"Reese" wrote:

Basically, the way mamy of these closminded folks around here take things, you're a fundy if you read the Bible.

Mark responded:

I read the bible. I have read the bible completely through (including the Apocrypha) from cover to cover more times over the last 30 years and in more differing translations and paraphrases than I could ever hope to remember or count.

I don't consider myself a fundamentalist. I doubt anyone who knew me would consider me a fundamentalist. My brother was an atheist and he read the complete bible many times. No-one ever thought he was a fundamentalist ... or a Christian.

It is not the reading of the bible that makes you a fundamentalist. It is the way you view the bible and how you use the bible that makes you a fundamentalist.

The bible is not the final word on anything and it is not always correct. God is more important than the bible. One can experience God apart from the bible. The bible is a collection of people's experience of God over many centuries. The bible is not a rule book or "God's word" literally dictated and written down word for word. The bible is not a science text. the bible was written by men (sexism intended).

Fundamentalists do not agree with the last paragraph ... but I do ...and I read the bible.

Your definition is wrong.

And I weighed in with this:

So, Reece, the difference between fundamentalists and others is not in their reading the Bible or not, it's more to do with the way they _think_. And the way they think is mostly a function of who got hold of them when they were impressionable...

When I spent three years wandering, full-time, around the campuses of our nation (Australia) - and some other places - I used to do a quiz for students, and academics (they're not the same :-). I'd ask some basic questions about their theological world-view, then later in the conversation I would ask about the key mentors in their life, and those people's world-view. Guess what! They were about 99% identical! Even with all their study about critical thinking, weighing arguments pro and con, they still ended up with roughly the world-view of their parents/pastors/mentors...

It's to do with homeostasis, and avoidance of cognitive dissonance...

Now, when people whose world-view is about the same as yours 'do you in' (do non-Australians understand that expression?), you lose a fair bit of motivation re aligning your world-view with that of your enemies, so a 'deconstructionist' phase sets in - as it has, I gather, with Mark.

Now, I hear you saying, does that negative motivation encourage objectivity? No, not necessarily. But nor does the positive reinforcement of friendship/belonging/security/esteem with/from those with whom you get along...

So we humans live in a bent world (was that G M Hopkins?) with bent thinking...

What do we do about that? Start doubting your presuppositions, but also don't forget to doubt your doubts...

--

Shalom!

Rowland Croucher