Are "Christian" and "Fundamentalist" the same thing?

well, I dont know where you get this right left stuff, or what you mean with that last line..
im satisfied if you agree that the brain dead bit is at least 50-50; then I will push for it being
predominantly on the right.

you know, give a leftie a inch and they will institute a takeover.

 

How am I to interpret "the world was flooded"? Prease exprain.

Sounds like you think the entire earth went under water, in biblical times. Do you?


And no, dont misinterpret what I said. There have been many floods, some bigger than others.
There is no "great flood" other than what some locals may choose to refer to as such.

There is reference to the "great flood" as an event in the chemistry bldg where I got my BSc.

 

I should be careful to make sure I dont appear to mock the bible, which i do not do, but
if someone insists there really was a flood, their beliefs, and especially their refusal to
accept that they could be wrong no matter the proof, is not worthy of much respect.

- - - Updated - - -

Makes sense. Thanks.

Do you see it as an attack on Christianity for me to argue that the flood and the 6 day creation are not literal events?

 

I don't know for sure. All I know is that those who experienced it thought that the entire world was destroyed.

It is akin to the story of Sodom and Gomorra. Lot and his family probably thought that they were the only ones left alive in the world, so Lot's daughters got him drunk and did the unthinkable with their father.

 

All I'm saying is that people are sheep. These sheep may have certain political leanings but in now way should one be viewed as "superior" to the other. Of course, this runs counter to your partisan propaganda, unless you wish to provide us with some evidence.

So here we have someone demanding evidence that the entire world was flooded or the Bible is all false, yet here is someone who is ready to believe that those on the right are intellectually inferior without evidence?

 

No I don't because I believe the same I don't use the bible as a fact based history book especially the old testament
what would be the attack is telling others they are wrong believing different then you and question their intelligents for not believing the same

 

No. You see, actually have a moderate approach to abortion. I think it's fine 5 minutes after conception. I think it's a problem 5 minutes before birth. Where in between that changes we can debate, but the extremists don't want that.

As long as it's a consenting adult, they should not.

 

Yeah right, that's what the Roman Catholics use to say because it didn't appear with the prayers of the Roman Catholic Patriarch who was placed there by the Pope, but only when the Patriarch of Jerusalem with the direct Apostolic succession performed the ceremony. The Holy Fire never appeared either by the heads of the Coptic and Armenian Church for the same reason.

You can tell the Muslim holders of the keys to the Church, the Israeli police who guard the Patriarch, and the tens of thousands of witnesses that what they see and know is a fake. You can also tell them that when their candles light up automatically at the appearance of the Holy Fire, and when the fire doesn't burn them as they play with it, that it's a fake.

Anyway here are nice photos, now don't tell me it's not a miracle that the Church has never caught on fire?

https://www.google.com/search?q=hol...ttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.holyfire.org%2Feng%2F;551;394

 

People often see what they want to see.. Plus, there's the issue of mass hysteria. There is another of these claims in the UK somewhere.

 

I think I disagree with you here. I did quite a bit of reading about it. It's certainly not a miracle, and it's certainly not honestly presented, but it's not entirely a hoax, anymore than (for example) communion is a hoax. It's a religious ceremony practiced by certain Christian sects, mostly Greek and Armenian.

 

Its a bit like Jesus on a cracker.

I have been to a number of churches in the ME where the head of John the Baptist is entombed. Religion is not above such devices.

 

According to one of the participants, the fire only arrives when it's brought by one of the priests. But I'm impressed by your faith that miracles can be scheduled, orchestrated, and performed on command, every year. I'm also impressed that this particular miracle collects such a large paying audience.

Here, you are confusing what I call stage magic with genuine mystery. There is no genuine mystery here, there isn't even any scientific curiosity, anymore than scientists investigate how magicians pull rabbits out of hats. The fact that the audience is tricked is essential to the act, as is the fact that the audience is never shown how the trick is performed.

No more than the fact that the magician has never failed to find the rabbit inside the hat.

- - - Updated - - -

I think you are confusing religious truth with scientific truth. Religious truths rest on faith - the more people believe it, and/or the more sincerely they believe, the truer it becomes. Saying "it's a miracle" is where religious truth ends and scientific truth begins.

 

Debate? I thought abortion was all about religious dogma. Now you seem to concede that it is not purely a religious issue,.

As for the marriage issue, why does the state sanction marriage of any kind? Is sex that important?

 

Well, I think the world operates on known principles.. and I don't require the "mysteries" to be a Christian.

 

Its not justification to be hateful towards people. Which is what you are doing when you call people names meant to demean, like "fundie". I am a Christian Fundamentalist, believing in the bible as God's word to be read and understood in the context of how it is written. As a Christian....I have to be careful to not get angry and just start calling people mocking names. Which....on this board can be a bit tough, especially after a glass of wine.

I have disrespect for intolerance, hatefulness, and the attitude of treating people like dirt who don't share in a belief or adhere to a certain faith. I see a lot of that here...but for the most part I can treat people who act like that as a human being and with respect.

 

Not true. Take the case of the young atheist in prison who won a lawsuit which changed the legal perspective of what Atheism is. Forced legislation via the judicial bench.

 

Well, to be a True Christian (TM) you absolutely do need to believe in at least one preposterous miracle. I would say you don't need mysteries, miracles, or imaginary sky daddies to be religious. The real world is awe-inspiring at every level.

- - - Updated - - -

How does this relate? What judges, legislatures, or lawsuits do has nothing to do with what Christians are commanded to do - that is, turn everyone else into a Christian to enable them to enter the Kingdom Of God.

 

Tell that to the poster who wrote this comment to which I responded to.
" I see christianity as a threat because they (and to date, only they) are trying to force the government to enforce their religion as law in this country."
Have a nice day.

 

I see no inconsistency here. Christians ARE trying to force the government to impose their religious beliefs. You point out that they are not entirely successful. Both of you are correct, but Christians nonetheless ARE trying. We are fortunate that some wiser heads throughout the government have seen fit to place the US Constitution above their own religious preferences, Scalia notwithstanding. And it's a continuing battle. Here in Alabama, Judge Roy Moore announced that he would NOT obey the law of man, because his GOD COMMANDED that he erect his 5-ton sculpture of the Ten Commandments. And he said, in so many words, that he places his interpretation of his religious requirements above his interpretation of the law he was elected to uphold.

And notice that he was removed as Supreme Court Chief Justice for disobeying the law, and he turned around and ran for re-election, and the good Christians of Alabama duly elected him right back to the office he disgraced, so that he could (as he promised in his campaign) continue to place his religion above the law.

Roy Moore might be an isolated nutcase, but how about the majority of Christian voters?

 

considering the bible contains stories about talking donkeys, why would it NOT be mocked and laughed at? why would you even be surprised that it's mocked and laughed at? it isn't as though you don't know it has this stuff in it.

 

So are some atheists.

Oh well.... it just proves my previous point made in other threads that there "is no separation of church and state".. Those elected to office will carry with them the beliefs that they have (Theist or non-theist) and those beliefs will influence their duties in that elected office.

 

How do you know anyone experienced it?

There is no evidenced that Sodom or Gomorrah ever existed, other than that story.

 

That's an odd statement. Of course church and state are separated, and in fact (as far as I can tell) Roy Moore is very much the exception (though the voters are typical Christians). Consider Judge Jones of the Kitzmiller case - a conservative Republican, a devout Christian, but he completely demolished any attempt to get "intelligent design" mislabeled as science or taught in science classes.

Then again, I agree there are those like Scalia, Alito, and Thomas who think that the state OUGHT to be the civil enforcement arm of their personal religious beliefs. And even these people would fall all over themselves agreeing that the state is separated from any religion other than theirs.

 

I dont guess I care to provide evidence to defend myself against a bit of made up calumny from you.


Your last sentence is pretty scrambled. But let's see...
So here we have someone demanding evidence that the entire world was flooded or the Bible is all false

All of that is completely wrong, if you refer to me. I dont "demand evidence" that the world was flooded; I know it was not. That is like asking for proof of batboy.
Second, it in no way is stated or implied by me that the "entire bible is false". Nor does that follow from the flood story being false. The bible is a composite, some reasonably accurate history, some poetry etc. Poetry cannot be "false".


here is someone who is ready to believe that those on the right are intellectually inferior without evidence?

Neither is that stated or implied by me. Fundamentalists are the people here in question.
Fundamentalism draws its strength from the lower socio economic rungs of society, so that speaks for itself.

A person who believes an old book despite the most clear and obvious proof that it is incorrect
is not being intellectual, at all.

- - - Updated - - -

So all disagreements in a debate forum are attacks?

(please note that I dont question others' intelligence)