• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

What is the difference between fundamentalist christians and Conservatives?

Discussion in 'Fundamentalist Christians' started by PraiseHisName9, Jul 30, 2013.

  1. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +20,905
    Anglican
    Married
    We've shown that they are neither 1) similar, nor 2) the same.

    What's the problem?
     
  2. Sasquatchit

    Sasquatchit Member

    436
    +10
    It sounds like a play on words. Being a fundamentalist is someone who lives by book, chapter, and verse; this is the N.T. church that we read about, the pattern by which we live by. R we conservative, for the most part....yes.

    Going back to ur question....there is no problem.
     
  3. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +20,905
    Anglican
    Married
    I see that you don't understand. There is a definition of "Fundamentalism " given on this forum. There also have been threads on which the meaning has been discussed at length. Read the definition (sticky) and see the difference between Fundamentalism and Conservatism as well as the Fundamentalist perspective on Scripture.
     
  4. Unix

    Unix Hebr incl Sirach&epigraph, Hermeneut,Ptolemy,Samar Supporter

    +69
    Anglican
    Single
    What do You think of recent New Testament commentary sets by one author that cite the KJV and have mostly modern day Christian living/some counterpoint examples plus application as content? (The author probably believes that the earth was created in 6 literal days, but probably doesn't believe in the young earth creationism as the university he went to doesn't but does purport literal 6-day creation.) The author of the set I'm thinking about preached the first time when he was 16, and is now 58. The NT set started to appear in the mid-00's and is not complete, dedicated volumes on books such as Mt and Mk are missing as well as Col, 1 Jn, Jude. (What books are missing is not a major problem since I have some other commentaries):
     
  5. Michael Collum

    Michael Collum Everything began with a voice, use yours Supporter

    +3,732
    Canada
    Christian Seeker
    Married
    Sometimes one can be both, sometimes it conflicts,

    If you base your interpretation on scripture and read it plainly you may notice conservatives ignore certain verses that do not lead to a conservative conclusion .

    a fundamentalist bases their faith on the fundamentals of the faith and may come to different conclusions depending on how they interpret the golden rule and apply it to people in general.

    that's my take .
     
  6. Unix

    Unix Hebr incl Sirach&epigraph, Hermeneut,Ptolemy,Samar Supporter

    +69
    Anglican
    Single
    Here are the beliefs of the university where the author graduated as a Doctor of Ministry: Bethany Divinity College and Seminary :: Doctrinal Statement:


    If You have time, read also my personality-test answers: http://www.christianforums.com/t7830849-post65942754/#post65942754
     
  7. VCViking

    VCViking Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel...

    +158
    Calvinist
    Married

    :thumbsup:
     
  8. VCViking

    VCViking Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel...

    +158
    Calvinist
    Married

    :thumbsup:
     
  9. lismore

    lismore Legend

    +1,878
    Christian
    Single
    A fundamentalist follows the bible, a conservative follows a socio-political idea?
     
  10. cubanito

    cubanito Well-Known Member

    +214
    Presbyterian
    Married
    US-Republican
    The above post is correct. Put another way, the Pharisees were conservatives who by giving excess weight to tradition, made void the Law of God. Thus no healing on Shabbat and so on. Jesus was a fundamentalist as He held to every letter of Scripture and gave little concern for tradition. He was so adamant about the tiniest letter of Scriprture that when asked by the religious liberals of His day (the Sadducees) to show the resurection from the Torah; He made His case from the TENSE of a verb by pointing out that God is referred to as the God of Jacob in the present, by implication that Jacob was still alive.

    This may seem as a put down of conservative Christians, given that the Pharisees are generally condemmed in Scripture. Yet some Pharisees were quite kind to Christ and His followers: Nicodemus tried to help, and Gamaliel also sought to stop the persecution of the early Church.

    When I was a resident, the medical program director was on my case to an absurd degree. I could do nothing right by this man's opinion. One time, when it was obvious to all I was right and he was not, he turned red, visibly shook, yelled "You are right for the wrong reason!" and left rounds midway with no further explanation. Years later as I commented to another physician that had gone through the same training, he laughed and explained to me WHY that man was so critical of me: he thought I had potentioal. He had seen various trainees under him, and he took interest only in those few he thought were worth his time and effort to train into good physicians. Apparently, this was this man's way of paying me a great complement: you are worth me flogging you.

    I honestly believe that while the Pharisees were wrong, Christ took an interest in them because they were NOT LUKEWARM! At least they stood for something, they cared to some extent for the things of God. Perhaps they got much more wrong than right, but they CARED enough to try.

    When I compare conservative Christians to Pharisees, I am trying to do so in a relatively positive way. They at least are not lukewarm liberals with whom I've no interest at all.

    JR
     
  11. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +20,905
    Anglican
    Married
    No. The statement of purpose for the Conservative Christians forum is clear that the meaning of the term there is traditionalist Christians holding to the historic beliefs and practices of tChristianity, regardless of denomination. It's a religious use of the word, in other words.

    A fundamentalist would be similar but not identical. A comparison of the two statements of principle for the two forums would answer the question quite well, I think.

    On the other hand, if the question is supposed to be "What's the difference between a fundamentalist and a political Conservative" (which would be an odd comparison), I suppose that we'd conclude that we're comparing apples and oranges because there are fundamentalists who vote Democrat, (or Labour), Bible believers who are not fundamentalists, and political Conservatives who aren't at all conventional in their religious values.
     
  12. Job8

    Job8 Senior Member

    +1,782
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Before 1881 the KJV was "THE" Bible for all English-speaking Christians worldwide. Even the Geneva Bible (which is very close) did not hold that position. So you might have a misunderstanding about the time from which the KJV became an issue. And yes, today, a true Fundamentalist would have no choice but to hold to the KJV-only position.


    This is a strawman argument. I have a reprint of the 1611 edition and other than spellings and some minor differences, the words are identical. The so-called "revisions" were to bring conformity to more recent lnaguage usage.


    There are a few passages where the old English usage needs clarification (through the use of a Concordance). But overall this is really not the issue it is made out to be.


    And that's perfectly fine. The real issue is that the Greek manuscripts supporting the modern versions have attacked Bible doctrines, and changed thousands of words to "emend" the text. The Hebrew text has been "emended" on modernisitic lines.

    If we believe in plenary verbal inspiration (every word is a word of God, including the jots and tittle), then a revised, "emended", corrupted Hebrew or Greek text is unacceptable, particularly if there was doctrinal bias in making the changes. The Gnostics had much to do with the changes.

    Coming back to the OP, some of the key differences between conservative and fundamentalist Christians would be (a) less denominational loyalty for fundamentalists, (b) more aggressive outreach with the Gospel for fundamentalists, (c) Dispensationalism and a pretribulation, premillenial Rapture doctrine for fundamentalists, and (d) a more literal interpretation of Bible prophecy for fundamentalists.
     
Loading...