OMG thank you! I'm a new Christian, I didn't intend to become one, I was doing academic critical Bible Study and fell in love with Jesus. So I go looking for Christian content on KZfaq and BAM I am greeted with a bunch of angry, unempathic/borderline sociopathic, women-and-gay-hating extremists who definitely think I'm going to hell because I cannot hold to their exact doctrines. I had never been forced to watch so many videos or read so many articles about how women are inferior to men or gay people are going to hell or even Christians who just have questions are going to hell. It was literally all that came up in my searches at first. It was a massive stumbling block, and was a little traumatic because I was seeking siblinghood with fellow Christians with an open heart and I found deep evil instead. I tried to join some Reddit groups but that didn't go well either. It's all left me even more scared of doing something like joining a church. As a vaguely educated and slightly intelligent person with some grasp of history these people make no sense. If they think the Bible is the most central thing what does that mean for the many, many Christians for hundreds of years when the Bible either DID NOT EXIST YET or was completely inaccessible because 1) it was illegal in their language 2) they couldn't afford one or 3) they couldn't read -as most people couldn't until fairly recently??? Were even those so passionate they martyred themselves not Christian to these people???? THEN they claim that this immensely complex thousand of year old collection of books originally written in three different languages across diverse settings should be able to be read plainly and literally by ANYONE. The rationale for this is that they believe that God intended to communicate and thus ANYONE can read and receive the message in its entirety. I'm sorry but a very uneducated or barely literate person probably cannot read the whole Bible and get anything of the original meaning of the authors - especially parts of the OT are very hard for us to really understand. People dedicate their whole careers to studying one book of the Bible and continuously notice new things and argue on the intended meaning. Jewish people - who read the OT in the original Hebrew - have spirited debates on what the stories really mean. And that seems to be more allowed among Jewish people. I really feel their treatment of the Bible is bizarre and lazy and demeans it. If it contains the secrets of everything worth knowing why wouldn't it require intense study to truly understand all the mysteries? Even Jesus says he speaks in parables to give wisdom and understanding only to those who are equipped to receive it. Fundamentalist Christians are clearly in error about many things, and their lack of ability to understand nuance or to act in good faith with out-groups is dangerous. They will abuse others and call it love. They are everything Jesus spoke out about. Subscribed :)

Literally. Fundamentalism sent me to a mental hospital and not just once. I wish fundamentalists could find peace with God without having to make others sick.

Thank you for this! I had a “discussion” (argument) with the leader of a fundamentalist group yelling at my campus about burning in hell yesterday and I just was having trouble reconciling with how we seemed to believe the same God but he told me my definition of love was wrong and “antichrist”😂😂 this helped me learn thank you.

I am 37 and have been in limbo since my early 20s. I’m recently feeling like it’s the end of this prodigal tale and I’m ready to return home, but I don’t know how. Understanding why I struggle to converse with people and feel unwelcome in my church is helping, and this video was part of that. Thank you.

We need to be careful when we disagree from any side that we don't allow ourselves to hate those whom we disagree with. Hate has no legitimate place in the lives of Christ's followers, regardless of whether we interpret Scripture as a fundamentalist or not. Fury and anger are not fruit of the Spirit.

😂 “Dave from sales”

Good Stuff Pastor. In my denomination we are overrun with Fundamentalists. Someone from my denomination once said in 1956 that they were the lunatic fringe. Only problem was, the lunatic fringe wasn't quit so fringy. I always approach them on the basis that I might actually help them to become more open minded. I usually leave them not being so successful. But I have seen changes in some over time. Not often, but I do see it. Keep praying and continue to struggle with them. Let no one rob you of your joy.

Pastor Tanner, great video! I am a devout practicing Catholic and have been debating (what has turned into just arguing now) with my very fundamentalist aunt. Everything you said here is 100% spot on! The way you put it is excellent! I have a great friend who is a Lutheran pastor and none of our talks or discussions are ever like that of one with a fundamentalist! Thanks for the video, and God bless you brother!

It's quite simple really. A Fundamentalist is somebody who takes the Bible literally.

Oh boy, some of the worst encounters with fundamentalist where atheist fundamentalists. Their bullying of not believing in their dogma is unparalleled.

I studied in a fundamental college and what you say is. 100% true

Hymn #20: The steadfast love of the Lord Change to large font Refrain The steadfast love of the Lord never ceases. Your mercies never come to an end; they are new every morning, new every morning: great is your faithfulness, O Lord, great is your faithfulness!

Really loved this Vid! Thank you! Do you know of any books or other resources that have the open but uncompromising mindset? I too am a historical fundamentalist. I often am on the defensive as they feel I’m backsliding when I disagree with them. Most of my community is modern fundamentalism(grew up in it)and I struggle feeling like a fish swimming upstream. Any resources would be greatly appreciated!

Brilliant, I could say amen to every word!

This was very helpful thank you

Help the poor, feed the hungry, treat others with kindness, and to better yourselves. Those are what Christians should inspire to do. Instead, fundamentalists focus more on the fire and brimstone part as well as hating another person's faith due to them either not being in the right denomination, following a different religion of the same God, and also hating polytheistic religions and seeing their gods as devils, which are some of the reasons Christianity has begun to be hated more now

Hello! I am having presentation in political ideologies and I’m supposed to find flaw in Fundamentalism. I am having trouble finding hole in this odeology. Can someone help?

Thank you for breaking this down - I've been going out of my mind when talking to people with a fundamental viewpoint. My approach of love and compassion did not find favour at all... How can we talk to fundamentalists without it escalating into an argument?

I dated a fundamentalist. Decades later I put the experience in one of my own vids. But in a nutshell this was how it went. I was an agnostic/unspecified theist as I am today. Probably closer to a Jew than anything else. The family was friendly to me only until they realized I wasn't going to convert--which they attempted to intrude on the second they met me. They told the daughter how I "had to get to church etc." And I knew more about the bible than all of them put together. Her family and friends eventually got her to break it off. It was like trying to push against a tidal wave. But the real eye opener was the hypocrisy. The father had another illegitimate daughter from an affair, the sister was a stripper and their pastor hanged himself after he got caught sleeping with a fifteen year old. But the guy who considered marriage to the daughter was a red flag because he dared question a book he knew from cover to cover which they had never even read. Saying I have a problem with fundamentalists? That is an understatement. They are a cult, pure and simple. Cheers, DCF

Great video thank you. I follow a lot of Christian Fundamentalists which led me to this video.

Open but uncompromised - I like the phrase, and would say it reflects my position, as well. Thanks for the phrase!

Point 1 is very good. The problem is when you find out the descrepencies in the early manuscripts..... 😮

Atheist here, Dude, you sound...piiii,,,,,,iiiissssed. And I don't blame you. You're right, fundamentalism exposes all kinds of logical fallacies, and general ignorance. I grew up fundamentalist Baptist, and I sure am glad I grew out of THAT!! I appreciate your views here, and I pretty much agree completely.

Well done!

Im a fundamentalist. The good old-fashioned one. Thats i klicked this video. I was curious. But good video on the topic on that other stuff.

What I detect from Christian fundementalists is (and apologies from being imprecise or vague) that there are some things where they seem to rely on their own power and understanding instead of trusting in God. They say they do but how they interact reveals otherwise. It's as if they have no assurance that our God is infinitely almighty so they have to step in. In the end, it's the Holy Spirit who convicts the hearts of people. Also, it sounds like they're not used to dealing with unbelievers so they're very sheltered. Then they start friendly fire incidents over secondary and tertiary doctrines, to borrow your words.

Congrats on keeping it to just three.

4:38 Catholicism actually would agree that pre-millennial or post-millennial (sometimes called "amillennial") is secondary. Though this is an ill known fact, some hold chiliasm to be a formally condemned heresy. However, pre-trib (at least for _all of_ the Church) would contradict Matthew 28:20 "all days" .... the tribulation saints are still part of the Church that Jesus founded on the Apostles, they are not like OT bis, as some have held. Now, some Protestants when dealing with Catholics will fail to understand we also do distinguish between primary and secondary, simply because for us, _more_ quantity of doctrines come into the level primary, a k a dogma. E. g. a Protestant may argue one could disagree on Real Presence vs Symbolism + Spiritual effect, a Catholic holds we need to believe Real Presence. A sinner can physically receive the Body of Christ, and thereby commit a sacrilege. As St. Paul actually says. If we have more primary doctrines, we might have more secondary and tertiary ones as well, not less ... where Babel was is tertiary, if my guess in advance on what you will define that as is correct. It's important for apologetics. W a i t ... it actually has sth to say on _what_ Babel _was_ as a moral atmosphere. In my view: * imagine a bungler, who thinks he can launch a space craft, if he only can continue to command everyone else on earth * but who in reality can't, because the Neolithic he is helping to technically and socially advance doesn't have all pre-Flood technology, whatever that was and didn't have Wernher von Braun * but as he thinks he can, and getting up into space and onto a plane where God lives and which can't be flooded is vital to human survival, he thinks he has a right to command human unity internationally, to save mankind * and as he was popular (but also efficient in coercion) as a mammoth hunter in the not far off palaeolithic (when he was a decade or two younger, or three or four), he gets away with capital punishment involving some kind of decapitation and leaving decapitated bodies to vultures, while he strings the skulls on top of each other, as skulls so stringed have been found in Göbekli Tepe, and as bodies lying under flying vultures are depicted on ceramics from the same neolithic ... I think this is a fairly important message. Antichrist won't be a great New Age guru, as they are normally seen. If he can rely on people, including Christians, to bark up the wrong tree, to see the tower as a bronze age ziggurat or chalcolithic ziggurat, and esoterism as its goal, he can get pretty far, even supported by Christians. Or supposed such.

Why’s the W missing from the map

I was gonna ask why you so mad bro. After listening…totally get it. Good vid!

I'm actually preparing for a debate with a well known athiest about fundamentalism. I hope to bring some of this to the table in discussion.

Excellent

Thanks

Im so glad i left the church and the gospels! There are about 41-45k denominations in Christendom😮

I agree with you and have struggled with fundementalists in the past. Yet, there are also people who pick and choose how to interpret the bible based on their own opinions, instead of trying to figure out what God is saying. For example, it seems that only the fundementalist churches are speaking out against the gay pride movement. In the churchs that have traditionally let people interpret the scriptures on this issue themselves, they are now actively promoting gay pride and pushing it on children.

So if I agree to disagree, where do I stand? Great video, two thumbs up.

5:02 Post-trib is obviously the correct, or at least safest doctrine. William Tapley believes there is a _partial_ pre-trib, which is obviously not in the fault against Mt 28:20. But then, that cannot be what 1 Thessalonians 4:16 speaks of.

5:08 Indeed, Calvinism was condemned by Trent, and women priests were condemned when they were Montanists, and no one outside Montanism was ordaining women. I don't know what an "ordained preacher" is, doesn't exist. Someone can preach because he is ordained and stationed at a particular parish (or diocese), and someone can preach with "venia praedicandi" from the bishop, this would involve St. Francis of Assisi, and probably at least internally to the nuns, St. Bridget.

I like this guy. He gets it!

5:21 It could be that you misjudge him. God could have given him the grace to approach Catholic, i e true, doctrine. The examples he gave definitely are not what we would call secondary.

"Family Values" is the new fundamentalism.

Great until the very end... he assumes we all agree what is uncompromisable lol. Anyway, a helpful insight into the mentality of fundamentalism. My mother's side of the family is like this. I converted to Eastern Orthodoxy a few years ago, and it's like speaking two different languages. Fundamentalism is impossible to engage with. Lord have mercy!

3:46 Great, the text from I think Acts 4 does not negate Romans 13, or in context, since the priests of the temple prior to deicide were ecclesiastic prelates, Hebrews 13:7, it actually just tells us where the limits are. Romans 13 should for instance not be a recommendation to take the mark of the beast bc it is required by government, if that is the manner in which it is imposed. Tensions are beautiful ... when it comes to soteriology (read Eph 2:8--10 for one) or instructions on how to live. It does not follow that tensions can actually be all that present about Biblical history. Nuance _can._ Speaking of nuance, how do you interpret Shinar in Genesis 11? If the LXX translates the word Shinar as Babylon on occasion (seemingly not in Genesis 11), does this reflect when Babylonian Empire was South of Assyrian, or when Babylonian Empire had entirely already swallowed up Assyria? Or in other words, was Babel a place only in Sumer or a place anywhere in the physical geographical region between two rivers, as per the precision "in the land of Shinar"? I hold to the latter, btw ...

I've noticed this issue when dealing with the issue of womens ministry. Not just in terms of pastoral ministry either. I'm what the person in this video calls a "Classical Fundie". But modern Fundies like to pretend there is no tension at all in the text when it comes to the role of women in the excercise if their spiritual gifts. Despite the fact that their were female leaders, teachers, and even prophets in the Bible (it seems only the apostles were exclusively male), and despite the fact that it is prophesied that daughters will have an outpouring of the holy spirit as well in the future. I'm not saying men and women are the same, but I am saying it's fair to reevaluate old traditions. Its really depressing cause i was a complementarian for the longest time and now Im seeing egalitarians treat the Bible with a lot more care and nuance these days. And I'm being put off by the boneheaded refusal to even consider the other side from so many in my previous camp. I just want to find a Biblical way to respect my sisters calling and gifts, am i no longer a Christian because of that? Even if Im honestly wrong on this one issue? Honestly i feel God will forgive me if I am, especially since I am doing so out of a desire not to supress the Holy Spirit. But i would ask Fundies: "if your wrong, are you not only guilty of being wrong, but also of supressing the Holy Spirit?" I think its a dangerous game we play when we tell a woman burning with the spirit to shut up too much. And yes I know what the text says but don't pretend that the examples i mentioned don't exist or are irrelevant either.

Rabbi, how can I verify the honesty of a business before I put my trust in the business owner? I ask you this because I am a homemaker in my hometown of Los Angeles, California. In recent years, most of the small businesses that I rely on are "male dominated" third-world men of color. These men are middle-eastern, Asian, South-East Asian, Mexican, South American, Puerto Rican, Near Eastern, Eastern European, Mexican, Korean, Japanese, Chinese, Arabs, and Jews sometimes. These folks seem to have a very alien tendency to presume to categorize me, and according to their cultural and religious social and psychological and political traditions, values and beliefs, and laws, or by the restrictions and requirements of their small community. In these various communities, they have their own hierarchy, they have feudal system complete with people whom they regard as their masters "Masters". To me that is ridiculous. It defeats the purpose of freedom and autonomy. I regard all of these cultures, traditions, and heritages as oppressive, and those who attempt to induct by, default, trickery, deceit, chicanery, bamboozle, seduction, subterfuge, guile, deceit, betrayal, drugging, kidnapping,coercion, duress, or Entrapment, or censure, or conquest as motivated by "mens rea", criminal intent, wickedness and an 😈 Evil inclination, swindlers, pirates, bandits, bigamists, bbig amiss, fops, rues, gigalos, womanizer, and serial mogonogamists, and mentally unstable, and personality disordered. The poor things. Being wicked has its disadvantages. I honestly do feel sorry for them, for the oppressed women and the men too. But not sorry enough to join their ranks nor cooperate with them. Moreover, I have recognized the fact that the State Courts are a primary source of wickedness among people of all types. If it's wickedness-generating, and fee-generating, the State Courts will actually manufacture relationships specifically for the wicked results that arise out of the sick, twisted, malignant fatal relationships and personalities. Such people live to generate noir, they love darkness, sorrow, anguish, illness, sickness, crookedness, squabbles, bickering, violence, murder, scars, bruises, scars, broken bones, bandages, Intimidation Menace, mismanagement, unfair surprise, fear, terror, misfortune, nosiness, Slander, Backfiring, Backsliding, fatal attraction, folly, robbery, car jacking, theft, shoplifting, traffic tickets, car accidents, training accidents, war, hold-ups, assassinations, home invasion, mass murder, iniquity, cocktail fighting, dog fighting, blood shed, blood sports. gun fights, dueling, dangerous games, shark attacks, plain crashes, massacres, disasters, rape, prison riots, jail riots, jail beatings, tough guys, mobsters, hangings, executions, deaths, miscarriages, molestation, hostility, belligerence, failures, defeats, deformity, injury, false arrest, false imprisonment, travesty, miscarriage of justice, ruin. Sincerely, gospelgirl So this is the State Courta generate, because this what it needs to survive and its pursuit of happiness, believe it or not. I am deeply sorry but these people are I have a tendency to presume that so long as this country is under the United States 🇺🇸 flag, so long as I have a President, and a Vice President, and a United States Congress, my traditions, and heritage, and legacy, will remain American identity. Sincerely. gospelgirl

I think the Christian should using different levels of openness and uncompromising depending on the situation. I will probably be a lot more open talking to a Presbyterian about baptism, but with a member of my church, I will be more uncompromising. Same with LGBTQ issues. Talking to my lesbian co worker, I will be much more open and understanding since she is an unbeliever. But talking to a Christian, I will be far more uncompromising on LGBTQ issues.

I am an atheist but I love this stuff. I see no conflict with obeying the government and obeying God, because, duh, God is the one telling you to obey the government.

Honest question: What is an example of a fundamentalist atheist?

My problem is you saying "the bible this.. the bible that".. the whole bible study thing is fundamentalism.

I think this is fair

Please Help me I Believe Jesus Is The Son of God and God The Son of The Holy Trinity I Believe Jesus Shed His Blood and Died in my Sins in my place He was Buried Then 3 Days Later Jesus Arose From The Dead!!! But I am struggling with some Sins that I honestly don’t know how to quit I hate my Sins But I genuinely don’t know how to stop them Am I still Saved because of my faith in Jesus or am I Not Saved because of my Sins? Am I born again because of my faith in Jesus or is there something more I need to do? Thank you for All your Help and Time God Bless you

He lost me when he sits in a church building, when he gave himself authority to lord over the congregation, and when he also has his own particular set of doctrines, such as the "believer's baptism". He, in the simplist of essence, is also a fundamentalist because you better agree with him or else? I'm sure his heart is in the right place to be a believer and a child of God. But he has a long way to go in his walk with Jesus because he's wrapped up in buildings, taking collection of money, and dwells in the psychobabble of theology talk. Thief on the cross anyone? "How does the thief on the cross fit into your theology? No baptism, no communion, no confirmation, no speaking in tongues, no mission trip, no volunteerism, and no church clothes. He couldn't even bend his knees to pray. He didn't say the sinner's prayer and among other things, he was a thief. Jesus didn't take away his pain, heal his body, or smite the scoffers. Yet it was a thief who walked into heaven the same hour as Jesus simply by believing. He had nothing more to offer other than his belief that Jesus was who he said he was. No spin from brilliant theologians. No ego or arrogance. No Shiny lights, skinny jeans, or crafty words. No haze machine, donuts, or coffee in the entrance. Just a naked dying man on a cross unable to even fold his hands to pray."

Why is he yelling at me?

reading from a book, that has been edited and re-edited into a language that is not remotely close to the language used in over 2000 years ago, with nuance and writing style that is not used in todays textbooks, mixed with men, who read with prideful natures, and lack of good reading skills, and we see the fruition of this. Add in the fact, that we have no idea of what books or scrolls were excluded into compiling the bible, the intention of the writers, and and the purpose of the bible in the first place. This is precisely why J.W's exist. What could possibly go wrong with and average, low edumacated man reading the bible?

I’m confused. Specifically to the first sign example of pedo baptism. The Bible teaches one doctrine, both presbyterian and Baptist can’t both be right..right? So, we ought to search the scriptures to see which is what God teaches. 🤷🏽‍♀️

Where is the peace? I saw none when watch the video without sound.

Fundamentalists love to quote the Bible, but I noticed that they rarely quote the Gospels, the words of Jesus. They seem to prefer any other part of the Bible. I wonder if it's not because Jesus Christ was so fiercely critical of fundamentalism that the fundamentalists of his time killed him.

WHY ARE YOU YELLING INTO A MICROPHONE? - The content is great in this video, but the yelling is stopping me from sharing it though.

Science is not open to interpretation in the same way that scripture is. In the case of science, we have millions of scientists alive today and we can ask them the exact meaning of scientific things. And it doesn’t make me a fundamentalist to tell people that their views disagree with science. By your logic, if I tell a flat Earther that their views disagree with the science I must be a fundamentalist, but really I would be correct and not a fundamentalist.

Sounds like you took a few bad apples and spoiled the bunch. My only take away from this is you spoke to some people that weren't very well educated with the bible is all I'm hearing. It's wrong for you to bash fundamentalists as a whole. If this is your mindset, this can be done with every belief system.

Gods word never changes. That’s why I put all my faith in King James when he decided to get it right once and for all in 1604. He wanted something that reflected the current church in England. God bless the 47 men the king picked that would help shape my belief system along with supporting my first sentence that…. Gods word never changes!!! HAYMEN!!!

If we are to be blindly compliant with any government under any circumstances… What does that mean for a Christian family in a more restrictive region of China? Does a member of that family have an obligation to inform on his family and ensure their maximum punishment under communist law? Also… wouldn’t that be a pretty big leap away from the nuance that you claim to center your “theology” around? Side note but does all this theological flexibility ALWAYS (or nearly always) bring your “Christian” views more in line with the views of secular society and if so…. Does that tell you anything? Reflect on Matthew 18:6, try to find a way to digest that verse that makes you feel really yummy about modifying Christianity to fit what is deemed acceptable by the secular world.

OMG - this pastor does reminds me very much to the fundamentalism bible freaks - it triggers me to much - so I had to quit listening to what he has to say. Can´t take it anymore.

2:45 Our Lord Jesus once told some people that St. John retroactively qualifies as "Jews" though he elsewhere shows Jesus would _not_ have used the word that way: *For if you did believe Moses, you would perhaps believe me also; for he wrote of me.* If you insist every book, chapter, verse of all the Bible is "interpretation" ... how do you deal with Our Lord expecting His words to be _verifiable_ (and in fact _verified_ by people living 45 miles or 73 km from Thessalonica, if you know where Berea is on a map)?

They drive me crazy.

Show me on the chart where the fundamentalist hurt you…. And this is coming from a guy who’s leaving fundamentalism. I’m sure this video really impresses James White.

5:50 Now, fine enough ... "Fundamentalism of this sort" ... you have _not_ brought up whether you'd admit it is a primary doctrine Adam was directly created, with no biological ancestry. Pius XII tried to treat it as secondary, but he could not define it as secondary. A Pope can define, from what he sees, as primary doctrine, i e as dogma. He cannot definitely say for the rest of history "this position is just secondary" ... one never knows in advance, when a previously seen as secondary doctrine turns out for some reason to be primary. The only things he can really define for the rest of history are infallible things. And an infallible thing, by the fact of being so, is a primary doctrine. I had once been of the idea, that Quo Primum (about the Traditional Latin Mass) could be non-doctrinal, therefore non-infallible, but _still_ binding on all successors. I recently saw a debate article from 77 state that it was simply _not_ just disciplinary, but doctrinal, and _that's_ why it could be binding on all successors, not just binding on all future _barring_ changes by successors, as the wording was also interpreted. So much more can a "right now, the teaching authority does not forbid that" (on Humani Generis) not be eternally binding because it's not an infallible statement, when it even says "right now" in close synonym in the text. That Adam had no biological ancestry was not just taken for granted by all centuries, but is implicit in ... * God's goodness to Adam, should the hypothetical biological ancestry, despite common anatomy, be non-human * God's goodness to us, in punishing us for his sin, if he was _not_ the human from which all other humans come. Btw, that Adam is not a figure of speech for a collective, is already defined as dogma, Trent Session V. Plus, making the first and that momentuous sin a collective one is in fact a kind of supralapsarian Calvinism, horrible heresy, since collectives as such do not exercise free will, only the individuals that constitute them can exercise it, or any other faculty of the soul.

Obedient to governments is biblical until it becomes tyrannical.

Very broad swipe.

The Catholic Church is the church that Jesus founded. Scriptural opinions contrary to the Catholic Church cannot be the truth.

Was Jesus a fundamentalist? Did he preach the teachings of the kings that came before him? Did he cut people's tongues out for wrong-speak? He got crucified by the dictator of his time, so I'm guessing not.

Fundamentalism destroyed my faith and I lost God'love. This is a black or white doctrine and make fundamentalists judgmental to others with different point of view. They are intolerent and think "they are in the truth". But the fruits are bad and not those oh the Holy Spirit. Today I turned to catholic church and feel much more better.

Fundamentalism equals fanaticism.

preacher you made a fundamental error.. you confuse fundamentalists with cults .. replace fundamental with cult and it becomes far more clear

Could it be YOU were wrong in the matter of obeying "government"? The midwives, Moses' parents, Daniel, Hananiah, Azariah, Mishael, Esther and Mordecai, Peter, and Paul "disobeyed government" directly and were blessed of God! Could it be that James White and you are wrong about the fundamentals of Calvinism? I was born into Calvinism of the Dutch Reformed, but I discovered I was predestinated NOT to be a Calvinist. I also discovered of my freewill that I reject Arminianism.

Atheist fundamentalist? lol

where were you 60 years ago when the Christian Fundamentalist were creating your modern world. You say Right-Wing without any idea how this has come to pass. Ever hear of IBLP? Or ATI? How about the Joshua Generation? These fundamentalist have been preparing this end game for generations. You probably "loved" 19 and counting (the reality show about about the Duggar family put out by TLC network. They had conferences all over the country filling stadiums with people willing to be converted to a form of culture designed to be able to not only overthrow the government but tp create a conservatives "utopia". They raised children designed for this assault on democracy. While Americans had their heads where the sun don't shine. They got people elected that shared their views, got their children in as interns and clerks for all the "right wing" politicians, and even to Supreme Court judges. If I was to use a chess analogy; its checkmate on democracy as you know it. Sorry to break the news, but it wasn't a secret.

I am an Independent Fundamental Baptist. There is no room for interpretation when it comes to the Bible. Every word is given by God. Revelation says you shouldn’t add or subtract to any words in the Bible. If the Bible isn’t authoritative, what is? The world will go to hell unless somebody proclaims the absolute authority of the Bible and everything in it. Jesus said He was and is the only way. There is no other way but by Him. I don’t see much room for interpretation in those texts. Apparently you’re allowed to have an opinion about fundamentalists but we can’t say anything about you. If you think we’re snobby, you are allowed to say so. If we think (according to the Bible, not necessarily our interpretation of the Bible) you are a heretic, we shouldn’t say so because that’s “intolerant” or “hateful” or “not being open-minded”. I don’t see Jesus being very open-minded when he called the Jews a generation of vipers. I don’t see Jesus being very open-minded when he called Peter Satan for having a personal opinion about what Jesus said about Himself. When it comes down to it, the Bible is authoritative. The Roman Catholic Church is not. The Presbytery is not. The Archbishop of Canterbury is not. The Southern Baptists are not. If my pastor, whom I love dearly, were to say something contradictory to the Bible, I would call him a heretic. There’s no such thing as a secondary doctrine. If it’s in the Bible, it’s truth. God’s Word is elevated above even His own name. There is no reason to think anything in the Bible is up for debate or subject to being called “secondary” or “tertiary”. Which doesn’t show up in scripture by the way. One of David’s mighty men of valor stood alone in a field of lentils and fought the Philistines, risking his life, to save it. He literally was willing to die for a field of lentils. It doesn’t get much more secondary than that. Daniel risked his life for a dietary law. 10,000 Jewish COWARDS (like you) went along with everything else happening in their day and age. Daniel wouldn’t have risked his life for a secondary doctrine if he was a ”free-thinking “ modernist or liberal. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego were willing to burn alive for something that 10,000 other Jewish young men considered a secondary doctrine. Every word in the Bible is given by God. The Bible is pure and perfect and needs no addition or subtraction. The church doesn’t need to change with the culture of the day. There’s no room for budging on that. Do you think I like dressing in a conservative manner? No. Do you think I necessarily like conservative music? No. Do you think I like hearing a pastor preach directly about the sins in my life? No. Do I agree with the Bible 100% of the time? No. If I were God, would I do things differently? Absolutely. But I’m not. Unlike you, I don’t worship my own opinions, and I’m not afraid of being ostracized for the cause of Christ. I know this was a long comment, but it needs to be said. I hope at least one person will read this through and realize the need for truth in a changing world. Realizing that God’s Word doesn’t change, despite the world and your personal opinions changing constantly, gives an incredible level of peace. Matthew 11:28-30 KJV thank you.

This guy is just a little too uptight

Your example of adult vs infant baptism as an example of "fundamentalism" is a bad one. Because the scriptures are crystal clear on that. There are no infant baptisms in the NT. All the baptisms are adults of consenting age. Plus scripture teaches that baptism is a symbol of the washing away of sins, repenting of ongoing sin and coming up out of the water to a new life in Christ. Babies cannot consciously or even unconsciously sin, so that symbolism and spiritual significance is meaningless.

For me, the bible does not hold any special place in my life. It is a collection of myths with the occasional bit of history. The old testament god is a horrible, mean, capricious tyrant. The new testament is better, but is still full of myths. I like to stay in the present and have science and reason guide my living. I find that much more effective than religion ever was for me. Religion is not necessary to lead a moral life.

There is only ONE way to interpret Scriptures, not a million. God's words are perfect and true and the only way to interpret His Word is His way. Let His words reveal their truth. Don't read into the Bible and cherry pick to get what you want to hear out of it. God's Word stands on its own.