jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (21 posts)

Reconciling truth with faith, and fundamentalism

  1. livelonger profile image89
    livelongerposted 5 years ago

    This was a thought-provoking post by a Catholic blogger:
    http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com … ology.html


    and this


    I'm not Catholic or Christian, myself, but I agree with him on many points.

    I'm interested in what others might think. Thoughtful commentary (whether it's in agreement or not), please.

    1. 0
      Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      If I understand correctly what part of the article is the blogger's words and what parts are not, then I agree with him on one thing----he is not a Christian.  Which he seems quite audaciously proud of,  to his own shame actually.

      I'm not sure what his definition of "fundamentalist" is, but if it means taking the Bible at its word and believing the Biblical account of Jesus's life and death and resurrection (which he seems to dismiss as false), then I'm a fundamentalist (as is ANY Christian).  And the blogger's article is simply an egotistical religious rant against Christianity with the critique of another anti-Mormonism writer thrown in (for what purpose, I dunno, except perhaps to try to fake people out about what side he's on...).

      I'm appalled that he wants to dismiss the literal act of Jesus's walk here on earth by changing the Scripture in John from "the Word" to "reason", as though it didn't literally happen.   The man is into mysticism or some such nonsense, and apparently cannot understand that the manifestation of the Christ was both literal and Spiritual.  Jesus was the Word in the flesh, God in the flesh.   I'd be disappointed if anyone takes that blogger's meanderings to heart.

      1. livelonger profile image89
        livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Did you read the actual article? It seems like you're just reacting and passing judgment based on an incomplete reading of the article.

        1. 0
          Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Then correct me by pointing out what I missed.  Isn't that the blogger's view that he doesn't believe the Bible?  That he thinks the accounts of Jesus's resurrection, in particular, aren't true?  I did read the entire article.  And that's what I got from it.

          1. livelonger profile image89
            livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I'm not going to read it for you, but he doesn't believe everything is the literal truth, because it couldn't be the literal truth. He points out the conflicting accounts of Jesus's final words as just one instance of an irreconcilable inconsistency.

            He is fairly clear about his belief in Jesus.

            1. 0
              Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Okay, I got that.   At least he claims to believe.  But that in itself is inconsistent with his view of the Resurrection and his view that the Bible isn't correct.  A Christian believes the Bible.   So, he himself said he's not a Christian.   Is he Catholic, as you referred to in the original post?  Okay....so....he's inconsistent already since a Catholic should be a Christian too, and Catholics believe the Bible.


              And no he isn't even fairly clear, from what I read, about his belief in Jesus; at least, not Jesus as the God and Savior that He is.  Maybe he believes in Jesus as a historical fact?   I dunno.   But he is apparently very confused about even the basics of Christianity.  That is my thoughtful commentary, based on the words of the blogger.

              1. livelonger profile image89
                livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                smile

              2. recommend1 profile image70
                recommend1posted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Who is christian, the blogger or Brenda ?

                On balance, from the tone and content of both their comments it would have to be the blogger who is the 'more' christian, showing tolerance, thoughtfulness and also a reasoning ability.

                1. 0
                  just_curiousposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  That exact question has always been a head scratcher for me, when reading the posts of the Bible literalists on this forum.

                  1. livelonger profile image89
                    livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Most of them are not Bible literalists in any consistent fashion. They are literal about the parts that don't apply to them, and very, very liberal about the parts that do. smile (They will go silent the second you call them on it)

                    For instance, some will insist Jesus spent a lot of time condemning homosexuals, while implying that he was fine with divorce. They usually don't rely on scripture to support heretical theses like these.

    2. 68
      paarsurreyposted 5 years ago in reply to this



      All religions accept the facts of science which just explores from nature that has been Created by the Creator-God.

  2. 0
    just_curiousposted 5 years ago

    I thought it was an excellent article. I loved the part (and have always agreed) where he said fundamentalism wasn't a true faith in God. I always tried to be supportive of them, always called them the weaker Christians; because of the insanity of believing in things that were proven wrong, time and again.

    I'm afraid I don't think there are useful lies. When something is proven wrong you have to accept it and move on.

    1. livelonger profile image89
      livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I agree with you completely.

  3. Aficionada profile image91
    Aficionadaposted 5 years ago

    ... and it's really nothing new.  It's very easy for us Christians to forget that there have been disagreements from the beginning about which aspects of the faith were most important and which ones were less important; about what was essential to believe in order to be a Christian and what could be allowed to be a matter of personal belief.  It's not even exclusive to Christianity. big_smile

    1. livelonger profile image89
      livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Absolutely!

  4. dingdondingdon profile image60
    dingdondingdonposted 5 years ago

    What an interesting article. Conflicting stories in the Bible is an issue atheists like to discuss between ourselves, but I have never found a Christian who enjoys discussing them too until this article - and I think he addresses them very thoughtfully, accepting them without trying to explain them away but also reconciling them with his faith.

 
working