What Is The Difference Between Liberal, Conservative and Fundamentalist Christians?

[GodsGrace]

Your question is invalid. Its invalid because it juxtaposes incongruent concepts, like the sound of orange.

Liberal and conservative tend to be political references. Fundamentalism tends to revolving around a literal interpretation of Scripture.

In common vernacular, Liberals tend to embrace mercy at the expense of justice. Conservatives embrace justice at the expense of mercy. Fundamentalists take a non-figurative interpretation of the Scripture to guide one’s application of justice or mercy.

Thanks Wrangler.

I think we have the definiton of a fundamentalist Christian and you're confirming it once again above:
"A LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE".

That leaves conservative and liberal.
You say they're political references.
OK
Should they be eliminated as definitions?

In politics, nowadays, a liberal is someone that is willing to go beyond the middle ground of what Democrats believe....
It means acceptance of ideology which I've spoken of here.....abortion, gay marriage, divorce for any reason, children being taught
about gender, sex, etc.

Conservative means someone that would like to hold on to more tradition and/or moral values without changing or adapting them to post modern times.

Can't we apply these definitions to religion??

Maybe my terms are incorrect?

 

[GodsGrace]

What Is The Difference Between Liberal, Conservative and Fundamentalist Christians?

Like @Wrangler I also thought your question was mixing a political and a religious connotation.

Regarding Political…(IMO) in brief/basic
* Liberal…more than enough, at an others expense.
* Conservative…meet needs, at ones own expense.
* Fundamentalist…Has a fixed Objective Standard (ie. Constitution) for their own Principles of beliefs and actions.

Agreed on the political definition.

Regarding Christianity…(IMO) basic.
* Liberal….more than enough, leaning back and forth between multiple opposite views as they hear from men believe this, no believe that…eh believe at that moment, whatever gets them what they want at that moment.

Agreed. A a couple of members here have expressed the idea that a person CANNOT be liberal and Christian at the same time.
I do believe this is correct if we describe liberal as you have PLUS add on to it social/moral beliefs which would be accepting whatever one wants at any given moment...even if it's breaking God's laws/rules.

* Conservative….believe one fixed objective Standard of Principles.

Agreed. Could we add that if we consider ourselves conservative...it means applying already existing moral standards to a person's Christian life which could not be changed? (relativism).

* Fundamentalist…Has a fixed Objective Standard (Word of God) for their own Principles of beliefs and actions.

How about what some have stated and with which I agree.....
Taking the entire bible literally, every single word.

I guess a fundamentalist overlaps a conservative?
Maybe a conservative doesn't accept every single word as being literal.
(I would fall into this category).

 

[GodsGrace]

Disagree…
I do Not see that as Fundamentalist … rather
Liberal, taunting in your face.

Glory to God
Taken

Could it be both?
A fundamentalist....believing every single word in the OT would believe that he could handle poisonous snakes with no consequence.

But,. yes, a liberal does taunt God with their own ideas.
But I think the video goes more to the fundamentalist "camp".

Liberal would be more like,,,I'm getting a divorce -no matter what God may think of it.

 

[JohnDB]

Agreed. The bible is not a history book.
But science tells us that the universe is billions of years old, about 15, and the earth is about 4.5 billion years old.
Geology could confirm the age somewhat.

I firmly believe that we have to stop pitting science against religion.
Our youth is very confused over this and there should be no confusion.

Genesis states that in the beginning God created...
EXACTLY how He created we cannot really know -- although the evidence is pointing more and more away from evolution (macro).
Which is good IMO because the young depend too much on this theory and it turns many away from God. (I know this from experience).

Science can work WITH religion.
John Lennox speaks of this all the time and also Stephen Meyer and other scientists that have faith in our God.

Scientists absolutely hate to say "I don't know"...they know they must at times.

When it comes to "creation science" there is not a lot of information. They know what exists...and the rest is speculation from a few clues. Nothing is guaranteed fact.

The 4.5 billion years stems from carbon dating. But carbon dating in itself is a flawed science as it assumes that the sun formed first and was stable. Then on top of this that the earth's atmosphere was also stable. Again more flawed hypothesis.
The scriptures say that the earth was formed first and the sun wasn't formed until the 4th day. As they say,"Back to formula" meaning they need to start over.

Science is useful for a LOT of things. If God wanted us to know these things for some reason...God would have told us. Pure and simple.
And would knowing precisely how God created the universe help with ANY of today's problems? Nope. Not a bit. Not when false propaganda today threatens our very existence on the planet.

There's literally nothing beneficial from knowing. It won't change drilling methods for oil. Mining for gold or diamonds. Or even what I have for dinner. (Truffles and candy making for Christmas I'd having a more substantial effect...its that time of year again)

And as far as having an answer for atheists?
It won't help there either. People didn't believe in Jesus when Lazarus arose from the grave...nor when Jesus resurrected himself.

However....
I am interested in conclusions from what people would classify me as. Fundamentalist? Classic? Ultra conservative? Definitely not a literalist.

 

[Wrangler]

Can't we apply these definitions to religion??

Maybe my terms are incorrect?

Let's step back. What do you want to measure and compare; grace v justice; literal v figurative; guilt v redemption?

 

[Stash]

Wait Stash.
In thinking about this and reading some replies...
it seems as though, perhaps, a liberal Christian cannot really exist.

If by liberal we mean a person that defines themselves as Christian but whose ideology
believe in gay marriage, abortion, divorce, mutilation of a body for trans reasons....
could that person still be called a Christian? I don't think so.

So we can't say, as you did, "IN GOD'S EYES, NOTHING".
I originally agreed with you but I think I was wrong.

In God's eyes a person cannot be a liberal Christian.
Because it's acceptance of sinful lives and this is not pleasing to God

 

[Stash]

To me, it comes down to the definition of liberal

My definition is different then yours

To me a liberal is someone who will look at other peoples opinions, and welcome New ideas.

Compared to your idea of a liberal christian
I wouldn’t even call those people Christians that believe in abortion and gay marriage

In conclusion, if it doesn’t conflict with the Bible, go at it, that’s my definition of liberal

 

[Eternally Grateful]

interesting question. I wonder this myself sometimes. i will say, I was part of a fundamental baptist church growing up and they believed in an OLD earth

so fundamentalism is not just a literal.. we called ourself fundamental because we believed in the fundamental facts of Christianity. based on what we felt the church taught for years.

I am sure it has different meanings for different people

Liberal or conservative I feel would run down political lines.. I would call a liberal christian someone who voted for Cam Harris,. and I would call a conservative one who voted for Trump.

it does not matter what they believed concerning the bible

 

[GodsGrace]

Scientists absolutely hate to say "I don't know"...they know they must at times.

Agreed.
(They do admit that they don't know what consciousness is.)

When it comes to "creation science" there is not a lot of information. They know what exists...and the rest is speculation from a few clues. Nothing is guaranteed fact.

Science knows nothing of how life began.
They know it takes some chemicals....but they can't even make proteins...or maybe something else.
IOW,,,,they can't even BEGIN to understand what SPARKED life.

The 4.5 billion years stems from carbon dating. But carbon dating in itself is a flawed science as it assumes that the sun formed first and was stable. Then on top of this that the earth's atmosphere was also stable. Again more flawed hypothesis.
The scriptures say that the earth was formed first and the sun wasn't formed until the 4th day. As they say,"Back to formula" meaning they need to start over.

There are different reasons why carbon dating doesn't work well.
I can't remember all this stuff anymore....there's just too much to know.

I'll take this opportunity to say that Darwin is pretty much dead.
That theory is being abandoned but what to put in its place?
Just like you said: Back to the drawing board.

Science is useful for a LOT of things. If God wanted us to know these things for some reason...God would have told us. Pure and simple.
And would knowing precisely how God created the universe help with ANY of today's problems? Nope. Not a bit. Not when false propaganda today threatens our very existence on the planet.

OK. I know what you mean.
But in my case it WOULD help if we understood HOW God made everything (besides speaking it into existence).
I say this because when I get 5th graders for Catechism....they're good.
By the time they're in the 7th grade, more than half of them have become little atheists.
Why?
One of them told me that science created everything. They don't understand anything....
I think having more answers would be a good idea. I give them some of the reasons why God must exist, but it doesn't work
on most because they're brainwashed by this time.

There's literally nothing beneficial from knowing. It won't change drilling methods for oil. Mining for gold or diamonds. Or even what I have for dinner. (Truffles and candy making for Christmas I'd having a more substantial effect...its that time of year again)

Yes! Baking time. I'm baking more these days because I'm cooking less. Guess I couldn't handle both!!
Nothing with chocolate however ---- I'm leaving that up to the experts....YOU!

And as far as having an answer for atheists?
It won't help there either. People didn't believe in Jesus when Lazarus arose from the grave...nor when Jesus resurrected himself.

Sorry,,,what I mean is that I wish we had a way of convincing them that science DOES NOT have all the answers.
As for adults....agreed.
Once they're "gone"....they need to come back on their own.

However....
I am interested in conclusions from what people would classify me as. Fundamentalist? Classic? Ultra conservative? Definitely not a literalist.

I'm not a literalist either.
Some scripture is clearly not literal.
Not fundamentalist either.
Classic....maybe yes.
Conservative....maybe yes.

At least I've come to the conclusion, with the help of some on here, that a person cannot be liberal - in today's definition - and be Christian at the same time.

 

[GodsGrace]

Let's step back. What do you want to measure and compare; grace v justice; literal v figurative; guilt v redemption?

No. Not grace vs justice.....I don't mean this to be a theological discussion.

Literal vs figurative.....YES! (as @JohnDB also mentioned).

Guilt vs redemption....No.

Looks like you're on the right path.

So:
Some take every word literally....
Some don't.

Some are creationists with a young earth,,,some an old earth, but still creationist.
Would the terms be different? Ithink they would still be creationists.

Is there a term for a literalist? A figurativist? (new word).

 

[GodsGrace]

To me, it comes down to the definition of liberal

My definition is different then yours

To me a liberal is someone who will look at other peoples opinions, and welcome New ideas.

Compared to your idea of a liberal christian
I wouldn’t even call those people Christians that believe in abortion and gay marriage

In conclusion, if it doesn’t conflict with the Bible, go at it, that’s my definition of liberal

I wonder how old you are.
In the old days a liberal was what you've stated above:
someone who will consider other person's opinions and welcomes new ideas.

This is no longer what a liberal stands for today.
Some real liberals are ashamed of being associated as such these days.

Liberals tend to be the most closed minded persons.
They will NOT consider other points of view....
not only that but if you don't agree with them, they cancel you and degrade you.

If you're listening to the news on different type newscasts, you'll see what I mean after the
victory of Donald Trump. Some persons were afraid to say they were voting for him.

This is not healthy for our country.
Ben Shapiro used to talk at Universities and had to cancel many times due to protests
FROM LIBERALS.

No more open minds Stash...they're as closed as closed could be.
They can't even accept why they lost the election!
That's how closed minded they are.

 

[Wrangler]

Looks like you're on the right path.

Right path? The problem with this thread is the lack of a thesis statement. Your OP was merely this:

That's it.....

Please explain your point of view.

So, the conversation is in search of a thesis. From Definition of THESIS
thesis
noun

1: a dissertation embodying results of original research and especially substantiating a specific view
especially : one written by a candidate for an academic degree
2 a: a proposition to be proved or one advanced without proof : hypothesis
b: a position or proposition that a person (such as a candidate for scholastic honors) advances and offers to maintain by argument
3 a (1): the unstressed part of a poetic foot especially in accentual verse
(2): the longer part of a poetic foot especially in quantitative verse
b: the accented part of a musical measure : downbeat
compare arsis
4: the first and least adequate stage of dialectic

By saying I'm on the right path, it implies that there is a specific view you seek to advance. What is that?

Is there a term for a literalist? A figurativist? (new word).

Hmmm. Seems like a question you should have answered while drafting the OP. It should be sufficient to dive into Bible study properly, taking some things literally and other things figuratively as the text demands, yes?

 

[GodsGrace]

Right path? The problem with this thread is the lack of a thesis statement. Your OP was merely this:




So, the conversation is in search of a thesis. From Definition of THESIS
thesis
noun

1: a dissertation embodying results of original research and especially substantiating a specific view
especially : one written by a candidate for an academic degree
2 a: a proposition to be proved or one advanced without proof : hypothesis
b: a position or proposition that a person (such as a candidate for scholastic honors) advances and offers to maintain by argument
3 a (1): the unstressed part of a poetic foot especially in accentual verse
(2): the longer part of a poetic foot especially in quantitative verse
b: the accented part of a musical measure : downbeat
compare arsis
4: the first and least adequate stage of dialectic

By saying I'm on the right path, it implies that there is a specific view you seek to advance. What is that?


Hmmm. Seems like a question you should have answered while drafting the OP. It should be sufficient to dive into Bible study properly, taking some things literally and other things figuratively as the text demands, yes?

This is funny Wrangler!
I didn't have a thesis.
I don't know that I ever have when starting a thread.
Usually, it's to learn something I feel I don't know enough about...
or to get different opinions.

It's kind of like when you go to the doctor.
To ask intelligent questions, you have to know a little about your condition.
Or, there's really not too much to ask.

I hear these terms...I think I know what they mean...
but I'm not sure.
Some of my threads have gone for 15 pages and more (not here)...
some last a couple of pages....it doesn't matter for me...if I get my answer, I'm happy.

So far I've eliminated liberal Christian from the list...since there's no such thing, as I've learned from some members on here.

That leaves Conservative which seems to be only a political term...as you've also said.

Fundamentalist seems to mean someone that takes the entire bible very literaly (VERY literaly??!).
It also might mean someone that believes in a young earth....what say you?

That leaves conservative...maybe I mean traditional, mainline....or something similar?

Yeah. If I had a thesis, I think this thread would not exist!

 

[Debp]

Agreed. The bible is not a history book.
But science tells us that the universe is billions of years old, about 15, and the earth is about 4.5 billion years old.
Geology could confirm the age somewhat.

I firmly believe that we have to stop pitting science against religion.
Our youth is very confused over this and there should be no confusion.

Genesis states that in the beginning God created...
EXACTLY how He created we cannot really know -- although the evidence is pointing more and more away from evolution (macro).
Which is good IMO because the young depend too much on this theory and it turns many away from God. (I know this from experience).

Science can work WITH religion.
John Lennox speaks of this all the time and also Stephen Meyer and other scientists that have faith in our God.

This is an excellent group of scientists who believe in the Bible as God's Word. Interesting articles, videos, etc.

The Institute for Creation Research | The Institute for Creation Research

www.icr.org

 

[JohnDB]

Louis Pasteur killed a few horses before he finafigured out how to make a vaccine....

That's science...they bury their mistakes.

Not all science is worthwhile. And sure....some is absolutely fascinating.

Electric cars, rockets on a budget, and satellites for internet....all is fascinating. They say they are well on their way for hoverboards soon....just gotta finish the mass production of the superconductors.

But science isn't God.

Science can't define "good" either. They can define "pure"....but not good. Although they use the term often.

Once upon a time they though radium tonics were "good" and harnessed the power of the atom for your body...nevermind the fact that the people taking such tonics had severe bone density issues and cancers....

Now they are rethinking the use of puberty blockers for the LGBTQ crowd and "going back to formula" on the whole sexual perversion thing.

Science can't mend a broken heart anymore than it can mend a broken family. And that's why we need Jesus.

 

[GodsGrace]

This is an excellent group of scientists who believe in the Bible as God's Word. Interesting articles, videos, etc.

The Institute for Creation Research | The Institute for Creation Research

www.icr.org

Tomorrow...too late here.

But here's some more....Stephen Meyer - The Discovery Institute

Stephen Meyer

Stephen C. Meyer is director of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture and a founder both of the intelligent design movement. Dr. Meyer is a Cambridge University-trained philosopher of science, the author of peer-reviewed publications in technical, scientific, philosophical and...

www.youtube.com

 

[Taken]

Could it be both?
A fundamentalist....believing every single word in the OT would believe that he could handle poisonous snakes with no consequence.

But,. yes, a liberal does taunt God with their own ideas.
But I think the video goes more to the fundamentalist "camp".

Liberal would be more like,,,I'm getting a divorce -no matter what God may think of it.

IN context…regarding snakes.
I do not FIND taking snakes out of their usual habitats, swinging them around in the air, the unusual Loud sounds in a microphone…would be usual, or NON threatening to a snake….rather agitating…and hinging on challenging God….out from His Intent to heal men finding themselves in an unsuspecting situation.

God bless you.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Stash]

I wonder how old you are.
In the old days a liberal was what you've stated above:
someone who will consider other person's opinions and welcomes new ideas.

This is no longer what a liberal stands for today.
Some real liberals are ashamed of being associated as such these days.

Liberals tend to be the most closed minded persons.
They will NOT consider other points of view....
not only that but if you don't agree with them, they cancel you and degrade you.

If you're listening to the news on different type newscasts, you'll see what I mean after the
victory of Donald Trump. Some persons were afraid to say they were voting for him.

This is not healthy for our country.
Ben Shapiro used to talk at Universities and had to cancel many times due to protests
FROM LIBERALS.

No more open minds Stash...they're as closed as closed could be.
They can't even accept why they lost the election!
That's how closed minded they are.

As far as age, I am 70 years old

Like I said, if you’re playing around with abortion and things that are against the Bible, you are not a Christian

I don’t know why you still seem to think a liberal is a Christian

A liberal in your definition today is the farthest thing from a christian

So I don’t see the importance of this conversation
Of trying to tie them in with the Christians

Your conversation should be non-christian versus christian
not liberal versus conservative

 

[Wick Stick]

That's it.....

Please explain your point of view.
Thanks.

I'm not sure "liberal Christianity" is a thing. Those who consider themselves "liberal" are generally not those who consider themselves "Christian." These are the Bart Ehrman's of the world - they know about Christianity, but are not actually believers in Christ.

There is such thing as a progressive Christian. Essentially, this is someone whose worldview is that the world is getting better, rather than worse. Christ is thought to be already ruling, and the world improves under his reign, until eventually it is perfected and he "renders up the kingdom" to the Father.

"Conservative" seems to be the de facto position for Christians. The conservative believes that "the old ways are better" and that the world is deteriorating. Eventually, Christ will come to save/redeem the world. In the meantime, we live out what was handed down to us.

"Fundamentalist" is someone who rejects common sense or any kind of learning/education in favor of whatever-their-pastor-said. This is someone who has completely subscribed to... someone-else's interpretation of Scripture... essentially they have given their own mind a vote of no-confidence and decided to rely ENTIRELY on someone else. This is not a good thing by my estimation.

 

[Wrangler]

I'm not sure "liberal Christianity" is a thing.

I went to 2 churches in Ohio who were liberal Christians. One common denominator was their embrace of our man-hating society. But the dead give-away is the preaching of a false Gospel, as they both only preached a partial Gospel.

The first was that MAN has fallen; a rather Catholic orientation of guilt. Each week was a barrage of how MEN failed to live up to the minister's standards. It became grating. So, we left the jaded church. We left after I had it out with the minister. I challenged him on how blatantly sexist his sermons are. Why does he bash the male ego? Does he deny women have an ego that cause problems? His entrenched answer was that women don't have testosterone driven egos, doubling down on the male only problem.

The second church had a female pastor. She preached about how men in the area need to "step up" after Northeast Ohio led the country in young people suicide, aware that the absence of father's was the single biggest determinate. I sent a scathing email driven by justice. She failed to address why men have stepped down and until you do, continue to enjoy burying your children. No response. No response in private and no response from the pulpit. Nepotism drove her ill prepared son to take over when she retired and my experience there is detailed below. Polls results showed 100% of the people thought I should also leave that church.

Should I Leave My Church?

Father's Day celebration. They asked men trivial questions like what color the children’s eyes are, what their pediatrician’s name is. They even asked one grandfather what is the date of his 2 grandchildren’s birthday. When he gave the month and year, the FEMALE interviewer told him that was not...

www.christianityboard.com

I recently learned of a book, Why Men Hate Going to Church. The author explains the feminization of church is not new but has accelerated in a time from coinciding with the feminization of society. Orthodox denominations tend to address political issues. Liberal churches claim we should be facilitators of the process while hypocritically advancing political agenda by insidious implication. I've had enough gaslighting to last me a while, maybe the rest of my life. This means I'm staying away.