[Vision2020] evangelicals vs. fundamentalists

Tue Feb 8 22:21:08 PST 2005

I just wish there was a country where most the people let you be what you 
wanted to be. A country where you could believe in the most radical and 
fundamentalist religion, or no religion at all and people would leave you 
alone; not comb through laws and regulations looking for something to bring 
you down or harass you.

Sadly, it is not the same group of people that will protect you if you want 
to be a fundamentalist Christian or an Atheist. You have to pick one group 
or another. You are either a fundy that wants to deny gays, lesbians, women, 
and non-christians equal rights; or you are an atheist that wants to deny 
Christians their right to worship. I really don't see many people in this 
town shooting for another perspective.  This is one of the reasons I believe 
in the Second Amendment, because it is needed to protect your First 
Amendment rights which are always under threat.

Good Day,

Donovan J Arnold

>From: "keely emerinemix" <kjajmix1 at msn.com>
>To: dave at davebudge.com, ngier at uidaho.edu
>CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] evangelicals vs. fundamentalists
>Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 21:36:19 -0800
>
>
>
>It might be instructive to point out that, sociologically, the American 
>Christian spectrum has often been represented by a five-point scale.  Left 
>to right, conveniently, sociologists have often categorized American 
>Christiandom thusly:
>
>"God is dead," Liberal, Mainstream, Evangelical, Fundamentalist
>
>While Evangelicals hold to the seven fundamentals of the faith (elucidated, 
>I believe, by R.A. Torrey in the 1920s), they are characterized by their 
>willingness to engage with culture and individual nonbelievers in an 
>attempt to spread the Gospel, unlike classic fundamentalists, who are 
>largely suspicious of secular science and academia, modernism and cultural 
>engagement.  Billy Graham and Tony Campolo typify the mindset of the 
>Evangelical and Bob Jones and Jerry Falwell are correctly referred to as a 
>fundamentalists.  This scale doesn't, however, classify charismatics and 
>Pentecostals separately, as they generally find themselves in the 
>Evangelical tradition.
>
>By the way, based on what I remember from my university career of 
>20-something years ago, the seven fundamentals are, in no particular order: 
>  the deity of Christ, his atonement on the cross, his imminent and 
>personal return to the earth, the virgin birth, his physical resurrection 
>from the dead, the Godhead as Triune, and the sinfulness of humankind.  I 
>may be wrong on the last two -- Nick, any corrections?
>
>And yes, to the chagrin of many and the encouragement of some, I am an 
>Evangelical . . . just one who's often mortified at the conduct of other 
>Evangelicals, but eternally impressed by Christ . . .
>
>keely emerine mix
>
>From: "David M. Budge" <dave at davebudge.com>
>To: Nick Gier <ngier at uidaho.edu>
>CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Moscow Taliban
>Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 21:43:53 +0000
>
>I applaud the call to protest and I've no use for radical fundamentalists, 
>but as I digested Dr. Gier's missive over the past several hours, I became 
>increasingly troubled by the broad brush with which he paints 
>"fundamentalists".
>
>I am not either a fundamentalist Christian or an evangelical. I do, 
>however, have many friends who are.  Although I do not embrace their 
>spiritual construct, I accept their beliefs while knowing that faith is the 
>leap of personal understanding where science can show no proof. What 
>arrogance would I display if I held that my faith were true and others' 
>were false? This is the primary argument against fundamentalism - the 
>belief that the literal reading of scripture are true and non-believers are 
>lost.  So the antithesis must also be true for those who deny 
>fundamentalist their beliefs.  This appears as intolerance of intolerance - 
>defying the tenets of Lockean liberalism.
>
>It is estimated that 30% to 40% of Americans are either fundamentalist or 
>evangelical Christians.  Most, who I know, are hard working loving people 
>who largely keep to themselves.  Baptist and Pentecostal organizations 
>provide a great deal of charity and give a meaningful and productive 
>worldview for millions of people.  For those of us who will not subscribe 
>to their religious edicts, we are protected by the rule of law and the Bill 
>of Rights.  Those, our tools to maintain liberty, must vigorously be used 
>to protect our right to speak in the public square.  Likewise, we must 
>protect their's as well.
>
>As I said, I've no use for radical fundamentalists and, taking the linkage 
>between Wilson and Monroe as  likely true given the evidence, it is 
>desirable to protest the radical ideology that may eventually infringe upon 
>the quality of life and personal liberties of the community.  Accordingly I 
>applaud the call to arms. But,  I think it would be more helpful while 
>appealing to a larger constituency if we addressed our concerns to the 
>villains at hand rather than call into question the religious liberties of 
>a third of our countrymen.  After all, influence is politics.  Just a 
>thought...
>
>Dave Budge
>
>
>
>_____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>
>
>_____________________________________________________
>List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the 
>communities of the Palouse since 1994.                 http://www.fsr.net   
>                              mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯