Does anyone actually believe???

[Biochemist]

Agree this is a minority, its just an extremely vocal minority. Disagree on its being "some local pastors" unless you include Jerry Falwell (Liberty University), Bob Jones (Bob Jones University), and many others of similar stature...

I am not going to defend either Falwell or Jones, but I don't think that either of them are literalists either. They make take some passages literally that I do not, but I don't think they take all passages leterally. I am certain that Falwell doesn't.

 

Besides, the point is to critique the informed arguments, not the weak ones. Why even bring these guys up?

[bumab]

But, in my defense, I was talking about high-school students, not their teachers.

 

Well, with that said... :xx: It's actually a great analogy.

[Biochemist]

Amen! :xx:

I need to check the rules, but is praying legal in these posts? Tormod?:)

[paultrr]

I want to add to this thread also...Where does Rapture come from, it is not in the Bible. No need to quote Theselonians I've read it.

I understand that there may be people who are not affected by the end times, but the bible states, "as in the times of Noah", "as in the times of Lot", during these times they were not magically removed from the earth they stayed right here, they were however excluded from punishment..Rapture is just another new doctrine put in place to satisfy a certain sect. I also thing Revelations is one of the best books, with the exception of, I am having trouble making sense out of it, but I am working on it. I do know that just because you see a preacher on TV that doesn't mean he/she is spreading the word of God even though it may seem like it.

 

Try looking up dispensationalism. It can be found under the Fundamentalists camps. By the way,some of the biggest groups here in Texas are fundamentalists groups with Dallas Seminary locally about the biggest school in the State on Theology. An out growth of DTS and other fundamentalists Seminaries is the Bible Church movement again big across Texas and much of the South. Going east of Texas one would find SBC in Birmingham Alabama, a Bible College founded by DTS graduates. All of these Bible Churches, DTS, etc all hold to the Bible being without error and that one interpret the scriptures literally. We also have locally the First Baptists Church in Dallas. Some might know the name of Criswell. He's a fundamentalists of the Southern Baptists camp. All of them also teach dispensationalism and hold to the rapture of the Church before the start of the tribulation. You could also add in almost all of the local Assemblies of God, the Church of God, most Independent Churches, etc. About the only one's holding to different views here are the Presbeterian, Methodists, and Catholic churches. As they say, this is the Bible belt and home field for Bush Junior.

[paultrr]

I've gone through a bunch of phases, from total belief to total disbelief and one thing has always remained the same in my belief, revelations should be completely ignored. I think it's just the ramblings of a senile man personally. I don't know if others really share this point of view or not.

 

Personally, I find that fits about a good portion of the Bible. Ever read the Song of Solomon. Talk about needing to use some filters on things.

[Buffy]

I am not going to defend either Falwell or Jones, but I don't think that either of them are literalists either. They make take some passages literally that I do not, but I don't think they take all passages leterally.

Sure but the funny thing is that the notion of literal interpretation is a key defining characterization of their sects, and at the same time, the definitely pick and choose what they interpret literally or twist to support their own positions. Try googling "literal interpretation of the bible falwell" and you get 42,000 hits!

Besides, the point is to critique the informed arguments, not the weak ones. Why even bring these guys up?

I disagree. While I understand your consternation at being by implication lumped with these idiots, they are the 800 pound gorilla in the room and you ignore them at your own peril. I think they pervert Christianity and they should not be ignored, they should be vociferously denounced! We keep asking the Muslims to denounce bin Laden and get mad when they don't, yet we live in a pretty glassy house. Again its a MINORITY, but when major publications like the Economist note that there are many influential people who are seeking to foment strife in the middle east because its one of the harbingers of the end times, we're not talking about some wierd Koresh-style sect....

 

Cheers,

Buffy

[paultrr]

This idea certainly comes up regularly. I don't know ANYONE who believes the Bible must be interpreted "literally", even from the oroginal source languages. Conservative scholars of all flavors agree that use of idiom, hyperbole, phenomemnal language, poetry, allegory, metaphor, and histoical context is required for interpretation.

 

I am not sure how a literalist could even read the newspaper, much less the Bible.

 

I think you misunderstand what they imply by literal. What they are saying in a nutshell is all the Bible,every last word is inspired by God, without error, etc. When they say literal, they take all you just mentioned into account. But to them everything there is God's message for us. They also hold to the Book of Revelations being real prophecy on the end times and that in reality it lays out the exact events that will happen in the end times. Fundamentalism goes further with a list of the so-called fundamentals of the faith:

 

Christ was born of a virgin, conceived by the Holy Spirit of God.

Christ was both perfect God and perfect man in the flesh.

You already know the one they hold to on the Bible.

 

The list goes on to name some more fundamentals of the faith in simular fashion to some Church's declaration of beliefs, etc. Jerry Falwel claims to be a fundamentalists himself. Some of these guys also add in the part about a literal seven days creation too. Tim Lehey is also a dispensational fundamentalists himself and a grad of a simular Institute to DTS. This is the heart and mouth peice of the modern Moral Majority out there. We could also add in Billy Graham into this list.

[paultrr]

Sure but the funny thing is that the notion of literal interpretation is a key defining characterization of their sects, and at the same time, the definitely pick and choose what they interpret literally or twist to support their own positions. Try googling "literal interpretation of the bible falwell" and you get 42,000 hits!

I disagree. While I understand your consternation at being by implication lumped with these idiots, they are the 800 pound gorilla in the room and you ignore them at your own peril. I think they pervert Christianity and they should not be ignored, they should be vociferously denounced! We keep asking the Muslims to denounce bin Laden and get mad when they don't, yet we live in a pretty glassy house. Again its a MINORITY, but when major publications like the Economist note that there are many influential people who are seeking to foment strife in the middle east because its one of the harbingers of the end times, we're not talking about some wierd Koresh-style sect....

 

Cheers,

Buffy

 

I agree. I was once one of these guys who studied at their Institutes. Basically, as I have tried to point out they also rather control not only the Bible belt as well as what I call the Immoral Minority.

[bumab]

I think you misunderstand what they imply by literal. What they are saying in a nutshell is all the Bible,every last word is inspired by God, without error, etc. When they say literal, they take all you just mentioned into account. But to them everything there is God's message for us. They also hold to the Book of Revelations being real prophecy on the end times and that in reality it lays out the exact events that will happen in the end times. Fundamentalism goes further with a list of the so-called fundamentals of the faith:

 

Christ was born of a virgin, conceived by the Holy Spirit of God.

Christ was both perfect God and perfect man in the flesh.

You already know the one they hold to on the Bible.

 

Actually, I think this describes the majority of Christians- this is not the extreme Fundamentalism that I think we've been discussing. Genesis, for example, can be true without being literally true, the whole Bible can contain valuable messages without being taken literally at every point.

 

Most Christians, I think, would describe your point #2 as being THE central tenent of the faith along with the Resurrection! I think a distinction should be made between your points, which are not at all uncommon, and the more distructive attitudes taken by the leaders mentioned.

[Biochemist]

...some of the biggest groups here in Texas are fundamentalists groups with Dallas Seminary locally about the biggest school in the State on Theology

Paultrr- Could you define your usage of "fundamentalism" for me? I have no idea what you mean by it.

All of these Bible Churches, DTS, etc all hold to the Bible being without error and that one interpret the scriptures literally.

The DTS folks do believe the Bible is inspired, but that is a long way from saying it is literally true. Are you assuming that anyone that believes the Bible is inspired believes it is literally true???

All of them also teach dispensationalism and hold to the rapture of the Church before the start of the tribulation.

Some Baptists are dispensationalists, but I am not sure how broadly held that notion is any more.

.. About the only one's holding to different views here are the Presbeterian, Methodists, and Catholic churches. As they say, this is the Bible belt and home field for Bush Junior.

Well, Bush Jr is a Methodist (although I am not sure how close he is to Methodist doctirne). I am not quite sure what your point is on this.

[Biochemist]

I think you misunderstand what they imply by literal. What they are saying in a nutshell is all the Bible,every last word is inspired by God, without error, etc. When they say literal, they take all you just mentioned into account.

Well, I speak English. I am not concerned what "they" mean by literal. I am concerned what you mean by literal. Literal is the oppostie of figurative. There is almost no relationship between believing that the Bibile is inspired and believing that it is to be taken literally. If we expect IN THIS FORUM to have a conversation about what folks believe, we need to use words. "Literal" means using a word consistent with denotation.

But to them everything there is God's message for us. They also hold to the Book of Revelations being real prophecy on the end times and that in reality it lays out the exact events that will happen in the end times.

Exact events??? Really?? For clarification (by example) I think the Bible is inspired, and that the Revelation is valid prophecy but I have only a very vague idea of what it means. And when I say "very vague" I mean that literally. Further, I got some of that vagueness and ambiguity from folks that were THDs from Dallas Theological Seminary. They certainly did not seem like literalists to me.

Fundamentalism goes further with a list of the so-called fundamentals of the faith:

 

Christ was born of a virgin, conceived by the Holy Spirit of God.

Christ was both perfect God and perfect man in the flesh.

You already know the one they hold to on the Bible.

Paultrr-This is not normal usage of "fundamentalist". This is what most folks mean by "conservative" or in some contexts, "evangelical". "Fundamentalist" means that a sect is extraordinarily focused on constraining a set of outward behaviors. That is why the phrase "Muslim fundamentalist" makes sense when applied to the Taliban, for example. I regard " fundamentalist" as derogatory. "Conservative" is not.

...We could also add in Billy Graham into this list.

Billy Graham is a conservative, not a fundamenatlist.

[Biochemist]

While I understand your consternation at being by implication lumped with these idiots, they are the 800 pound gorilla in the room and you ignore them at your own peril.

My consternation is based exclusively on who does the lumping. I do attempt to influence those around me to think. That would include you.

 

We are in the middle of a discusison about the validity of the Bible. In this discussion you are using unstructured external argument as if that is a valid debating position held by me. It is not. It is PERFECTLY REASONABLE to ignore folks like Falwell in these contexts. :xx: I do.

 

We have had uncountable posts now about the notion that believing the Bible makes you a 1) Creationist 2) Fundamentalist or 3) homophobe. Incontrovertibly, NONE of those are true. It is not legitimate in debate to surface these false associations.:)

[Biochemist]

...Try googling "literal interpretation of the bible falwell" and you get 42,000 hits!

No that I care much about Falwell, but I am not sure what you are suggesting this means. If I google "PhD ignorant lesbians" I get about 14,000 hits. I don't think that means that PhDs are generally ignorant lesbians. Or that PhDs are ignorant, or that PhDs are lesbians....

[BEAKER]

I want to add to this thread also...Where does Rapture come from, it is not in the Bible. No need to quote Theselonians I've read it.

Back to Smokinjoe's question: you're absolutely right; the word "Rapture" isn't in the bible. It is a name given to the event spoken of by Jesus in Matthew 24:29-31; Mark 13:26-27; Luke 21:27-28; and prophesied in Daniel 12:1-3.

 

who "coined the phrase"? I don't rightly know.

 

Personally I don't believe that the church will escape much, if any, of those terrible times called the "tribulation". But that's my "interpretation" of the scripture - because I take it pretty literally, and see no reason to do other than that.:xx:

[infamous]

I need to check the rules, but is praying legal in these posts? Tormod?:xx:

 

If it's not, maybe it should be?

[Buffy]

We are in the middle of a discusison about the validity of the Bible. In this discussion you are using unstructured external argument as if that is a valid debating position held by me. It is not. It is PERFECTLY REASONABLE to ignore folks like Falwell in these contexts. :xx: I do.

No, the original post in this thread was "does *anyone* actually believe this stuff?" not "do most mainstream conservative Christians believe this stuff" I think we both *clearly* agree that the latter is false, but I continue to argue that the former is TRUE. In the discussion here, you seem to be arguing that the former is *irrelevant* because these sects are such an insignificantly small minority that the former statement is *false* which I consider to be a dangerous delusion, so I get a bit hot under the tank top about it. Sorry!

We have had uncountable posts now about the notion that believing the Bible makes you a 1) Creationist 2) Fundamentalist or 3) homophobe. Incontrovertibly, NONE of those are true. It is not legitimate in debate to surface these false associations.:)

I absolutely agree with this, and you know it and I try to back you up in these discussions on this point, but I think you do a disservice to your arguments by taking these unfounded aspersions personally to the point of arguing for false statements. Falwell spends a lot of time talking about inerrancy and literal truth of the Bible that goes *much* further than mainstream conservative Christian sects: saying he does not or at least saying he's irrelevant not only is not true, but starts to paint his followers with the same brush you accuse others of painting you with. I believe it ts much better to recognize that although it is a minority, it is a *significant* minority that does indeed wield a large influence upon society and it is not a good idea--as well as being a bit intellectually dishonest--to just pretend its not there. Don'tcha think?

 

Cheers,

Buffy

[Biochemist]

No, the original post in this thread was "does *anyone* actually believe this stuff?" not "do most mainstream conservative Christians believe this stuff" I think we both *clearly* agree that the latter is false, but I continue to argue that the former is TRUE.

I concede your point. The original post was whether any Christians believe that those who have not heard the gospel are lost. Some certainly do.

...which I consider to be a dangerous delusion, so I get a bit hot under the tank top about it...

Yes but I drew us off track. My apologies.

I absolutely agree with this..I think you do a disservice to your arguments by taking these unfounded aspersions personally

Point conceded again.

...I believe it ts much better to recognize that although it is a minority, it is a *significant* minority that does indeed wield a large influence upon society and it is not a good idea--as well as being a bit intellectually dishonest--to just pretend its not there.

I did not mean to contend Falwell is not there. I just did not mean to insert him in the discussion at all, since he is such a liberal's bogey man. His theology does not (frankly) bother me near as much as his political activism. I wish he would go back to being a pastor.

 

I appreciate your patience, Buff.