Serious Question: What distinguishes a "Fundamentalist Christian" from other Christians? (traditions, preaching)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Obviously, the "spirit" that is being listened to cannot be the same if they disagree. The reality is that people are listening to themselves and the spirit that is guiding them. John instructed his readers to "test the spirits" and to "not believe every spirit". I believe the problem is that most people have not tested the spirit they are listening to and if it agrees with their human desire they go with it. This is also the reason so many refuse to accept any standard by which to determine the truth of the spirit they are choosing to listen to.
The only answer, of course is the way we have of checking whether it is the Spirit operating, and that is whether the results are consistent with the fruit of the spirit listed in Galations 5. This, anyone claiming to be spirit-led should agree to.
Obviously, the "spirit" that is being listened to cannot be the same if they disagree. The reality is that people are listening to themselves and the spirit that is guiding them. John instructed his readers to "test the spirits" and to "not believe every spirit". I believe the problem is that most people have not tested the spirit they are listening to and if it agrees with their human desire they go with it. This is also the reason so many refuse to accept any standard by which to determine the truth of the spirit they are choosing to listen to.
Those who trash the Bible and claim to have better sources fail to come up with a single example of a spiritual truth which cannot be found in the Bible. They are also keen to quote the Bible in order to add some authority to their arguments.
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness"
If you want to test the "voices" you hear, it is easy when you can compare the message against the word of God. The Spirit, which talks to us will never contradict the word of God.
The bible has been leaned upon by many weak men in order to subjugate women.
The bible has been leaned upon by many weak men in order to subjugate ANYONE who is willing to be subjugated and afraid of free-will and self-determination.
Eventually this STEP-FORD mentality that every "christian" must walk, talk and regurgitate the same ideologies has to run its course and just vanish from humanity's culture. When the masses realize that religion is indeed an opiate (I can hear the judgements even now) and that God never intended for people to live as slaves to ANYONE, the world will be a better place. YES, there is a difference between being a SLAVE and providing assistance to others..most people would say SLAVE and SERVANT are synonymous with loss of freedom and choice.
The only answer, of course is the way we have of checking whether it is the Spirit operating, and that is whether the results are consistent with the fruit of the spirit listed in Galations 5. This, anyone claiming to be spirit-led should agree to.
As we study the Word of God, to show ourselves approved unto God, as workmen who need not to be ashamed of our workmanship, rightly dividing the Word of Truth. We should be able to stand in judgement of new doctrines being preached.
only One to whisper to us we must test the spirits. God's Word is the best way for us to do so.
3. Paul and women. As a fundamentalist, here is what I gather from 1 Corinthians 14. Paul gives his guidance. He didn't say the Lord decrees such and such. So, you need to weigh the advantages and disadvantages. I can't speak for the Apostle but my experience with women is that once a woman is put in charge or given a position of authority then the other women almost immediately dislike her. I've had female bosses before and had no problem with working for them. But typically, the women under her are held to a very high standard and I've seen it get ugly time and time again. Drama in the work place is bad enough. The Church should be free of that.
In the household the woman was to be subservient to the man but for that you have to blame Eve. (Genesis 3:16). Eve cursed all women when she was the first to fall prey to deceit. Of course, a man has an even greater responsibility because he is to love the woman as Christ loves His Church. Better or worse, sickness or in health, rich or poor. When that scale is tipped the other way with the woman ruling the man then the marriage often fails. As did mine. Not that it was all the fault of my ex. I made more than my share of mistakes.
Just an aside here, I spoke with my wife about this topic a while back as these section of 1 Corinthians really got me thinking. My wife calls herself a "Christian Feminist", so this portion also troubled her a lot while in Bible college. She explained it to me this way:
During the time this was written, women traditionally did not study scripture and were not knowledgeable on spiritual matters in the same ways as men of the time. Paul wrote this suggestion for the sake of stability during church services. Imagine if someone in a classroom constantly raised their hand to interrupt the lecture or to ask questions. They might be intelligent, thought-provoking questions that add to the discussion, but the point of the lecture is to listen and learn, not interact. Paul suggested that women be silent in services and to ask their husbands about spiritual matters when they got home, because otherwise they were being disruptive or distracting during services. Women aren't any less capable of learning, understanding, or preaching spiritual things, but they, at that time, were far less knowledgeable than men who had been privileged with teachings for years. Obviously there were women scholars and teachers throughout the Bible, so I don't think they are any less capable than men, although Paul probably didn't agree because during his time most women were second class citizens and like infants as far as religious knowledge went.
Just an aside here, I spoke with my wife about this topic a while back as these section of 1 Corinthians really got me thinking. My wife calls herself a "Christian Feminist", so this portion also troubled her a lot while in Bible college. She explained it to me this way:
During the time this was written, women traditionally did not study scripture and were not knowledgeable on spiritual matters in the same ways as men of the time. Paul wrote this suggestion for the sake of stability during church services. Imagine if someone in a classroom constantly raised their hand to interrupt the lecture or to ask questions. They might be intelligent, thought-provoking questions that add to the discussion, but the point of the lecture is to listen and learn, not interact. Paul suggested that women be silent in services and to ask their husbands about spiritual matters when they got home, because otherwise they were being disruptive or distracting during services. Women aren't any less capable of learning, understanding, or preaching spiritual things, but they, at that time, were far less knowledgeable than men who had been privileged with teachings for years. Obviously there were women scholars and teachers throughout the Bible, so I don't think they are any less capable than men, although Paul probably didn't agree because during his time most women were second class citizens and like infants as far as religious knowledge went.
That is basically how our church sees this passage.
The 'women' are to talk to their husbands at home, so the 'women' are actually the wives of the men teaching.
This post is the answer to the thread title question.
I am especially appalled that someone in this day and age is still claiming that women are subservient to men and using the bible to justify it. The part about how women in charge can't work with other women is simply pathetic.
I gave my opinion passed on my observations of women in the workplace and unlike you, I can back it up.
Thirty-five percent of Americans reported being bullied at work, according to a 2010 survey by the Workplace Bullying Institute. Women make much nastier office bullies than men, says psychologist Dr. Gary Namie, co-founder of the Institute.
...
Girls are taught to be critical about each other from adolescence, and it’s particularly vicious among working women; from playing favourites to badmouthing colleagues.
...
Debra Falzoi, a communications coordinator who was terrorized by a female boss at a Boston university, says:
“My female bully lied and gossiped about me and others. She used all indirect tactics. I have seen men also use indirect bullying tactics, but they’re much less frequent, and they have seemed solely to protect their ego rather than proactive moves to sabotage.
Falzoi eventually quit her job after reporting the harassment. Her boss did nothing, despite multiple complaints against the same woman.
It’s probably no surprise that most of these bullies are men, as a survey by the Workplace Bullying Institute, an advocacy group, makes clear. But a good 40 percent of bullies are women. And at least the male bullies take an egalitarian approach, mowing down men and women pretty much in equal measure. The women appear to prefer their own kind, choosing other women as targets more than 70 percent of the time.
...
Ask women about run-ins with other women at work and some will point out that people of both sexes can misbehave. Others will nod in instant recognition and recount examples of how women — more so than men — have mistreated them.
...
“I’ve been sabotaged so many times in the workplace by other women, I finally left the corporate world and started my own business,” said Roxy Westphal, who runs the promotional products company Roxy Ventures Inc. in Scottsdale, Ariz. She still recalls the sting of an interview she had with a woman 30 years ago that “turned into a one-person firing squad” and led her to leave the building in tears.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn
My eyeballs rolled so far back into my head I had to send out a search party to find them.
That can happen when you speed read and make rash judgments.
Dangers of a marriage with a dominant wife.
I had already written a book but it appears I need to elaborate on my comment about the "subservient wife."
I think anyone who knows me would laugh hysterically if were to boss some woman around. I can cook, wash and iron my own clothes, and I've been a very loving father to my three girls and two boys. I could never be the 'fetch me a beer woman!" type.
What I mean by subservient is a 51% to 49% partnership. Women are very intuitive about people and situations so a man who doesn't listen to her counsel is a fool. They have an innate ability to read others. The husband should be her protector, her defender, her hero when she's having a bad day or has a flat tire. God would never approve of a man treating a woman as some slave. (That would be Islamic).
Quote:
“I have never yet met a woman who respected a man she could control. So from her innermost soul swells a basic need to disrespect her husband, to find fault with him.” ~Dr. Marlin Howe
I think that quote does a good job of summing up what I mean. God designed man and woman differently. Even the secular world knows we are not wired the same. (Men are from Mars...) Man wants a beauty to fight for and a woman wants a hero who thinks she's a beauty worth fighting for. When a relationship is balanced the man will want to woo and pursue his woman. And the woman will want him to do so.
A man who never takes charge will eventually lose his woman. When I say take charge I mean setting up a romantic getaway for the weekend with every contingency planned for. Deciding where to go for dinner. Taking on the pressures of the household budget and making ends meet. Being the primary disciplinarian for the children.
The wussification of man has left a lot of women frustrated. For years now man has been told he must always be safe, never take risks, never raise your voice, give in to her every demand (the woman is always right), work and do housework (I'm fine with that btw if both parties are working), etc. Women always say they want that nice guy who will go shopping with her and who will binge watch Gray's Anatomy all weekend. But she doesn't want romance from that guy. That guy ends up being just a friend and not much more.
Don't believe me? Then explain the wild success of "50 shades of Gray." I've heard more than my share of women say "every man has to read that book!" Personally, I think it's nothing more than Mommy Porn and I doubt seriously that Jesus approves. But what is the attraction? The man is very dominant. To the point of abuse from what is said about the book. What does that tell you about the majority of women? They want a man to take charge! (Satan did a good job of corrupting that instinct. He never creates anything good. He perverts.)
The problem now is that more Christian men aren't behaving like they should. They should take charge more. They should initiate the romantic interludes. Men need to speak up for their beliefs without fear of being called sexist or insensitive. He shouldn't always agree with his wife just to keep the peace. If the woman wants to buy something frivolous then he needs to be man enough to say "no, we don't need that." (Of course that means he shouldn't be running out to buy a new pair of golf clubs every year either). Now, the one thing a man should never, ever be honest about is "do I look fat?" The answer is always, always, always - NO!!!
You show me a marriage where the wife is dominant and I'll show you a man who is either looking for an affair or hides away in some hobby (sports, tv, fishing, gaming, etc) until his miserable life passes and the sweet kiss of death comes to him. A naggy, bossy wife can be just as damaging as an abusive husband. Words can hurt men too. You will never know it because the man will suffer in silence. He will just keep it all inside until one day he looks at his wife and feels nothing. He will stop caring about his tormentor until any shred of love that ever existed will be snuffed out like a candle that's run out of wax. I speak from experience.
And before you all verbally stone me as some misguided caveman I'll offer further proof. There is even a website that shows women how to dominate their husbands! Caution, there is some graphic content on that site.
...A primary reinforcer is any reward your husband will work to get, and which will increase or maintain a behavior. Of all the rewards that you could offer your husband, sex is far and away the most powerful. Sex, therefore, serves as the core, primary reinforcer. Simply put, under the right circumstances, your husband will do virtually anything to have sex with you. A secondary reinforcer, or a conditioned reinforcer, is any previously neutral stimulus that acquires reinforcing properties through an association with a primary reinforcer over a period of time. Lingerie a secondary reinforcer, albeit one that he has almost certainly already associated with sex. As a practical matter, you cannot use sex to reward your husband for every good deed. Secondary reinforcers are therefore critical to an effective training program...
... You are, in effect, rewiring his brain to enjoy doing the chores for you. Your husband might initially be willing to make the personal sacrifice to do the chores for you. But as the training progresses, doing the chores will become less a personal sacrifice and more a self indulgence. A wise husband who has committed to serving you will therefore eagerly cooperate in the training.
And in the end, he becomes boring to her and she will become interested in the next challenge. Thus the downward spiral will continue. But what do I know?
Those who trash the Bible and claim to have better sources fail to come up with a single example of a spiritual truth which cannot be found in the Bible. They are also keen to quote the Bible in order to add some authority to their arguments.
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness"
If you want to test the "voices" you hear, it is easy when you can compare the message against the word of God. The Spirit, which talks to us will never contradict the word of God.
The Bible is a great tool of inspiration when read through the lens of Jesus Christ. It is a fine tool of the devil when read literally as inerrant and infallible.
And here's something no fundamentalist has addressed yet--- nowhere in the Bible are the words inerrant or infallible used. So fundamentalists, in worshiping the Bible, have added words TO the Scripture which in Revelation 22:18 will result in all the plagues listed in Revelation being visited on the perpetrator.
So why is it that fundamentalists can claim for the Bible that which it does not claim for itself? Can you quote Scripture for other than teaching, rebuking, correcting and training which in no way points to an inerrant Bible? And why do the early church fathers like Origen and Augustine reject the "scientific" literalism with which you imbue Scripture.
So let me rebuke you in the Name of The Lord with Scripture: "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; and you are unwilling ti come to Me so that you may have life...."
John 5:39-40
Instead of viewing scripture through the lens of Jesus Christ, you review Jesus through the lens of the Bible, finding ways to make Jesus subject to the Book He supposedly dictated.
The Bible is a great tool of inspiration when read through the lens of Jesus Christ. It is a fine tool of the devil when read literally as inerrant and infallible.
And here's something no fundamentalist has addressed yet--- nowhere in the Bible are the words inerrant or infallible used. So fundamentalists, in worshiping the Bible, have added words TO the Scripture which in Revelation 22:18 will result in all the plagues listed in Revelation being visited on the perpetrator.
So why is it that fundamentalists can claim for the Bible that which it does not claim for itself? Can you quote Scripture for other than teaching, rebuking, correcting and training which in no way points to an inerrant Bible? And why do the early church fathers like Origen and Augustine reject the "scientific" literalism with which you imbue Scripture.
So let me rebuke you in the Name of The Lord with Scripture: "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; and you are unwilling ti come to Me so that you may have life...."
John 5:39-40
Instead of viewing scripture through the lens of Jesus Christ, you review Jesus through the lens of the Bible, finding ways to make Jesus subject to the Book He supposedly dictated.
In that, there is no salvation.
Worshipping the Bible? Do you worship the voices in your head?
Just like I said before, you went right back to quoting the bible, the book which you reject. It never fails
PS You know nothing about me, so you might at well quit telling me what I believe, worship, or whether or not I am saved.
Just an aside here, I spoke with my wife about this topic a while back as these section of 1 Corinthians really got me thinking. My wife calls herself a "Christian Feminist", so this portion also troubled her a lot while in Bible college. She explained it to me this way:
During the time this was written, women traditionally did not study scripture and were not knowledgeable on spiritual matters in the same ways as men of the time. Paul wrote this suggestion for the sake of stability during church services. Imagine if someone in a classroom constantly raised their hand to interrupt the lecture or to ask questions. They might be intelligent, thought-provoking questions that add to the discussion, but the point of the lecture is to listen and learn, not interact. Paul suggested that women be silent in services and to ask their husbands about spiritual matters when they got home, because otherwise they were being disruptive or distracting during services. Women aren't any less capable of learning, understanding, or preaching spiritual things, but they, at that time, were far less knowledgeable than men who had been privileged with teachings for years. Obviously there were women scholars and teachers throughout the Bible, so I don't think they are any less capable than men, although Paul probably didn't agree because during his time most women were second class citizens and like infants as far as religious knowledge went.
Just a thought on women being in "submission" to the husband. There is a conflict WITHIN the book of I Corinthians regarding that very role. In I Corinthians 11:5 Paul tells of how women are to prophesy (our word in modern idiom is "preach"). They are to follow the cultural standard of the day and wear a covering over their heads.
In I Cor 14:34-35, a reading in the original Greek shows linguistic differences between those words and verses preceding and following, rendering those verses as a highly probable scribal addition to Paul's writing. When you remove the scribal addition and read the chapter without them you get a seamless picture of how the church is to keep order in its services.
In act 2:17-18 Peter quotes Joel 2:28 when he says
"'And it shall be in the lat days,' God says, 'That I will pour out my Spirit on all mankind and your sons and daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; even on my bondslaves, both men AND women, I will in those last days pour forth of my Spirit and they shall prophesy---.'"
This is a primary example of how fundamentalists misapply Scripture in an attempt to demean and dominate women, who biblically, are more likely to exercise faith than men who ran away to hide during Jesus' crucifixion, were absolutely more likely to underwrite the work of disciples (like Paul who praised women for providing for his needs on more than one occasion, and generally show more of the compassion Jesus urged His followers to practice.
So your wife's views are well grounded scripturaly. Neither of you should listen to fundamentalist trash talk designed to tear down rather than build up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
