What do non-fundamentalist Christians actually believe?

[Rendition99]

Yeah, I've heard that southern baptists can be pretty bad. I have read some things on Fundies Say the Darndest Things that probably would have had me calling the police even in my most devout times. I don't know about episcopal christians, though we had some jehova's witnesses that my grandmother (the most religious member of my close family) said weren't true christians. We also didn't think catholics were christians.

Yeah, I've heard that sort of thing many times, among the Baptists and Pentecostals here too!

Roman Catholicism has been a very contentious matter here over the centuries, at some points illegal, and it took a long time for them to gradually get the same rights as people of other denominations. They still can't be Prime Minister, or certain other top government positions, or marry the monarch. 

Episcopal Christians, being Anglican, would tend to be fairly liberal, in the main. Although, within Anglicanism there are some in what we call the Low-Church, who are of a more evangelical persuasion, so there might be some fundie tendencies. On the other hand, some are more High-Church, which errs towards Catholicism. I don't know, but I would imagine Episcopalian has this spectrum too, to an extent.

[Chad32]

That's cool. I don't mind liberal christians so much. I'm more concerned with the extremists who want to enforce biblical values in the government, or kill people for not having the same views.

[Disciple]

I think a fundamentalist by definition must believe every word the bible says in every book. A non fundamentalist picks and chooses what he wants to believe. If they don't understand what the chapter or verse is talking about , it isn't true. If they don't like the way a particular verse makes them feel, they rationalize it away, because it cant be true. Problem is, If you pick out a specific part that you don't like and discard  it, then how can you tell the difference between truth and bs in the rest of the bible.  I consider myself a fundamentalist in the sense that I believe what the bible has written in it. But I don't fit you guys stereotype of hating people that aren't like me.  I see it like this, If you hired a plumber and he told you he didn't know the fundamentals of plumbing, would you let him fix your toilet? Would you even consider him a "true" plumber? I don't view the bible as a science book at all. To the believer, its a spiritual road map, that's about it.  To comment on an earlier discussion, Im not a science denier. I think science is the method to break down into parts how Gods creation works. I fail to see how you disprove God by discovering how natural phenomenon operates.

[Nihilist Virus]

I see it like this, If you hired a plumber and he told you he didn't know the fundamentals of plumbing, would you let him fix your toilet? Would you even consider him a "true" plumber?

What if your plumber claimed to be the Son of God and said that he could forgive you of your sins?

[robvalue]

No one is trying to disprove God. It's enough to observe that such a concept is an unecessary assumption that's not well-defined or supported by credible evidence.

Not that I'd care. Someone flipped a switch for us? So what. Looks the same to me either way. What am I meant to do about it?

[The Grand Nudger]

Fall to your knees and shout hosanna...silly.  

[robvalue]

I'll fall to my knees and beg them to turn this damn thing off again, it sucks!

[madog]

I think a fundamentalist by definition must believe every word the bible says in every book.  

Then why are there so many different types of fundamentalists?

[Aractus]

What do non-fundamentalist Christians actually believe?

Well it's a slippery-slope. Noah's ark for instance - I've always believe (and still do, now with scientific certainty) that there is enough water in the world to cover the Earth. Not only have I believed that, just on principle, but I also do believe the earth had to be relatively flat compared to now at some point in the past, which precludes there from being any land masses. Anyway, they have found a huge reservoir of water deep in the earth's core that could fill the oceans at least 3 times over - so that vindicates the belief that there is indeed enough water in the Earth to completely cover the Earth.

Thing thing about Noah's ark though is that if it's not literal then why did a loving creator lead his followers to believe for millennia that it is literal? If it's not literal why does the New Testament trace Jesus's linage back through David and Noah to Adam? On the other hand the story is possible - but only if God intentionally misleads Noah into spending 100 years building an ark that is unnecessary for his survival and the survival of the regions animals if they all travel two days at the most on foot out of the future flood area. We know that the whole Earth has not been covered in water in humanity's lifetime, nor even in the time of the dinosaurs. You would have to go back billions of years to find the stage at which Earth was, or may have been, covered in water.

Now I cite Bible scholars as the authority on the Bible all the time. What I find interesting here is that many members think they are all biased by their religious beliefs - which is true don't get me wrong, but did you know a large number of Christian scholars do not believe in a supernatural resurrection for example? They're still Christians, they still believe in Christianity, but they believe that Jesus either died and was buried never to return, or that if he did leave the tomb alive that he was laid there alive (which is well possible given our modern understanding of mortality). So there are actually Christians with views well outside of orthodoxy, and those who are top scholars.

[Rendition99]

What do non-fundamentalist Christians actually believe?

Well it's a slippery-slope. Noah's ark for instance - I've always believe (and still do, now with scientific certainty) that there is enough water in the world to cover the Earth. Not only have I believed that, just on principle, but I also do believe the earth had to be relatively flat compared to now at some point in the past, which precludes there from being any land masses. Anyway, they have found a huge reservoir of water deep in the earth's core that could fill the oceans at least 3 times over - so that vindicates the belief that there is indeed enough water in the Earth to completely cover the Earth.

Thing thing about Noah's ark though is that if it's not literal then why did a loving creator lead his followers to believe for millennia that it is literal? If it's not literal why does the New Testament trace Jesus's linage back through David and Noah to Adam? On the other hand the story is possible - but only if God intentionally misleads Noah into spending 100 years building an ark that is unnecessary for his survival and the survival of the regions animals if they all travel two days at the most on foot out of the future flood area. We know that the whole Earth has not been covered in water in humanity's lifetime, nor even in the time of the dinosaurs. You would have to go back billions of years to find the stage at which Earth was, or may have been, covered in water.

Now I cite Bible scholars as the authority on the Bible all the time. What I find interesting here is that many members think they are all biased by their religious beliefs - which is true don't get me wrong, but did you know a large number of Christian scholars do not believe in a supernatural resurrection for example? They're still Christians, they still believe in Christianity, but they believe that Jesus either died and was buried never to return, or that if he did leave the tomb alive that he was laid there alive (which is well possible given our modern understanding of mortality). So there are actually Christians with views well outside of orthodoxy, and those who are top scholars.

I never knew this, thanks for that information. 

I suppose by definition one needs only to be a follower of Christ, whether or not they believe that he was resurrected, in the way that others follow Mohammed (PBUH) or The Bhuddas.