-- BEGIN included message
- To: binkmeisterrick at yahoo_com
- Subject: Fundamentalism, etc
- From: Tndreamgal at aol_com
- Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 11:13:10 EST
bink and other interested parties Okay Im gonna plunge into this question whether or not it is wise to do so . . . :-) Here is the definition of fundamentalism as it is interpreted by our friend Noah Webster (no, no not the webster from different strokes!!!) 1. a movement in 20th century Protestantism emphasizing the literally interpreted Bible as fundamental to Christian life and teaching. 2. a movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principles. Now if I say I am a fundamentalist, neither of these definitions properly convey what I am trying to say. The trouble with both definitions lies in the word LITERAL. Now, when I go to read my Bible I do believe that everything I read there is true . . . however, I do not believe that everything I read there is literally true. I believe that God is the God of poetry as well as prose, and so a literal interpretation is not ALWAYS appropriate to the context . . . even when the passage is not straight out poetry, btw, because one can be poetic without writing poetry. Next, you mentioned Levitical guidelines. I do not consider even a strict interpretation of the Bible to mean that these guidelines must be followed. The book of Leviticus is a historical account of what the law was for the nation of Israel at the time. We must differentiate between history and instruction. This does not, by the way, mean that God has changed, it just means he is not dealing with us in the same way he dealt with them. Too long to discuss here, so lets move on . . . Now, when I say fundamentalist, I do not mean exactly what you defined a fundamentalist to be, so Im gonna play with the definition a little. First of all, here are some more definitions as Webster records them: fundament- the base on which a structure is erected fundamental-one of the minimum constituents without which a thing or a system would not be what it is Based on these definitions, this is what I mean when I say that I am a FUNDAMENTALIST: I believe that God's Word, as revealed in the Bible(inerrant, but not always literal) and in creation itself, is the base upon which Christianity stands. I believe that Biblical teachings are the minimum constituents without which Christianity wouldnt be what it is. Though the scriptures are subject to INTERPRETATION, they are not subject to alteration. So basically all I mean when I say fundamentalist is that I take the Bible seriously, which varies a bit from Websters definition. Okay thats all for now . . . thanks for your input. Debbie
-- END included message