What do non-fundamentalist Christians actually believe?

[Aractus]

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.

I didn't know it until recently either. Most Scholars, that are professionals, keep their beliefs to themselves. They aren't into proselytising or professing their faith. There are some exceptions of course, but most who do that fall into the category of apologetics. And that's where you see scholars that quite literally defy the evidence, and they're the ones that get used and quoted in Biblical commentaries for examples (where you will see such things as "many scholars do not feel this is historical, but those arguments are from people that deny the divinity/power of Jesus/god, etc"). What's really telling is when Evangelical scholars tell you that something is not right, one really great example is Dan Wallace who will maintain that the LXX, and therefore also the Matthean, translation/s of Isaiah 7:14 are wrong. You can't find a scholar more Evangelical or more Apologetic than him, and even he says that Matthew's translation of Is 7:14 is wrong!

[Disciple]

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?

Wow, that would be pretty crazy wouldn't it? Not sure where that came from though, totally off base from my point. Which was to say how can a plumber claim to be a plumber if they didn't have a grasp of the fundamentals of plumbing.

[Disciple]

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?

I thought there was only one type of fundamentalist. Lots of Christians sects who interpret the bible differently sure, but I would consider the fundamentals of Christianity that Jesus was the son of God, died for the sins of the world and was raised from the dead on the 3rd day to be at the right hand of the father from that point to forever. I would say if you believe that, it would make you a fundamentalist.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Paul said that if a person doesn't believe that Jesus bit the dust and was actually resurrected that the person can't be a Christian. You must believe in zombie Jesus to be a real Christian because that's the central doctrine of Christianity. 1 Corinthians chapter 15.

[The Grand Nudger]

I suppose you got specific about the number of days and that jesus was gods son, but I don't think that's enough to be classified as fundamentalist(and those two things aren't required for christianity).  The competition is fierce, after all.  In common parlance, fundies are the literal genesis crowd, biblical inerrantists, divine command-ers, theocratic hopefuls.   That sort of thing.

[T.J.]

Personally, I'm Anglican, better known as Church of England where I come from or Episcopal in America

And THAT demands....

DON'T DO IT! THE CAKE IS DEATH!

@OP, perhaps that God is always in the right because he created the universe and don't question him because he's all powerful and can kill you and that'd be right too so fear him. Also the stuff about Jesus.

Or maybe that's a fundamentalist. I'm not really sure, anymore.

[Aractus]

Paul said that if a person doesn't believe that Jesus bit the dust and was actually resurrected that the person can't be a Christian.  You must believe in zombie Jesus to be a real Christian because that's the central doctrine of Christianity.  1 Corinthians chapter 15.

Well apparently not. There are some Christians who say they don't believe in the Resurrection. God really must work in mysterious ways to convince them to worship him despite their disbelief in his miracle.

[vorlon13]

First and foremost, non-fundamentalist "christians" believe THEY know better than God concerning His Holy Scriptures and their applicability and relevance.

Non-fundamentalist "christians" have NO SINCERELY HELD RELIGIOUS VIEWS as sincerely held religious views would encompass all Scripture as ordained by God and their personal whims and preferences would be secondary to His WILL, not the other way round.

Non-fundamentalist "christians" are

(pick as many as apply)

*heretics

*apostates

*blasphemers

*agnostics

*atheists

[Disciple]

I suppose you got specific about the number of days and that jesus was gods son, but I don't think that's enough to be classified as fundamentalist(and those two things aren't required for christianity).  The competition is fierce, after all.  In common parlance, fundies are the literal genesis crowd, biblical inerrantists, divine command-ers, theocratic hopefuls.   That sort of thing.

Yes, I think the way the term fundamentalist is used on atheist forums and conventions and whatnot is different then the way I was thinking of it. Which was in a more literal sense. As in, if you were to believe the central theme of the NT. Although, Im not familiar with any specific denominations of Christianity that don't believe that Christ is the son of god and all that. It wouldn't surprise me to find out they exist but I wouldn't call them true Scotsmen..er Christians I mean.   Seeing how that's what the book says. It would be akin to the plumber reference I made earlier.

[vorlon13]

If one believes the central tenet sincerely and with the entirety of their heart and soul, I'm having trouble understanding the difficulty with embracing the rest of the totality of scripture.

And after coming to believe the central tenet, still holding out as to knowing better than God as to which scriptures are appropriate and which ones aren't seems impossible to me, yet, the incidence of that particular quirk seems near 100%.