Top Ten Signs You're a Fundamentalist...
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#660 Mar 21, 2013
Punisher wrote:
1. <quoted text>There is so much missed nuance in this claim its almost funny at how fast you/other gloss over all of it. Almost...
"How we (humans) came into existence." Is as loaded a claim as you could write. Its over-loaded to the point of it being a laughable place to start, and/or end a POV.
Do you mean the human species itself? Ancestors, etc? Or humans as we are now, and apparently the way You believe your God created us? Standing up and inventing the wheel (technology)?

2. Plus, the manifestation of cancer (when it occurs)- is a poor analogy when discussing Evo and Creationism. One is involving individuals and the other is dealing with a species across a huge landscape of variables...
1. I don't believe there's any ancestors that weren't as we are now, and I don't see any reason to think such a thing.

2. I agree. It's an analogy I personally would never use.
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#661 Mar 21, 2013
Punisher wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Nearly everything about Xtianity is about miracles! Its hardly about self-knowledge...as its more about the miracle of Intervention from your God. Xtians are constantly in the hunt for a miracle to take place in their lives.

2. Holding unyielding "Faith" is works based. Any practice involves work. Even its a constant fight to Believe and conform to a "system" of behaviors.

3. Yet Xtianity and the way its practiced by most has been near wholly involved in the process of judging others as acceptable, or not. Me versus them. "Why cant I get it right? Oh, its because of others around me tempting me. So what do I do? I will attack them and make that my Spiritual mission."
1. Giving the time span of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, the miracles were fairly scarce as far as what has been recorded, save perhaps the last 3 years of Christ's life on Earth. As far as what Christians seek, I'll need some proof of that claim. I know a lot of Christians, and I don't know many who are looking for miracles. And they are focused on gaining wisdom.

2. It's not about human unyielding faith, it's about God's unyielding faithfulness. Without that, there wouldn't be any faith in Christ let alone unyielding.
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#662 Mar 21, 2013
Punisher wrote:
<quoted text>

3. Yet Xtianity and the way its practiced by most has been near wholly involved in the process of judging others as acceptable, or not. Me versus them. "Why cant I get it right? Oh, its because of others around me tempting me. So what do I do? I will attack them and make that my Spiritual mission."
I can't claim that 'never' happens within the Christian circle. But this attitude you speak of opposes scripture.
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#663 Mar 21, 2013
Punisher wrote:
<quoted text>
1. If you had chosen say...Hinduism...how much grief would that have caused you in your family, etc...?
This is an interesting. I'm guessing you're asking this with idea that it 'would' cause grief within family, etc.?

I can honestly tell you that it wouldn't/wouldn't have caused any grief to any family members whatsoever. None. To some, it may even be more preferable.
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#664 Mar 21, 2013
Punisher wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Hardly. Most of them are not organized and most do not care what other non-theists think or say. Most non-theists are about personal independence to think and believe and act independently of a group-thinking process.
Are there some outspoken anti-theists? Sure, but the "things" they seek are in no way equal to what Theists have been pushing for and still are pushing for...

2. Its too bad that so many in the current crop of American Xtians dont appreciate, nor fully understand the realities of what the FF's and their contemporaries did for us. Too many today want to limit and constrain, want to push Religion INTO the system the FF's never intended.

3. And while many non-theists might ignore some reality, few groups do it or did it better (or is it worse?) than Theists. In fact, today we have many Xtian Organizations who appear wholly dedicated to ignoring reality and history in whole while rewriting it at the same time. While also heavily influencing politics not with their real and true faith - but MONEY!
One can not merely look and consider the "good" of Xtians (of all levels of faith and adherence) in the building of this nation - while ignoring in whole all the atrocities committed by them as well. Its simply hypocritical and disingenuous.
Which seems to be a common theme with Xtians - ignore the bad, and inflate the good to mythic-fantastic proportions.
1. I think we need to separate anti-theists from non-theists (or atheists). At least from my understanding of what an anti-theist is, realizing that there may not be a definite dividing line. But I do think there's a difference.

As far as 'organized', groups like "Freedom From Religion" are certainly 'organized'. And unlike, as you suggested, many are only interested in personal freedom; the more 'activist' anti-theists are 'intrusive' on the rights of Christians.

2. Can you give me an example?

3. What 'reality' may some non-theists be ignoring?
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#665 Mar 21, 2013
Punisher wrote:
<quoted text>

One can not merely look and consider the "good" of Xtians (of all levels of faith and adherence) in the building of this nation - while ignoring in whole all the atrocities committed by them as well. Its simply hypocritical and disingenuous.
Which seems to be a common theme with Xtians - ignore the bad, and inflate the good to mythic-fantastic proportions.
It seems as if American anti-theists want to ignore (or claim to be completely disconnected from) Communist anti-theists. The general idea is that there's no political, or national connection; so consequently no affiliation.

As far as looking and considering the "good" of Christians, one of the problems is probably "not" looking. And for some, like the one poster who creates threads on fallen ministers, "look" for just the very "opposite".
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#666 Mar 21, 2013
Punisher wrote:
<quoted text>
There is questioning, and then there's flat-out dismissing based on a Faith based belief.
Example; questioning the loyalty of Mr. X.
Party A, does it based on some evidence against it, and the trail of more following it...from a few dozen sources.
Party B, doesn't question it based solely on faith, and ignores the evidence, while dismissing the evidence based on what is a perceived threat to the faith - and continues to dismiss more and more evidence.
For B keeping the faith seemingly intact outweighs the reality of the evidence.
I know what you're saying, but I think many overlook the fact that there are legitimate scientists who rejected evolution based on flaws they've seen, and the inconsistencies of evolutionists themselves 'before' taking a Creationist view. The idea that all Creation scientists started out as creationists, and deny evidence so as to remain faithful to the Bible is false.

Evolution is so involved with religion, I can't help but perceive the irony. The fact that 95% of bio-scientists are atheists and agnostics makes it quite clear that there is an issue of bias involved.
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#667 Mar 21, 2013
Punisher wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Really? But I think/recall You and many other Believers making the claim (over and over)- as have many Xtian commentators thru history, that No one comes to Faith by reason. That reason blocks it (a main theme of Augustine and therefore Xtian rhetoric) and can only be used in any manner - AFTER someone comes to their Faith thru some sort of miraculous intervention.
Face it, "free-thinking" is not a tool Xtians should be using to defend the process of coming to faith. Least of all in a Nation that is drenched in Xtian propaganda, imagery, cultural references, etc - where the non-Xtian is looked at with suspicion.
I find it funny that Americans who align to Xtianity think there is not a mountain of cultural influences and even economics at work there...
I suppose I could put an asterix next to "free thinking". Are 'we' free to think that everything is made out of rubber? Yes....and no. One has the human/legal right to think this. But they would have no logical/reasonsble right to think such a thing. It's denying one's sense of reality.

If God makes Himself manifest to someone, they 'could' deny it, but they would be in defiance of their sense of reality. If God manifests Himself, He has become a 'reality'.

To use a crude example; I think we both agree that little green or gray men from other planets are capturing humans, studying them, hypnotizing them so as not to remember (until they get flashbacks) is absurd. However, if it happens (to an individual, or to the entire world), it wouldn't matter how absurd the notion 'was', it would 'be' reality.

God is not on display for everyone to see and proclaim His existence via common human senses; but when He manifests Himself to an individual, He becomes a 'reality' no matter what anyone else thinks.

So in a sense none of us are completely "free thinkers", as various sensual perceptions limit us to accept 'reality'. The same holds true with a spiritual perception that originates from God Himself. So there are those like yourself who thought the way you do; and had their 'reality' turned upside down when the reality of God's existence was made manifest.
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#668 Mar 21, 2013
Punisher wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet you do. You align to an (interpretive) theme invented in some form by a Man/men.
Yet another of the Xtian absurdities...that they dont follow a man-made line of thinking...
I can't claim that my way of thinking is 'unique', that is 'unlike' any others. But it's really more of a matter of agreeing with, or having common thoughts with some more than others. I don't think along the lines of any other individual simply because they think it. Even certain teachers who I may gleam from the most, I have differences of opinion on some things. If I agree, I agree. If I don't, I don't.
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#669 Mar 21, 2013
Punisher wrote:
1. <quoted text>Yet you claimed that some have come to their faith thru free-thinking? Which would be an adult thing...not a child-like thingy...

Another Amer-Xtian absurdity is that an adult after decades of various systems of indoctrination to various cultural beliefs and memes, can come to this faith like a child would...which also contradicts the Proty belief-doctrine that no child should be baptized...but should do it as a free-choice of an adult.
1. Yes, but again I have to place the asterix. Basically when I say "free-thinking", I'm referring to one who has become a believer by either force, or indoctrination (realizing many think we 'all' are indoctrinated).

What exactly do you mean by "free-thinking"? In reality, none of us are free in the sense that something "captive"-ates us one way or another to believe the way we do. If you "think" that New York, San Francisco, or New Orleans are beautiful cities, you've been somehow 'captivated' through your senses to think this. To think otherwise may be a big 'struggle'. In a way, you're not really free to think otherwise.

I can't help but believe that God exists. I'm not really free to think otherwise, and it has nothing to do with upbringing, church indoctrination, etc.
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#670 Mar 21, 2013
That should read:

"One who has not become a believer by either force....
Punisher

Massapequa, NY

#671 Mar 21, 2013
Job wrote:
<quoted text>
1. If it's made up 'because' it doesn't make sense that a God would be insulted over one event, then we have to deal with the question on why would God, who is supposed to emulate a chopping block-happy dictator, bother to sacrifice Himself for mankind?

That's an obvious contradiction if this is your ultimate claim, as 'no' megalomaniac would ever make anything close to that kind of sacrifice.

2. If it was a "made up" story, there would probably be an opportunistic reason for the authors to do so. If this were ultimately the case, what would be the purpose of commands to love God, seek God, not favoring status, loving one another, loving "all", forgiving "all", avoid being like "religious" leaders, etc.?

3. It really wasn't until the Bible was far from reach from the common man that 'rules' were put into place that favored religious leaders, because scripture does not work in favor of opportunistic religious leaders.
3. When it was oral more control was in the hands of the "priests", etc. Look to the Celts for that great example, the Bards and such. Oral tradition meant control. As does the written word. The scribes became powerful and the Bards lose...

In fact, the written word meant more control from the very moment a stylus hit some parchment/vellum/papyrus...onc e something is written its being controlled in full. There is no more room for the story to expand and contract...as it did with oral traditions.

The Bible was first far from reach, not the other way around.

2. See #3. Once Religious leaders started to form doctrine, they being in control of it is the opportunity. Once they do this, people must now go thru them for their understanding of the same.

Are you really implying that Religious leaders were not, are not seeking to control their clan, flock, etc...? If only - in the case of the ancient Jews, to keep the Tribe intact...? Rules of behavior, rules of performance are all about Control, and keeping the tribe/clan/flock in line...and when necessary enforce punishments.(shaming, physical harm, banishment, etc...)

(whats the point of a Nation's Gov't trying to instill patriotism if not for allegiance and control? Uncle Sam serves a much bigger purpose...or at least did..)

1. its is a very serious question/issue for the logic of the story - How and why does a God need to sacrifice himSelf, to himSelf in order to pay a debt to himSelf.???

Jewish Prophecy never spoke to that...the Messiah was to be a man, of purely human lineage, not the God incarnate...thats the much later Xtian spin...
Punisher

Massapequa, NY

#672 Mar 21, 2013
Job wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't claim that my way of thinking is 'unique', that is 'unlike' any others. But it's really more of a matter of agreeing with, or having common thoughts with some more than others. I don't think along the lines of any other individual simply because they think it. Even certain teachers who I may gleam from the most, I have differences of opinion on some things. If I agree, I agree. If I don't, I don't.
Its glean, not gleam...as gleam means to shine with reflected light. But its wholly appropriate nonetheless. As you gleam with the reflection of that interpretive line you most favor.

I never said you would 100% agree, but its fair and honest to say that if we dissected your beliefs you would fall under an umbrella of a particular Man's or his descending groups interpretive theme.

Like some Psychologists would be deemed more Freudian than others. They would never be 100% Freudian for a few reasons, but they would still be under his umbrella view of Human psychology.

My point was YOU DO follow a mans way of thinking - thinking about matters of this particular God and how to believe in and properly worship him...them...
Punisher

Massapequa, NY

#673 Mar 21, 2013
Job wrote:
<quoted text>
1. I don't believe there's any ancestors that weren't as we are now, and I don't see any reason to think such a thing.
2. I agree. It's an analogy I personally would never use.
1. Then you're denying reality. Were our ancestors not more physically fit than the majority of current American adults? Less prone to various "modern-era" diseases? We are changing our biology, and subsequently that of our progeny...which might just be the "intent" of the Evolutionary process.

We are burning into our collective DNA a propensity to be weaker and more prone to diseases then our ancestors.

2. Yet you did?
Punisher

Massapequa, NY

#674 Mar 21, 2013
Job wrote:
<quoted text>
I suppose I could put an asterix next to "free thinking". Are 'we' free to think that everything is made out of rubber? Yes....and no. One has the human/legal right to think this. But they would have no logical/reasonsble right to think such a thing. It's denying one's sense of reality.
If God makes Himself manifest to someone, they 'could' deny it, but they would be in defiance of their sense of reality. If God manifests Himself, He has become a 'reality'.
To use a crude example; I think we both agree that little green or gray men from other planets are capturing humans, studying them, hypnotizing them so as not to remember (until they get flashbacks) is absurd. However, if it happens (to an individual, or to the entire world), it wouldn't matter how absurd the notion 'was', it would 'be' reality.
God is not on display for everyone to see and proclaim His existence via common human senses; but when He manifests Himself to an individual, He becomes a 'reality' no matter what anyone else thinks.
So in a sense none of us are completely "free thinkers", as various sensual perceptions limit us to accept 'reality'. The same holds true with a spiritual perception that originates from God Himself. So there are those like yourself who thought the way you do; and had their 'reality' turned upside down when the reality of God's existence was made manifest.
Yet Xtianity has a seriously long history of doing exactly the opposite. Telling people what and how to think and why.

In fact its still doing it...

When Xtians make the claim that by their Faith their God exists and is therefore all the proof anyone who doesnt needs - they are making their (perceived) reality the only one for all peoples.

For example. Xtians claim a divine covenant re; marriage. So therefore ALL people must abide by that covenant and deem marriage ONLY as they describe it. Where I and many others do not recognize such a covenant - using the Bible in some cases to refute the American Xtian version - or by merely dismissing the whole notion a divine covenant altogether. While also rightfully pointing out that people can/do successfully marry outside of a Religious ceremony - and in order to marry in a Religious one, they MUST be sanctioned by the State. The State doesnt recognize a Church ONLY marriage - but the Church must recognize the State sanction. In fact a Religious marriage is a useless endeavor for any legal means...

Xtians love to use the mere existence of Xtianity as all the proof anyone should require to believe. Yet they seem not to recognize that many of them came to it thru clearly different means.(while I would argue most were indoctrinated.) Its mere existence wasn't enough, they needed some personal nudge - that too many Xtians deny others. Instead I'm supposed to believe because You/others say I should. Its pretty funny when you look at the hypocrisy of most Born-Agains, etc...till its not funny, and they're in your face damning you to hell.
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#675 Mar 23, 2013
Big Al wrote:
1. <quoted text>
Apparently you are unable to comprehend the significance of the fact that the very same Catholic Church that burned her at the stake for heresy declared her a martyr 11 years later.
<quoted text>

2. Scientists demand evidence creationists demand a Judeo-Christian world view.
<quoted text>

If the people who wrote the Bible believed that the earth was flat and that the Sun revolved around the Earth you cannot say that the Bible does not imply a flat Earth and Geocentrism. The books of the Bible, like all other books, are merely an expression of the beliefs of the authors.
1. This time you are quite right. By all means, explain it to me.

2. And Creation scientists,'being' scientists, demand evidence as well.
Punisher

Massapequa, NY

#676 Mar 23, 2013
Job wrote:
<quoted text>
1a. I think we need to separate anti-theists from non-theists (or atheists). At least from my understanding of what an anti-theist is, realizing that there may not be a definite dividing line. But I do think there's a difference.

1b. As far as 'organized', groups like "Freedom From Religion" are certainly 'organized'. And unlike, as you suggested, many are only interested in personal freedom; the more 'activist' anti-theists are 'intrusive' on the rights of Christians.

2. Can you give me an example?

3. What 'reality' may some non-theists be ignoring?
1b. Because Xtians have been intruding on the rights of others for centuries.

The current push-back (historically small) is not a crime nor a sin. In fact, it can be seen as more virtuous than what Xtians have been doing for centuries. Taking back what Xtians stole.

3. science wont explain every last detail of the natural world...

That religious participation is valuable for some people, and in turn can often be valuable to the community/society...
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#677 Mar 23, 2013
Big Al wrote:
1. <quoted text>
The very few well-credentialed scientists that do not accept the scientific evidence that supports the Theory of Evolution are just as credible as the very few well-credentialed scientists that did not accept the scientific evidence that cigarette smoking causes cancer. Scientists have discovered how existing life forms have evolved from more primitive life forms.
<quoted text>

2. Scientists, unlike believers, are always questioning things. Dr. Raup was certainly not questioning the evidence that supports the Theory of Evolution. He was merely questioning “mechanism” of natural selection not the evidence for the Theory of Evolution.
“We must distinguish between the fact of evolution -- defined as change in organisms over time -- and the explanation of this change.”- Dr. David M. Raup, Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin Jan. 1979
How much of a “subjective problem” could he be suggesting if he considers evolution a fact?
<quoted text>

3.“In everyday usage,‘theory’ often refers to a hunch or a speculation. When people say,‘I have a theory about why that happened,’ they are often drawing a conclusion based on fragmentary or inconclusive evidence. The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.”– U.S. National Academy of Sciences
<quoted text>

4. I don’t understand what mean by the statement “And yet we're not supposed to question what evolution 'cannot' answer”.
The Theory of Evolution explains how life on Earth developed in a way that fits the evidence unlike Genesis. The only thing it doesn’t explain is what started the process. That doesn’t mean it’s a question that “evolution cannot answer”. Scientists are working on it.
"However, before we come to [supernatural] creation, which puts an end to all discussion: I think we should try everything else." — Johannes Kepler

5. <quoted text>
More of an embracing of the evidence.
1. Prove it.

2. And he makes an assumption based on "naturalism".

3. And they dismiss the possibility of a creator being responsible for what they cannot answer. Again, a majority of atheists/agnostics with a world view based on 'naturalism'.

4. It's not so much the "try everything else" (which will inevitably lead nowhere), but the absolute 'dismissal' of the supernatural (or what would seem supernatural to us). Again, a world view based on 'naturalism'.

5. While dismissing the evidence of intelligent design.
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#678 Mar 23, 2013
Big Al wrote:
1. <quoted text>
"What you should say to outsiders is that a Christian has neither more nor less rights in our Association than an atheist. When our platform becomes too narrow for people of all creeds and of no creeds, I myself shall not stand upon it." Susan B. Anthony (self-proclaimed heretic), famous American women's suffragist
<quoted text>

2. Your knowledge of history is poor.
"If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians thought persecution extremely wrong in the Pagans, but practiced it on one another. The first Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution in the Romish Church, but practiced it upon the Puritans. They found it wrong in Bishops, but fell into the practice themselves both there (England) and in New England."--- Benjamin Franklin
<quoted text>

3. "I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator." - Adolph Hitler
There is no animal on the face of this earth more dangerous than a man who thinks he is doing “God’s” will.
1. Christians don't demand "unequal" rights in our favor. Do you know the specifics of what she was referring to?

2.“In this situation of this Assembly groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when to us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our understandings? In the beginning of the contest with G. Britain, when we were sensible of danger we had daily prayer in this room for the Divine Protection.— Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a Superintending providence in our favor. To that kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? or do we imagine that we no longer need His assistance.

I have lived, Sir, a long time and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth — that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings that “except the Lord build they labor in vain that build it.” I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall be become a reproach and a bye word down to future age. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing Governments by Human Wisdom, and leave it to chance, war, and conquest.

I therefore beg leave to move — that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the Clergy of this City be requested to officiate in that service.”-Benjamin Franklin

3. You mean like George Washington?

"Make sure you are doing what God wants you to do---then do it with all your strength."
Punisher

Massapequa, NY

#679 Mar 23, 2013
Job wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Prove it.
2. And he makes an assumption based on "naturalism".
3. And they dismiss the possibility of a creator being responsible for what they cannot answer. Again, a majority of atheists/agnostics with a world view based on 'naturalism'.
4. It's not so much the "try everything else" (which will inevitably lead nowhere), but the absolute 'dismissal' of the supernatural (or what would seem supernatural to us). Again, a world view based on 'naturalism'.
5. While dismissing the evidence of intelligent design.
4. and that is...? Religious claims? Often using Evo sourced evidence to force-fit a Religious, and ONLY one Religious POV on it...?

Problem with the ID/Creationist crowd is they are taking a Judeo-Xtian ONLY POV...and not merely proposing that some, as yet undefined, ONE did the creating. There could have been a committee of them...but in the US (home of the main ID crowd) its ONLY the Xtian Creator.

None of the ID crowd wants to, or is doing the work to prove the singular, Xtian version of this "creator", but have decided its already decided...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Are World Events Pointing to End Times (Aug '14) 42 min 2all 2,610
Mark 4:11 – Should Christians follow the Bible? 1 hr QUITTNER Jul 7 2015 240
*Forgiveness* 3 hr Truths 15
If it's a sin to go to nightclubs, then it's a ... 3 hr QUITTNER Jul 6 2015 5
Homosexual acts remain a sin. 4 hr Gary Coaldigger 191
all religions are myths and fictions 8 hr Allen Richards 56
Christians: Is this really Christian theology? 10 hr Big Al 243
More from around the web