WHAT GOD THINKS OF FUNDAMENTALISM

Whats up Whatever !

quote:

---

I see the Fundementalists, want righteous laws

---

Are you talking about secular law, O.T. law, social laws/morality ?O.T. law was righteous - nobody disagrees with that.I think you are expressing a quasi secular/theological mixture that confuses how society should be governed with how a person relates with Christ. My OP has nothing to do with politics or secular law or social issues.The message that I get from your entire post is that secular society is abandoning Biblical morality and the fundies are leading the way to prevent this.Whatever, please listen closely; My topic is not about the issue mentioned above. My topic is about the gross misrepresentation of God that the established church world of fundementalism does to the gospel - a theological issue.This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 06-13-2004 05:49 PM

Please feel free to play devils advocate, as I will not accuse you of defending the fundies.Thanks,WT

The entire content of your post is tangentle gnosticism/heresy.You cite no source or authority except yourself. The true source of your dogma is a secular "everybody is alright and equal" non sequitor.You are just like the JW's I mentioned in the OP - you know your Bible....................verses.My OP carefully cites scriptural verses then interprets them. This post of yours demonstrates zero knowledge of theology.

quote:

---

GOD may hate and condemn acts, particulary against the weaker, but he certainly is not going to worry too much about issues of theology.

---

Jar, tell me what the word "theology" means ?God is not going to worry about theology ? - what utter subjective ignorance ! 6th graders with Sunday School knowledge know more than you.You have outed yourself as a complete idiot and unworthy to waste any more of my time.ATTENTION:Now Jar will create a furious post trying to deflect away from his massive ignorance of religious and theological truths. Why don't you ask Brian or someone of his caliber what he thinks of the post I am responding to.This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 06-13-2004 06:15 PM

Hi Buzsaw:First, I want to acknowledge your status on this board as one of the top five creos. I respect and admire your knowledge. The EvC Forum is seeing the best debate on-going in the Exodus topics as you and Brian slug it out.As to your question:

quote:

---

True or False? The word fundamentalist is derived from the word fundamental.

---

I honestly do not know. I suppose I could find out but I haven't.If you say that it is derived from "fundamental" then this would be obvious and basically invulnerable. For the sake of argument I will accept your question/point to be rhetorical.I believe I know what you are trying to establish/do. Be careful, because word meanings are three-fold: Actual, reportive, and emotive.sincerely,WT

Hi WmScott:You are a fundementalist and the OP clearly says why. You need to REFUTE from the OP or lick your wounds elsewhere.There is one and only one definition of what a true christian is: GALATIANS 2:20:

​

I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.No if's and's or but's attached - this is what makes a christian a christian.What makes Jehovahs Witnessess fundemenatlists is the fact that you plainly declare a list of "denominational" code of conduct that in essence says the conformity to these things proves you are a christian.The truth is we are supposed to live our convictions but preach Christ - period. The established church world of today, the Fundemantalists, of which Jehovah's Witnessess are a part, clearly send the message that their pet view of Moses law (whatever that is) proves a true christian. The essence of true christianity is the indwelt placement of the Spirit which comes by faith, continues to remain by faith, and will take you home IF you finish by faith - that is the gospel - the good news from God which is a righteousness that has nothing to do with Moses law. (Romans 3:21,22)

Your post sounds groggy but thank you for telling us about your ordeal. I wondered what happened to you because you never disappear from a debate. Hurry back !best regards,WT

quote:

---

Before I respond to the above complement, WT, which is it. Is it respect and admiration for this Biblical fundamentalist, 58 years into Biblical fundamentalism, or is this Biblical fundamentalist the "God damned"...... "mother fucker" as the other side of your forked tongue implicates him to be??

---

If the shoe of the OP fits - wear it.I will not apologize for anything.Paul in Galatians 1 said if anyone PERVERTS the gospel they are God damned. Paul who speaks for God said it. I clearly connected fundementalism to be this perversion.I didn't compliment your fundementalism - I complimented your Biblical knowledge.Its time for you to refute what I said (OP), from scripture, or wear the shoe that condemns your kind.How else would you interpret Galatians ?This is rhetorical.You and your kind are mofos who have completely turned the world off to Jesus. I am with Paul "Cast out the bondwoman and her son".By the authority of this verse I solemnly hereby excommunicate you from the church of Jesus Christ.sincerely,WillowtreeThis message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 06-14-2004 10:27 PM

You need to pull yourself together.If what I say is error then your hysteria says otherwise.I never said anything about anyones dear departed Mother.Stop hiding behind your Mother.Paul was speaking about the perversion of the gospel by the church at Jerusalem/establihed religious community/which perfectly matches the Fundementalists of today.

Please do me a favor and expose the dogma.Thanks,WT

quote:

---

How so am I hiding behind my good mother? You and Scott are implicating all Biblical fundamentalist's of modern times to be "God damned......mother fuckers" are you not?

---

God, in Galatians, via Paul the Apostle is.Dr. Scott pointed this out and I agree.A clear precise Biblical interpretation has been made, an interpretation that exposes the Fundementalists with Divine irony and application.Only a cissy would initiate his dear departed Mother in an anonymous debate forum. The "MOFO/MFer" description is a common modern day expression - a synonym for the directive of Paul to cast out the spiritual perverts who void the gospel. For you to bring up your mommy is a pathetic and disturbing non sequitor.I have argued position - the heresy message of fundementalism, which is a voiding of the gospel by those who would pervert it by their rendition of Moses. This thing about your dear departed Mother is a STRAW man argument. Your anger strikes me as contrived, a tantrum thrown by a person who has finally got whipped by the truth of scripture and is trying to deflect away from this fact.I am in your face just like Paul got in Peter's face in Galatians 2.
You fundementalists have lived your whole life bullying everyone with the terror of Moses. Lets see you push me around !The Apostle Paul, in Galatians 4, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit likens Sinai law to Hagar.Genesis 16:2 says Sarai barely breathed her approval for Abram to procreate with Hagar, then, immediately in the same verse it says:"And Abram heeded the voice of Sarai"That dirty old rat Abram couldn't wait to get in the tent with that young handmaid.Here we have Abram fornicating in a tent with a young girl. Thats what the inspiration of the Holy Spirit via Paul thinks of Sinai/Moses law ! And you Fundies have the audacity to equate Mosaic law/Abram flupping a young girl to have anything to do with the gospel of Jesus Christ ! There are no "fundementals" (plural) - there is only ONE term of the New Covenant: we relate to Christ and receive His benefits by faith. This is the never ending term until the day we die.This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 06-15-2004 02:09 PM

Hi WMscott:

quote:

---

The definition of Fundamentalism is:

---

Then you proceed to define fundementalism, which said definition excludes the Jehovah's Witnesses.The only problem is that I defined fundementalism to be ANY established church entity that requires ANY external conformity to Mosaic law as proof of salvation. This is what the church at Jerusalem did with circumcision. The Jehovah Witnesses do the same with their unique pet list of laws that identify a true christian.Listen closely: IF you can agree with the following statement without any qualifications or buts attached I will retract my characterization of you as a fundementalist:Christ and the benefits of His atonement are initially received by an act of faith. To continue to receive Christ and His benefits is dependant upon a continuing act of faith. To finish your journey with Christ depends on an act of faith. To forsake faith jeopardizes salvation and disconnects you from Christ. Any adherence to Mosaic law with the INTENT to gain or maintain standing with Christ is a departure from the gospel/way of faith and is condemned by Paul in Romans, Hebrews, and Galatians.

quote:

---

Now this is your special definition of the word Fundamentalist

---

This was your comment as to the way I defined "fundementalism". I carefully connected the fundies to be a perfect match with the church at Jerusalem and their perversion of the gospel exposed by Paul.THEN you cite the First Church Council decision in Acts 15.James the epistle writer, Pastor of the church at Jerusalem ruled against Paul and Peter.You are confusing the decision by James, and its recording in Acts to be God's word/will.Acts 15:7-11

​

After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are." These verses clearly say Peter was against any decision that required any part of the yoke of the law to be necesary to receive salvation.Paul's response came in Galatians.Galatians 2:12

​

Before certain men came from JamesPaul is reporting that Judaizers from James came to the Galatians and poisoned their innocent knowledge of the gospel/way of faith with this circumcision nonsense.In Acts 15 James lied. He agreed to a Levitical list of law but went on to poison the Galatians with circumcision ALSO.Paul wrote two thirds of the N.T. and nowhere does he affirm what James said in Acts 15. This means what James said in Acts 15 is not the will of God, as the Galatian letter was written to counter this Mosaic decision by James.For you to assume NECESSARY THINGS to be the Holy Spirit/God speaking perfectly exposes your perverted mind. The Acts 15 decision by James was recorded by Luke to expose the heresy of James which Galatians does in grand fashion.Who are you going to believe: Paul or James ?I'll go with an Apostle who wrote most of the N.T.James wasn't an apostle, God chose Paul in Acts 9.Acts 15 means THE TRUE MESSAGE OF THE TRUE CHURCH EXISTS OUTSIDE OF THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH. Same as today. The true church, who adheres to Paul, is not the established church, but on the "outside" of what is considered the established church.The purpose of Acts 15: 1 is to expose heresy - not to record "christian law".The purpose of Acts 15 and the decision of James is not for reception as God's will, but to expose heresy.What place does Levitical law have in gospel christianity ?How absolutely perverted of you to think everything in scripture is for adherence. The Book of James is in the Bible to contrast his crooked and perverse message of works with the straight God ordained message of Paul - grace by faith and faith alone.The gospel is HOW you obtain Jesus and that way of obtaining Christ has nothing to do with Levitical law spewed out of the mouth of James in Acts 15. The New Covenant replaces the Old Covenant - this is whatt you fundies cannot understand. Faith gets the miracle power of the Spirit to change us Divinely, and discipline willpower upon Mosaic law is a disconnection from the gospel/way of faith.

quote:

---

Paul's point was stated in the next verse. (Galatians 2:21) "for if righteousness is through law, Christ actually died for nothing."

---

You state this verse THEN you backtrack by saying this:

quote:

---

This verse is not a 'definition of what a true christian is' it is only one of requirements spelled out in scripture for Christians.

---

When Paul said if righteousness came by Moses law - then Christ died in vain - this means if you do any lawkeeping with the intent to gain or maintain salvation you are deceived and under the curse of the law.You go on to contradict this statement of Paul when you categorize it as a "requirement among other requirements".Then you accuse me of embracing "once saved always saved"."once saved always saved" is heresy.We are only guaranteed salvation if we continue how we started (faith) Hebrews 3:14.Faith is a verb and not a noun. Faith is not right belief in creed, but acting in faith upon promises of God. When this is the focus of ones life (the life of faith/gospel) God places the doer in grace and all of Moses law is abrogate to him.WMscott:This is a long post - so was yours. Lets keep them short from now on and debate specifics, more will be accomplished - ok ?

Buzsaw:It is you who have completely avoided the pointy points of my previous posts.You are still in a state of rant and your posts are semi-incoherent. I have answered all your questions - its just that you don't like my answers. One question I haven't answered is the one about Mormons.I am not a Mormon.I am a Protestant Evangelical Paulinist.This means the Apostle sent to we Gentiles has authority over all issues in the Bible per Jesus Christ per Acts 9 and 15. (not to mention the fact that he wrote two thirds of the N.T. as you know)Once again, the OP is a shoe, if it fits (and it does) wear it. This fact has you steamed. If what I say is error/heresy then your reaction betrays you. You have judged yourself. The interpretation of Galatians 4 indicts and sentences the heresy of Fundementalism. That sentence is the same as Hagar's/Ishmael's - ejection, thus saith God in Galatians.You and your kind just don't get it. The gospel is being perverted and you are worried about preserving the traditions which are responsible for the voiding. You've spent your whole life in the established religious community of fundementalism and finally somebody has put you in your place."Buzsaw"......the irony of your name and its synonymous relation to the perversion of circumcision (cutting) - the symbol of the established church/Hagar/Sinai/Fundementalism which Paul says to cast out.

The last word in the O.T. is the word "curse".This means NOBODY ever kept "all the words of the law"(Deut.27:26), therefore everyone is under the curse of the penalty of the law which is death.Death is everywhere in the O.T.The only persons to escape the penalty of death are persons who related to God via the Abrahamic covenant of righteousness by faith. (Genesis 15:6) Persons in the O.T. whom the Bible singles out as having a good ending to their life are thus believed to have "been saved". What happened to these people after dying can only be discovered by reading Hebrews.Once again, when "life" is mentioned in the O.T. it means "eternal life" and when "death" is spoken of it means eternal death. Go check me out in any O.T. hebrew dictionary/commentary.This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 06-16-2004 01:48 PM

quote:

---

Look at the last verse of the Hebrew Bible as canonized by the Christian church. The verse is upbeat, and not anything remotely related to Willow's take on it.

---

The word we are talking about is "curse".There is nothing "upbeat" as you say about the verse or the word.The LXX wasn't produced by christians. It was produced by Jews from 300 to 100 BC. This means that this source cannot have any christian influence. The only source with a christian influence is the anti-christian intent of the MT.What does Deuteronomy 27:15-26 say to be the person who does not perform/obey the law ?The entire O.T. is a record of man failing miserably under law which repeats its penalty of the curse of death as the very last thought of God via His prophet Malachi.The very next thought of God comes in the Gospels and that "thought" is the only way to escape the curse - the gospel/way of faith via Jesus Christ.

quote:

---

My point was is that you can't redefine words

---

Yes I can.But I didn't.Anyone can STIPULATE a meaning to any word.Word meanings are three-fold: Actual, Reportive, and Emotive.Fundies can define themselves and they have. Whatever "Fundemenatlist" actually means is irrelevant BECAUSE they REPRESENT a/the established religious community of OUR day.Reportively and emotively "fundementalism" means "crusaders for Mosaic law". The church at Jerusalem merely grafted Christ onto Moses. The Fundementalists do the same. Luther, in Table Talk, speaking to the "fundies" of his day said "they got Jesus on their lips but Moses in their heart."So do you Anderson.

quote:

---

Jehovah's Witnesses are not fundamentalists since they don't preach conformity to the Mosaic law.

---

Yes you are, and yes you do.You call it "requirements".....here is your crafty doublespeak:

quote:

---

You have been confusing the law of the Christ with the law of Moses. You review my earlier post on that if you want. The law of the Christ is the biblical requirements for Christians, the righteous standards we are to live by, like not murdering or committing fornication, or do you think that Christians can practice such things?

---

The only "law" of Christ is the never ending and exclusive way of relating to Him called the "law" of faith.All you are doing is using different words and phrases for Mosaic law. Like; "requirements"/"righteous standards"These "righteous standards" as you phrase it ORIGINATE from the O.T.
They are a spin-off from Mosaic law.This is your error:Because the N.T. reinforces a righteous standard - these standards become goals to conform to via willpower effort.Absolute heresy.These righteous standards ARE the goal, the issue is HOW to conform.The Holy Spirit indwelt is the ONLY thing that makes a christian a christian. The N.T. is crystal clear. The Holy Spirit only comes to dwell inside of a person by a continual act of faith toward Christ via His promises. This indwelling of Spirit results in the famous born-again experience conversion. This miracle of indwelt Spirit is the same Spirit that raised Christ from the dead AND when we continue to relate to Christ by faith that indwelt Spirit causes us to miraculously conform to the "righteous standards" reiterated in the N.T.Your error is the same error of every established religious movement. You interfere with Christ by presumptuously poisoning new converts with false information as to HOW the righteous standard is to be complied with. Your method is self-propelled disciplined willpower conformity. The way of the gospel taught in the N.T. is to KEEP DOING WHAT STARTED YOU (faith).The only issue is HOW to walk with God.To disconnect from the way you start and pursue the righteous standard apart from faith is departing from the only term of the New Covenant - faith.You fundies do not give God a chance to change people by faith. Instead you preempt the work of the Spirit by getting people to pursue the righteous standard the way it had been since Moses brought it down from Mt.Sinai - physical willpower. This is the perversion of the gospel spoken of in Galatians. "If you be circumcised Christ will profit you nothing" says Paul. Do ANY requirement or law or righteous standard with the intent of gaining or maintaining standing with God you are under the curse of the law and a god-damn pervert.Christianity starts with a miracle - the Resurrection - and that miracle is duplicated in us IF we continue how we started and not by pursuing God through the "righteous standard".Sinning is not an option. Of course we cannot murder and steal and lie. The issue is HOW to be DELIVERED from even wanting to do such things. Only the indwelt Spirit accomplishes this, this indwelt Spirit does not operate when a person goes back to the old way of relating to God by law/requirements/or righteous standard.Faith is an action based upon belief sustained by confidence. It is absence of fear and doubt. When our life's energy and focus - ALL of it is laser beamed upon acting in faith on a promise of God then the miracle indwelling of Spirit promises to make us "walk in newness of life".The issue is the focus of our attention and energy: Faith or willpower conformity to Moses/righteous standard. The latter the N.T. condemns as the perversion of the gospel.Your continued exaltation of James to be in the same authority of Paul defies the N.T.Galatians 2:9 has Paul insulting those persons by saying "they seem" to be pillars. This implies that they aint.Every evangelical scholar agrees that Paul wrote Galatians to rip the perversion of James.James represents a Godly man misrepresenting the way a person is ALWAYS to relate to God - faith.Galatians 3:1,2 asks the Galatians a RHETORICAL question. "How did you receive the Spirit and miracles.....by works/requirements OR the hearing of faith."This directly implies what I have been saying: The "rules" of relating to God do not change after conversion, even if an angel from heaven says so (chp. 1) we start by faith, continue by faith, and finish by faith. Galatians was written to condemn the decision of James in Acts 15, and Romans and Hebrews say the exact same thing just a little differently.Your view and respect for James is not what was intended by God. The Book of James, who was never an apostle, was included by God into His eternal word for the single purpose of exhibiting what heresy looks like dressed in a righteous robe.James perfectly typifies the Fundies of today. We are all addicted to sin and are all condemned by God's righteous standard/the Law, the issue is how to escape that addiction and curse: The Gospel/way of faith to faith (Romans 1:16,17) is the only escape hatch - the narrow road to life.Anderson:Even though we disagree and I know you are wrong I thank you for your quality participation in my topic.WT