"Neighbor boys peep at my scantily clad daughters. Should I have them cover up?"

[Sunstone]

I'm an evangelical Christian

More than likely they are fundamentalist. People often confuse evangelical and fundie, or equate the 2, which is not necessarily correct. While many fundies are probably also evangelical, not all evangelicals are fundie

I see. I hadn't realized the distinction between fundamentalist and Evangelical had grown so great in recent years. All the people in Colorado Springs, like James Dobson, who use to call themselves fundamentalist started calling themselves Evangelicals right after 9/11.

 

[beenie]

Naaaaawww, girls only have as much honor and dignity as they have fabric between them and the world. Honor and dignity don't come from inside a person, they come from what that person is wearing. Quit being superficial!

Woe is me.

 

[pwfaith]

I see. I hadn't realized the distinction between fundamentalist and Evangelical had grown so great in recent years. All the people in Colorado Springs, like James Dobson, who use to call themselves fundamentalist started calling themselves Evangelicals right after 9/11.

He very well might be an evangelical, but he is on the extreme side of it - fundamentalist. As I said, many fundamentalist are evangelical but not all evangelicals are fundamentalist. I don't think this is something that has happened in recent years. I think it's been a long-term misunderstanding.

 

[Sunstone]

I don't think this is something that has happened in recent years.

I was here, in Colorado Springs, when just about everyone who had once called themselves fundamentalists, including James Dobson, started calling themselves Evangelicals. And it happened right after 9/11. Before the fundamentalists flew the planes into the twin towers, the fundamentalists here in the Springs were happy to be known as fundamentalists.

 

[pwfaith]

I was here, in Colorado Springs, when just about everyone who had once called themselves fundamentalists, including James Dobson, started calling themselves Evangelicals. And it happened right after 9/11. Before the fundamentalists flew the planes into the twin towers, the fundamentalists here in the Springs were happy to be known as fundamentalists.

I can understand why they would not want that association anymore, but doesn't change the fact that they are on the more extreme side. He can call himself whatever he wants (as I said being a fundamentalist doesn't mean one is not also evangelical, just means they are on the extreme of evangelical views), however most till consider him and Focus on the Family fundamental. Dobson and Falwell are both up there with the fundies.

I found these to be interesting and fairly accurate explanations of the differences.
Evangelicals - Evangelicals V. Fundamentalists | The Jesus Factor | FRONTLINE | PBS
The difference between evangelical and fundamentalist [email protected]

 

[Skwim]

I can understand why they would not want that association anymore, but doesn't change the fact that they are on the more extreme side. He can call himself whatever he wants (as I said being a fundamentalist doesn't mean one is not also evangelical, just means they are on the extreme of evangelical views), however most till consider him and Focus on the Family fundamental. Dobson and Falwell are both up there with the fundies.

I found these to be interesting and fairly accurate explanations of the differences.
Evangelicals - Evangelicals V. Fundamentalists | The Jesus Factor | FRONTLINE | PBS
The difference between evangelical and fundamentalist [email protected]

"Accurate"? Really!

Your first source, Steve Waldman, says fundamentalists are a subset of evangelicals.

"People often get confused between the terms evangelical and fundamentalist. They mean two different things. Evangelicals are a very broad group. It's probably a third or 40 percent of the population of the United States. Fundamentalists are a subset of that. They are very conservative politically. Have a literalist view of the Bible."
​

Whereas your second source, Ahab, implies evangelicals are a "subset" of fundamentalists.

In the late nineteenth century a group of Christians (that included several different denominations) with a more literal interpretation of the Bible split off theologically from the rest of Protestantism, which they called "high Protestantism". They considered mainstream denominations (i.e. Presbyterian, Methodist and Lutheran) to be too "cosmopolitan".

Based mainly in the south, they became known as "fundamentalists". However, in the 1930's a group of conservative fundamentalists became tired of the radical fringe that was dictating where fundamentalist theological thought was going (they felt that the radicals were too anti-modern). They split off, and began calling themselves, neo-evangelical Christians, which was later shortened to the current name.

​

 

[pwfaith]

"Accurate"? Really!

Your first source, Steve Waldman, says fundamentalists are a subset of evangelicals.

"People often get confused between the terms evangelical and fundamentalist. They mean two different things. Evangelicals are a very broad group. It's probably a third or 40 percent of the population of the United States. Fundamentalists are a subset of that. They are very conservative politically. Have a literalist view of the Bible."
​

Whereas your second source, Ahab, implies evangelicals are a "subset" of fundamentalists.

In the late nineteenth century a group of Christians (that included several different denominations) with a more literal interpretation of the Bible split off theologically from the rest of Protestantism, which they called "high Protestantism". They considered mainstream denominations (i.e. Presbyterian, Methodist and Lutheran) to be too "cosmopolitan".

Based mainly in the south, they became known as "fundamentalists". However, in the 1930's a group of conservative fundamentalists became tired of the radical fringe that was dictating where fundamentalist theological thought was going (they felt that the radicals were too anti-modern). They split off, and began calling themselves, neo-evangelical Christians, which was later shortened to the current name.

​

My point was simply that they are 2 different groups, not one in the same. Both give alternative views of that. I said FAIRLY accurate, not completely

 

[Skwim]

My point was simply that they are 2 different groups, not one in the same . . . . I said FAIRLY accurate, not completely

But your sources can't even agree on the nature of the groups.

When the issue at hand is the difference between Alice and Barbara, and someone says Barbara came from Alice, and another someone says Alice came from Barbra, I'd say that's the kind of difference whose explanations come nowhere close to being any kind of accurate, fairly or otherwise.

Both give alternative views of that.

They sure do, and they're incompatible alternatives. So which are we to take to the bank?

 

[pwfaith]

But your sources can't even agree on the nature of the groups.

When the issue at hand is the difference between Alice and Barbara, and someone says Barbara came from Alice, and another someone says Alice came from Barbra, I'd say that's the kind of difference whose explanations come nowhere close to being any kind of accurate, fairly or otherwise.

They sure do, and they're incompatible alternatives. So which are we to take to the bank?

Here are some:

People often get confused between the terms evangelical and fundamentalist. They mean two different things

Fundamentalists tend to be very strict. They tend towards intolerance.

They tend to be very judgmental. They tend to want to require an awful lot of individuals who would join their communion. And they tend to be very, very critical of other Christians -- even other evangelical Christians -- who don't share their very strict approach to religion.

Evangelicals and fundamentalists both agree that the Bible is inerrant, but fundamentalists tend to read the Bible literally.

Many evangelicals don't actually read it literally. They're willing to understand that there's metaphor and poetry in the Bible, and it's just that the truth expressed in that metaphor and poetry is without error; whereas fundamentalists would tend to want to read even the metaphor and the poetry literally. That's a particular way to interpret the Bible.
​

Many fundamentalists don't want to associate even with other Christians who don't agree with them. They want to separate themselves from people that have fairly similar values. Oftentimes, fundamentalists will even want to separate themselves from people who refuse to separate themselves from people who they don't agree with.

Evangelicals are not as separatist. They are perfectly willing to cooperate with people of other religious faiths, with whom they don't agree on all of the particulars, for the greater cause of evangelizing and bringing people to Christ.

in style, belief, and practice, fundamentalists really are different from evangelicals.

​

(The above ones are from the first link - PBS\)
(Ones below are from the 2nd link - 2nd statement)

In his book Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism, George M. Marsden (professor of the history of Christianity in America at the Divinity School, Duke University) uses the introduction to define his terms. He begins with a little levity, saying that "a fundamentalist is an evangelical who is angry about something."

He then goes on to give a more specific one:

an American fundamentalist is an evangelical who is militant in opposition to liberal theology in the churches or to changes in cultural values or mores, such as those associated with "secular humanism." In either the long or the short definitions, fundamentalists are a subtype of evangelicals and militancy is crucial to their outlook. Fundamentalists are not just religious conservatives, they are conservatives who are willing to take a stand and to fight.​

While this isn't supposed to suggest cultic or "militia-style" separatism, one should consider the number of media outlets, daycares, publications, schools and colleges (often separate from even evangelical-based ones) catering specifically and often exclusively to conservative Christianity.

Unlike many fundamentalists, evangelicals are less separatist and belong to a diverse group of (Protestant) denominations. There is less tendency to be anti-modernist (though, they are still religiously conservative) among evangelicals than fundamentalists and there is less of a sense of "them against us." They are still strongly "Bible-based" Protestants who reject much of the liberal theology found in the "mainstream" churches.

The 2nd part of the 2nd link, seems in agreement with the 1st link to me, unless I am missing something. Regardless - which came first really doesn't change any of the points above, imo.

 

[Maureen]

If his boys are leering at the girls from their bedroom window, then Mike has already failed at his stated goal. Maybe he should worry more about his sons' inappropriate behavior.

I have not read this whole thread....so in answer to the OP, I agree with Kilgore.

 

[Sunstone]

I think women should have their butts surgically flattened so as to not tempt me. That would solve a lot of problems while not inconveniencing anyone of importance.

 

[beenie]

I think women should have their butts surgically flattened so as to not tempt me. That would solve a lot of problems while not inconveniencing anyone of importance.

I'm out of Frubals! I'm making my appointment with the plastic surgeon as we speak.

 

[Duck]

But why would this matter given the principle of the situation (for some)? Either scantily clad females is non issue for just looking or magically it becomes an issue depending on audience.



I would say dad isn't necessarily fine with it. He's not bent out of shape over it like Mike may (or may not) be.

For me, the issues is about 'getting along with the neighbors who are making a request.' If I were dad in this situation, and Mike came over and demanded I dress my daughters differently all the time, I'd be more inclined to tell Mike to shove it. I would still listen up to a point and have discussion up to a point, but if it were only righteousness being espoused, I would probably have little willingness to accommodate. But if neighbor Mike or anyone on block makes a request, I'd want to discuss it with hopefully a reasonable, amicable resolution being found.



How one dresses equals behavior? I don't think people "should" structure their lives to please others, and yet, there is something to be said for living in community and manifesting positive relations with neighbors who make requests.

Isn't the bolded statement what happened? Mike came over and pretty much said (my impression/summation) 'your girls dress like sluts and my boys are angelic innocents that I want to keep that way'. Mike further "asked if I could please have my girls not wear such revealing clothing if they're going to be outside..." So, yeah, Mike pretty much demanded that the neighbor make his daughters dress differently.

 

[Duck]

IMO, it is not proper to say both parents approved because they didn't object. In fact, I would say mom comes off as defensive and dad as not sure of proper etiquette in this neighborly situation and because he has doubts he is seeking advice from 3rd party advisor. Why would he do this if he is "perfectly fine with this?"

My impression is that he sought advice from a 3rd party on how to interact with the neighbor in order to maintain the tranquility of the neighborhood. Not on whether or not to comply, but how to handle the response (at least that is what I got out of it).

For the record, I am with the wife - tell Mike to get stuffed. Not only is the guy controlling how his family dresses, but wants others to comply with his 'morality' so as to not do his job as a parent and police the behavior of his children. What next, complaints to a different neighbor over the music the neighbors listen to poolside because it is 'worldly' or some crap?

 

[linwood]

I think women should have their butts surgically flattened so as to not tempt me. That would solve a lot of problems while not inconveniencing anyone of importance.

Shh..my neighbors might hear!

You don`t want to give them any ideas.

 

[Reach]

In response to the thread's original question, I'd have to agree with the wife. Furthermore, the fact that the boys were looking at the daughters to begin with means that Mike should worry about what his own kids are up to, rather than his neighbors'.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

The Bible calls Christians to be modestly dressed. I disagree with the man asking is nonbelieving neighbors to dress more modestly because they don't recognize the authority of Scripture. Not only that but we live in a culture where sex is worshipped. My guess is that the parents who allow their kids to dress provocatively probably wouldn't have a problem with their kids watching porn or their daughters sleeping with their boyfriends.



1 Timothy 2:9 "I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes,"

 

[Skwim]

The Bible calls Christians to be modestly dressed. I disagree with the man asking is nonbelieving neighbors to dress more modestly because they don't recognize the authority of Scripture. Not only that but we live in a culture where sex is worshipped. My guess is that the parents who allow their kids to dress provocatively probably wouldn't have a problem with their kids watching porn or their daughters sleeping with their boyfriends.

Although wearing short shorts and tank tops or bikini tops no doubt provoked the boys, I hardly think their reaction should be the basis for coming up with such a probability. But I understand where you're coming from: women should be subjugated to men, wear no braids or teach, but remain silent. So any parent letting their daughter wear clothes that provoked anyone is probably an unfit parent. :slap:

 

[work in progress]

In response to the thread's original question, I'd have to agree with the wife. Furthermore, the fact that the boys were looking at the daughters to begin with means that Mike should worry about what his own kids are up to, rather than his neighbors'.

I don't know if this thread is worth breathing life into again, but my opinions are still the same as before: having raised two boys informs me that the problems in the quoted article are:
A. The other Christian family has eight children! Hello, there's 7 billion in this world today, what do you think you are - a bunch of bunny rabbits?

B. Uptight Christian dad has created a crisis where none previously existed, since normal teenage boys love to watch pretty girls. That's not the problem. If they exhibit little, if any respect for girls, and may have bad intentions, that's another matter. Hell, if I see a couple of hot teenage girls in bikini tops and short shorts washing a car across the street, I'm probably going to get a better look myself....without being noticed of course, and coming across as a dirty old man! And that is why I suspected that religious dad was also filled with lust, and felt so conflicted because of his sexual desires being triggered, the only course of action was to play the sexual repression card.

What's especially sinister in these kinds of stories, is that it is the girls who are treated with hostility or contempt, just because of men who are afraid of and conflicted by their own sexual desires.

 

[Skwim]

I don't know if this thread is worth breathing life into again, but my opinions are still the same as before: having raised two boys informs me that the problems in the quoted article are:
A. The other Christian family has eight children! Hello, there's 7 billion in this world today, what do you think you are - a bunch of bunny rabbits?

B. Uptight Christian dad has created a crisis where none previously existed, since normal teenage boys love to watch pretty girls. That's not the problem. If they exhibit little, if any respect for girls, and may have bad intentions, that's another matter. Hell, if I see a couple of hot teenage girls in bikini tops and short shorts washing a car across the street, I'm probably going to get a better look myself....without being noticed of course, and coming across as a dirty old man! And that is why I suspected that religious dad was also filled with lust, and felt so conflicted because of his sexual desires being triggered, the only course of action was to play the sexual repression card.

What's especially sinister in these kinds of stories, is that it is the girls who are treated with hostility or contempt, just because of men who are afraid of and conflicted by their own sexual desires.

No doubt a lot of truth in your observation.