Fundamentally speaking
James, Peter and John, those reputed to be pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews. All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do. Galatians 2: 9 and 10.
What is a conservative Christian? Or to be precise... how can you identify a fundamentalist Christian? Are there any particular traits that enable easy recognition?
As far as popular assumptions go, a 'fundamentalist' Christian is supposed to be a weirdo. He is anti-anything-intellectual and has his head stuck firmly in the sands of orthodoxy. His worldview has only two colours: black and white because he does not imagine shades of grey exist. He is supposed to stubbornly believe in strange ideas like creation, patriarchy, thinks abortion is evil, hates homosexuals and homosexuality with equal vigour, can spout scripture at the drop of a hat, and is usually a bit of a killjoy.
In other words, the 'world' likes to imagine fundamentalist Christians to be the most avoidable creatures on this planet. Question is, how far are these assumptions correct? Is there any truth to this viewpoint that seems to be so popular and widespread? Now before we even make an attempt at finding an answer to these questions, it is necessary to ponder over what exactly does the Bible have to say about these identifying 'traits'.
Jesus' words give us a clue: 'by this shall all men know that you are my disciples if you love one another as yourselves.' We need to love each other, and that's what is expected of us. Our love is to be our shining light and our huge neonlit identifying trait. But how do we love one another? For starters, we need to move away from the lovey-dovey, all talk and no action frame of mind and start focusing on being more proactive, caring, Christlike in the way we love. A simple practical example would be to 'remember the poor' and to do something about them instead of offering mere lip service to their misery.
The early disciples did not find this kind of concern to be 'odd' or 'radical' and neither did they call it an 'extreme case of social gospel-itis'. Caring for the poor was the most natural thing for them to do and they did not place such actions in a separate "social-work" compartment the way we do these days. The book of Acts shows numerous examples of how the early church not only remembered the poor but, also, offered practical solutions towards ending their plight. Down the ages, many Christian missionaries demonstrated the same concern for the poor and the helpless and the social outcasts as they went all over the world preaching the gospel and making disciples from every tribe and nation.
So why is it that, today, caring for the poor is seen as a left-wing agenda? And why do we like to insert a 'but' whenever poverty elimination programmes are introduced or even discussed? Why are we so different from what the gospel expects of us?
I wish I had answers. I really wish I did but then, even if I did have those answers... would I be any different?
What is a conservative Christian? Or to be precise... how can you identify a fundamentalist Christian? Are there any particular traits that enable easy recognition?
As far as popular assumptions go, a 'fundamentalist' Christian is supposed to be a weirdo. He is anti-anything-intellectual and has his head stuck firmly in the sands of orthodoxy. His worldview has only two colours: black and white because he does not imagine shades of grey exist. He is supposed to stubbornly believe in strange ideas like creation, patriarchy, thinks abortion is evil, hates homosexuals and homosexuality with equal vigour, can spout scripture at the drop of a hat, and is usually a bit of a killjoy.
In other words, the 'world' likes to imagine fundamentalist Christians to be the most avoidable creatures on this planet. Question is, how far are these assumptions correct? Is there any truth to this viewpoint that seems to be so popular and widespread? Now before we even make an attempt at finding an answer to these questions, it is necessary to ponder over what exactly does the Bible have to say about these identifying 'traits'.
Jesus' words give us a clue: 'by this shall all men know that you are my disciples if you love one another as yourselves.' We need to love each other, and that's what is expected of us. Our love is to be our shining light and our huge neonlit identifying trait. But how do we love one another? For starters, we need to move away from the lovey-dovey, all talk and no action frame of mind and start focusing on being more proactive, caring, Christlike in the way we love. A simple practical example would be to 'remember the poor' and to do something about them instead of offering mere lip service to their misery.
The early disciples did not find this kind of concern to be 'odd' or 'radical' and neither did they call it an 'extreme case of social gospel-itis'. Caring for the poor was the most natural thing for them to do and they did not place such actions in a separate "social-work" compartment the way we do these days. The book of Acts shows numerous examples of how the early church not only remembered the poor but, also, offered practical solutions towards ending their plight. Down the ages, many Christian missionaries demonstrated the same concern for the poor and the helpless and the social outcasts as they went all over the world preaching the gospel and making disciples from every tribe and nation.
So why is it that, today, caring for the poor is seen as a left-wing agenda? And why do we like to insert a 'but' whenever poverty elimination programmes are introduced or even discussed? Why are we so different from what the gospel expects of us?
I wish I had answers. I really wish I did but then, even if I did have those answers... would I be any different?
Comments