire.

Baptists believe, as stated in Romans 3:23 that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Because we are all sinners, it is not our place to judge, but to show compassion, love, and forgiveness and provide the Word of God "for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness." as prescribed in 2 Timothy 3:16.

There are man-made laws in different places which one must abide by, but for ultimate judgement - it will be left up to God.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Thank you for replying

I just have to point another question stated above.

What about the claim that Baptists are violent and hateful ( I'm not saying that is true, but I'm just saying what some people claim about Baptists and Evangelicals ). And that they are very hateful people who want to perish homosexuals, seculars, muslims...etc. ?

In my own experience I have found violent and hateful individuals within all religions without exception. In most cases they are the exception and not the rule. You will find violent and hateful Baptists if you look for them (and I refuse to assist you in that effort) but the vast majority of Baptists strongly adhere to the fundamental beliefs of the Christian faith, which include loving your neighbor as yourself.

 

[classicalhero]

Well it's not like homosexuality is harmful or not? End sarcasm. The penalty for both homosexuality and adultery is the same in the Bible.

 

[Bluelion]

Hi.

I need to inform you firstly that I don't speak English perfectly, but I'm sure you'll be able to understand me.

Some people claim that Baptists / Evangelicals are fundamentalists. I have to mention that if "fundamentalists" mean that Baptists are holding straight to the basic orthodox fundamental teachings of Christianity such as the divinity of Christ, the Holy Trinity, the virgin birth, the Bible is the word of God, Jesus Christ's death and physical resurrection, then I applause that. But I wonder if it is the other meaning of "fundamentalism", which means, violence, hate, discrimination, attacking those who disagree with, i.e, we all heard of the anti-gay laws in Africa which are supported by some American Evangelicals and Baptists, and these laws punish homosexuality with life in prison. This is just an example.

Are such claims true ? And if not, then why do people think that about Baptists ?

To my knowledge those laws were made by Muslims and not Christians.

It comes down to this if you reject gays do you also reject those who commit adultery, or fornicate? Its all the same sin sexual immorality. We are sinners who have received grace, we are to have grace on others.

Jesus said forgive and love everyone. That is the core of the baptist teaching and other Christians teaching that is truly of God.

No Christians are not haters, but remember we are human and make mistakes.

 

[food4thought]

Hi.

I need to inform you firstly that I don't speak English perfectly, but I'm sure you'll be able to understand me.

Some people claim that Baptists / Evangelicals are fundamentalists. I have to mention that if "fundamentalists" mean that Baptists are holding straight to the basic orthodox fundamental teachings of Christianity such as the divinity of Christ, the Holy Trinity, the virgin birth, the Bible is the word of God, Jesus Christ's death and physical resurrection, then I applause that.

This is close to how most Baptist churches would view themselves.

Fundamentalism was a movement in the late 1800's and early 1900's that was largely a reaction against some very liberal views that gained influence over many of the major denominations and seminaries in America, rejecting the core doctrines of the historical Christian faith. Over time, many fundamentalists increasingly withdrew from modern society, and evangelicalism split off from them, but still held to the core doctrines. Because the remaining fundamentalists were often increasingly legalistic and prone to "hellfire and brimstone" type preaching, the word fundamentalist began to take on negative overtones in western culture, eventually being used to describe hateful and violent groups in any context... hope that helps you with your confusion.

But I wonder if it is the other meaning of "fundamentalism", which means, violence, hate, discrimination, attacking those who disagree with, i.e, we all heard of the anti-gay laws in Africa which are supported by some American Evangelicals and Baptists, and these laws punish homosexuality with life in prison. This is just an example.

This definition does not describe the vast majority of Baptists in any way, shape, or form. I wasn't aware that any Evangelicals supported laws putting gays in prison for life.

Are such claims true ? And if not, then why do people think that about Baptists ?

It probably has to do with some people using the original definition of fundamentalist, which is close but not entirely accurate, while others use the more negative definition, and get believed because of people like the Westborough church giving Christians a bad name.

 

[th1bill]

Hi.

I need to inform you firstly that I don't speak English perfectly, but I'm sure you'll be able to understand me.

Some people claim that Baptists / Evangelicals are fundamentalists. I have to mention that if "fundamentalists" mean that Baptists are holding straight to the basic orthodox fundamental teachings of Christianity such as the divinity of Christ, the Holy Trinity, the virgin birth, the Bible is the word of God, Jesus Christ's death and physical resurrection, then I applause that. But I wonder if it is the other meaning of "fundamentalism", which means, violence, hate, discrimination, attacking those who disagree with, i.e, we all heard of the anti-gay laws in Africa which are supported by some American Evangelicals and Baptists, and these laws punish homosexuality with life in prison. This is just an example.

Are such claims true ? And if not, then why do people think that about Baptists ?

Hello and welcome Raylighti. I am one of those Fundamental Baptists and we are Fundamentalists because we try to hold the Basic Beliefs close to our hearts and not because we might own a gun or a knife. any weapons we might have are for killing wild animals to feed ourselves and our children after the manor of our fathers before us. We will fight if we need to but we prefer being peaceful.

Please do not be offended but you have admitted you are still learning English and when you typed you should have typed applaud. A general use of applause would be "The applause was so loud I could hear nothing else." And the use of applaud is more of a singular form of the word.

At 69 and rushed because I have been in the last stage of MS for a few years now I am trying to learn American Spanish. Spanish, I believe is much easier to learn than English, especially the American form of it because we have so many spellings of the same sound and so many meanings oof the same word.

May God bless my brother.

 

[th1bill]

Well Baptists are fundamentalists if you use the liberal definition (which is negative). As a Reformed Baptist, when I hear the word fundamentalist, I typically think of the IFB,KJV Only people. But don't even get me started on them.......

What you have done is to misuse a perfectly good word The way you have defined it is modern day reformationist and not at all dictionary correct. If we go to an unreformed Miriam Webster we see that a fundamentalist is a person that holds the basics close. I teach the basics and the title of my BLOG is Basic Christianity... I am aFundamental Christian with membership in a Baptist Church.

 

[th1bill]

The answer is NO - we are not violent and hateful, but this opinion may have been shaped by some groups that have gained attention in the media.

Westboro Baptist Church is perhaps the most obvious example that comes to mind, because they have been on the news protesting homosexuality, particular at funerals for the American military. Keep in mind that Westboro is an unaffiliated church that has extreme ideologies, which are not consistent with affiliated groups such as the Southern Baptist Convention or Baptist World Alliance. A lot of us are saddened and disappointed in their actions and don't feel that they are acting in a manner that Christ would desire.

Baptists believe, as stated in Romans 3:23 that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Because we are all sinners, it is not our place to judge, but to show compassion, love, and forgiveness and provide the Word of God "for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness." as prescribed in 2 Timothy 3:16.

There are man-made laws in different places which one must abide by, but for ultimate judgement - it will be left up to God.

Except for the lack of defining what y o ument by not judging, AMEN! I not only can not judge a person's eternal home but I must not do that. On the other hand, if I fail to judge that my brother is about to drive off an unmarked bridge into the abyss and therefor fail to work to stop him, I have become a fool unto myself. We judge all day long or we are, truly, fools.

 

[Angelquill]

I'm wondering...
As Christians, is it not our responsibility to uphold Christian values?
I'm not talking about extreme punishment, like life in prison for gays...nor do I agree with the Westboro church.
However, should we not have the guts to call a sin a sin?
Yes, we should be forgiving. Yes, we should welcome all who wish to come to Him.
However, should we not expect that those who do come to Him would wish to put their sin away from them?
Do we not fight sin in ourselves?

What should the church's stance on things like "gay marriage" be?

 

[food4thought]

I'm wondering...
As Christians, is it not our responsibility to uphold Christian values?

Yes and no... within the church, we should call our brothers and sisters to holiness and uphold that kind of standard. Outside the church, we should not expect such a high standard from those in the world. We abide by the law of the land, and in a democracy like America, where a large minority of the population does not even claim to be Christian and a large majority certainly don't live out their claim to be Christian, we have the difficult question of whether Christian values like the forbidding of homosexual sex should be upheld by the government.

I'm not talking about extreme punishment, like life in prison for gays...nor do I agree with the Westboro church.
However, should we not have the guts to call a sin a sin?

Absolutely yes. Some day, perhaps soon, we may be held criminally and civilly liable for doing so, though.

Yes, we should be forgiving. Yes, we should welcome all who wish to come to Him.
However, should we not expect that those who do come to Him would wish to put their sin away from them?

Most certainly. We should have patience and mercy on those who are sincerely struggling with their sin, but those who refuse to acknowledge and deny that their sin is wrong, but instead embrace it, should be cast out of fellowship until they repent.

Do we not fight sin in ourselves?

I would certainly hope so if we call ourselves Christian. But we need grace and mercy and love and patience with each other, because we do not always win the fight immediately. I have been fighting a battle against my addiction to cigarettes for years, and still have not gained the final victory... but I will not stop fighting until I am free from it.

What should the church's stance on things like "gay marriage" be?

It should obviously be forbidden in the church. A wedding ceremony is a covenant between the man and woman before God. A pastor/priest should not pretend to place God's blessing on a union that is inherently sinful.

As far as the law of the land, I am less certain how to proceed... in America, the majority will dictate these things within the framework of the Constitution and existing law. With the way young people are being indoctrinated to accept homosexuality as normal, very soon those who think gay marriage should be allowed will be in the clear majority, and I do not think that the constitution or existing law would prevent the legalization of same sex marriage. It is clearly against God's will, but regardless of what the founding fathers wanted or intended, we now live in a secular state.

In order to protect pastors/priests from having lawsuits filed against them for refusing to perform same sex marriages due to conscience, and in order to honor the religious roots of marriage, I think the best way forward would be to completely remove government approval from the marriage process. Instead of marriage licenses, all who wish to be recognized as a family unit by the government would get a civil union contract (call it whatever they want, just not marriage), and a ceremony could be held to celebrate this if they choose, or not. Civil unions would be recognized by the government just as marriages are today for tax and other purposes. Clergy would not have any authority to perform unions, upholding the secular idea of the separation of church and state. Anyone who wished to be married would be allowed to do so in a separate ceremony performed by clergy, but there would be no government recognition of marriage in any way. It would be a "religious" ceremony that believers would have to signify their covenant between themselves and God. I am sure that homosexuals that desired a marriage ceremony could find some poor excuse for a pastor/priest to perform one for them, but those who refused to do one for them should be safe from civil/criminal suits against them. I am not completely happy with this solution, but it might be the best we can hope for in western democracies.

 

[Angelquill]

Yes and no... within the church, we should call our brothers and sisters to holiness and uphold that kind of standard. Outside the church, we should not expect such a high standard from those in the world. We abide by the law of the land, and in a democracy like America, where a large minority of the population does not even claim to be Christian and a large majority certainly don't live out their claim to be Christian, we have the difficult question of whether Christian values like the forbidding of homosexual sex should be upheld by the government.



Absolutely yes. Some day, perhaps soon, we may be held criminally and civilly liable for doing so, though.



Most certainly. We should have patience and mercy on those who are sincerely struggling with their sin, but those who refuse to acknowledge and deny that their sin is wrong, but instead embrace it, should be cast out of fellowship until they repent.



I would certainly hope so if we call ourselves Christian. But we need grace and mercy and love and patience with each other, because we do not always win the fight immediately. I have been fighting a battle against my addiction to cigarettes for years, and still have not gained the final victory... but I will not stop fighting until I am free from it.



It should obviously be forbidden in the church. A wedding ceremony is a covenant between the man and woman before God. A pastor/priest should not pretend to place God's blessing on a union that is inherently sinful.

As far as the law of the land, I am less certain how to proceed... in America, the majority will dictate these things within the framework of the Constitution and existing law. With the way young people are being indoctrinated to accept homosexuality as normal, very soon those who think gay marriage should be allowed will be in the clear majority, and I do not think that the constitution or existing law would prevent the legalization of same sex marriage. It is clearly against God's will, but regardless of what the founding fathers wanted or intended, we now live in a secular state.

In order to protect pastors/priests from having lawsuits filed against them for refusing to perform same sex marriages due to conscience, and in order to honor the religious roots of marriage, I think the best way forward would be to completely remove government approval from the marriage process. Instead of marriage licenses, all who wish to be recognized as a family unit by the government would get a civil union contract (call it whatever they want, just not marriage), and a ceremony could be held to celebrate this if they choose, or not. Civil unions would be recognized by the government just as marriages are today for tax and other purposes. Clergy would not have any authority to perform unions, upholding the secular idea of the separation of church and state. Anyone who wished to be married would be allowed to do so in a separate ceremony performed by clergy, but there would be no government recognition of marriage in any way. It would be a "religious" ceremony that believers would have to signify their covenant between themselves and God. I am sure that homosexuals that desired a marriage ceremony could find some poor excuse for a pastor/priest to perform one for them, but those who refused to do one for them should be safe from civil/criminal suits against them. I am not completely happy with this solution, but it might be the best we can hope for in western democracies.

You and I do seem to think quite a bit alike.
I have no problem with the idea of "civil unions", nor do I care so much the rest of it.
It just really frosts my cupcakes when the churches seem to accept it as "normal" when we know that it is not.
I get cranky when I hear such nonsense as "they are born that way"...of course they were, silly...we are all born into sin.
Or "animals do it". How ridiculous. Should we pattern our sexual behavior on what we see in the animal kingdom? I grew up on a farm...trust me, animals do lots of things that we would put people in prison for. Oh, and gay sex is actually pretty rare in the animal kingdom...and when it does happen, at least on the farm, it is generally because the opposite sex is not available.