Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Pick and Choose Fundamentalism
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 31 of 384 (430645)
10-26-2007 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by iceage
10-26-2007 2:08 PM


Re: God Ordained Killing
Iceage, I'd like to see you talk it out with nem_jug, gen, phat, buzsaw, and riverrat. I'm not the person you should be arguing with. All of these guys have at one point tried to tell me that what happenned to Jericho was just because god was always just and those people deserved what was coming to them.

Disclaimer:
Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.
He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by iceage, posted 10-26-2007 2:08 PM iceage has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 32 of 384 (430646)
10-26-2007 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Taz
10-26-2007 2:11 PM


Taz writes:
Ok, so do you agree with me that people shouldn't teach this story to their children literally and claim it to be a moral example?
That is a no-brainer.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Taz, posted 10-26-2007 2:11 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Taz, posted 10-26-2007 2:24 PM GDR has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 33 of 384 (430648)
10-26-2007 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by GDR
10-26-2007 2:20 PM


Then it's not me you should be arguing with.

Disclaimer:
Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.
He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 2:20 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 3:43 PM Taz has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 34 of 384 (430649)
10-26-2007 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Taz
10-26-2007 2:14 PM


Taz writes:
And yet this supposed minority group is somehow taking over America.
Sorry, I've never bought into this "silent minority" claim. The fact that a literalist like Bush could get into office by getting the fundamentalists to organize whole bus tours to the voting places should tell us something about their numbers.
I frankly don't think that most people who claim inerrancy in the Bible really think that much about it. In some churches it has become a litmus test of faith and so they just go with it, as it is easier than trying to sort out what it really has to say.
The Bible has no authority on its own. Jesus is the word of God and Jesus has authority. The Bible only has authority as is given it by God. It is primarily the grand narrative of God and His creation from beginning to end. Jesus made the whole thing simple by saying that the great commands were to love God and love your neighbour and that everything else had to be taken within that context. The story of the fall of Jericho has to be looked at in that light.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Taz, posted 10-26-2007 2:14 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Taz, posted 10-26-2007 2:47 PM GDR has replied
 Message 38 by arachnophilia, posted 10-26-2007 3:45 PM GDR has replied
 Message 44 by Equinox, posted 10-26-2007 5:10 PM GDR has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 35 of 384 (430652)
10-26-2007 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by GDR
10-26-2007 2:34 PM


Then let me ask you this question. How come you never show up when my head explodes from trying to explain to nem_jug or buzsaw or riverrat why reading the story of jericho and trying to say that god was just to kill all those people doesn't make any sense?
I've said this in the past and I'll say it again. Not telling someone he's wrong is another way of agreeing with him. Everytime people like buzsaw and nem_jug go on a rampage with their excuses for the story of jericho, you of all people should be right there telling them not to read it literally and try to rationalize it. Instead, it's always been myself and other atheists who have been the ones to tell these people it's wrong to try to justify genocide and rape.

Disclaimer:
Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.
He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 2:34 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 3:39 PM Taz has replied
 Message 139 by Hill Billy, posted 07-05-2009 6:47 PM Taz has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 36 of 384 (430665)
10-26-2007 3:39 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Taz
10-26-2007 2:47 PM


Taz writes:
Then let me ask you this question. How come you never show up when my head explodes from trying to explain to nem_jug or buzsaw or riverrat why reading the story of jericho and trying to say that god was just to kill all those people doesn't make any sense?
Frankly I don't read all the threads. I have made this point on some threads but it becomes very time consuming and frankly I don't always have the time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Taz, posted 10-26-2007 2:47 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Taz, posted 10-26-2007 4:24 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 37 of 384 (430667)
10-26-2007 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Taz
10-26-2007 2:24 PM


Taz writes:
Then it's not me you should be arguing with.
Except that it seems that you have thrown the baby out with the bathwater. Because when you decided, quite rightly in my view, that God did not say that everyone should die you came to the conclusion that it was all a myth. Then it seems that if the Jericho story was a fabrication then so was the whole Bible.
My discussion with you is that there are more ways to gain truth from the Bible than a literal reading of it.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Taz, posted 10-26-2007 2:24 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Taz, posted 10-26-2007 4:17 PM GDR has replied
 Message 41 by ringo, posted 10-26-2007 4:21 PM GDR has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 38 of 384 (430668)
10-26-2007 3:45 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by GDR
10-26-2007 2:34 PM


Jesus made the whole thing simple by saying that the great commands were to love God and love your neighbour and that everything else had to be taken within that context. The story of the fall of Jericho has to be looked at in that light.
perhaps it's just me, but i'm a little lost on this point. can you explain to me how we are to read genocide in the light of loving our neighbours?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 2:34 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 3:53 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 39 of 384 (430669)
10-26-2007 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by arachnophilia
10-26-2007 3:45 PM


Arch writes:
perhaps it's just me, but i'm a little lost on this point. can you explain to me how we are to read genocide in the light of loving our neighbours?
That's my point. You can't! I'm saying that the actual battle happened and that they actually justified it by saying God had told them to do it, in the same way that the crusaders claimed they were justified in their actions. Them saying that God had told them to do it, is very different than God actually telling them to do it.
Saying that God told you to do something, doesn't make it so.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by arachnophilia, posted 10-26-2007 3:45 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by arachnophilia, posted 10-26-2007 4:42 PM GDR has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 40 of 384 (430671)
10-26-2007 4:17 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by GDR
10-26-2007 3:43 PM


GDR writes:
Except that it seems that you have thrown the baby out with the bathwater. Because when you decided, quite rightly in my view, that God did not say that everyone should die you came to the conclusion that it was all a myth. Then it seems that if the Jericho story was a fabrication then so was the whole Bible.
Well, it wasn't really the determining factor for my atheism. It was something else... long story.
But in short, denying the whole deity thing has made me a much better person now. In fact, being an atheist makes me want to be yet a better person. It's really something that I feel religion could never do for me. Instead of caring for my fellow men (and women) because some god supposedly told me so, I've found better reasons to care. If there really is a god and if he really is as all loving as people claim him to be, I highly doubt he'll judge me and condemn me to hell simply because I refuse continue to be the hating bigot I used to be.

Disclaimer:
Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.
He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 3:43 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 9:24 PM Taz has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 41 of 384 (430672)
10-26-2007 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by GDR
10-26-2007 3:43 PM


GDR writes:
... you came to the conclusion that it was all a myth.
What's wrong with it being a myth?
Then it seems that if the Jericho story was a fabrication then so was the whole Bible.
What's wrong with the whole Bible being a fabrication? If they fabricated the "God told us to do it" part, how do you know which other parts are (not) fabricated?

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place”
-- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 3:43 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 9:36 PM ringo has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 42 of 384 (430673)
10-26-2007 4:24 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by GDR
10-26-2007 3:39 PM


GDR writes:
Frankly I don't read all the threads. I have made this point on some threads but it becomes very time consuming and frankly I don't always have the time.
I guess I should have been more general.
It really seems to me that everytime this issue comes up it's always us atheists who are trying to tell the christian side that it's immoral to run a sword through a 1 year old no matter how you look at it. It's not just that. It's also other issues such as gay rights and whatnot. I rarely ever see professing christians standing up for human rights. This is why I don't believe there is such a thing as a silent majority. The evidence simply doesn't exist for the existence of the silent majority.
But anyway, if next time one of these people decide to go on a rampage and claiming acts of genocide was on god's order, would you come and tell him not to read it literally if I somehow could bring your attention to it?

Disclaimer:
Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.
He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 3:39 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 9:45 PM Taz has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 43 of 384 (430675)
10-26-2007 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by GDR
10-26-2007 3:53 PM


Arach writes:
perhaps it's just me, but i'm a little lost on this point. can you explain to me how we are to read genocide in the light of loving our neighbours?
That's my point. You can't! I'm saying that the actual battle happened and that they actually justified it by saying God had told them to do it, in the same way that the crusaders claimed they were justified in their actions. Them saying that God had told them to do it, is very different than God actually telling them to do it.
Saying that God told you to do something, doesn't make it so.
oh! ok, then, thanks for the clarification. i would agree with that assessment.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 3:53 PM GDR has not replied

  
Equinox
Member (Idle past 5142 days)
Posts: 329
From: Michigan
Joined: 08-18-2006


Message 44 of 384 (430679)
10-26-2007 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by GDR
10-26-2007 2:34 PM


Who's the minority?
GDR writes:
Actually, as near as I can tell literalism is a view held by a minority of Christians who are primarily North American.
Alas - I wish you were right. The data doesn’t seem to support that. I thought that too for a long time because the majority of the Christians I knew were moderate, loving people like you. However, I’m liberal, with a liberal circle of friends and as we know, our own anecdotal evidence is terribly biased by a small sample size.
Looking at larger studies give a clear and indisputable picture:
In 1990 it was found about 86% of the US was Christian. By 2001 this had dropped to 77% (religioustolerance.org, ARIS data, other sources too). Polls (such as the CBS poll in December 2004) found that about 55% of Americans believe that every single word of the Bible is literally true. About the same percentage believe that man was created by God 6,000 years ago (Gallup, Barna, others). So, that means that 55/77 = over 70% of Christians are “Fundamentalist” depending on how you define that term. Other statistics show similar attitudes. For instance, 30% of Americans want a Constitutional Amendment making Christianity the Official Religion of the United States (that’s about half of US Christians), according to a Barna poll taken in 2005.
Studies by various groups have all shown that since 1900, moderate Christianity has been withering, while fundamentalist Christian churchs have been growing by leaps and bounds. Here is one of many sources for that data: http://www.pbs.org/fmc/book/6religion2.htm another is the fact that the Episcopal church has withered from over 7 million in the 70s to less than half of that now, while the US population grew, and membership data has shown that for any denomination, the more liberal, the faster it is shrinking, the more fundy, the faster it's growing. I think this is because the fundamentalists challenge moderate Christians to support their views using the Bible, and when they try to, they realize that the Bible supports fundamentalism (I’ve read it cover to cover, and I agree with the fundamentalists on this point). So, they are faced with a choice - uphold the Bible and become fundamentalist, or leave Christianity all together. So moderate Christianity bleed members on both sides, explaining why we concurrently see “no religion” rising, fundamentalism rising, and moderate Christianity shrinking. It also explains why fundamentalist power has been growing over this entire time, even though the number of Christians has been shrinking. I see no reason to expect that this polarization of Christianity will reverse what it has been doing for decades. The only exception to the liberal/fundy grouwth trend above is the UUA, which is slowly growing dispite being more liberal than even the UCC. I think that's because they aren't Christian, and so they don't have to wiggle around the Bible.
There are literally millions of moderate and liberal Christians. I don’t deny their existence. I’m just pointing out that though they ruled the country in the 70’s, their influence and members are disappearing. Moderate Christians aren’t a majority, they are a rapidly shrinking minority. Fundamentalists aren’t a tiny minority of Christians, but are instead a growing majority of Christians - and that’s even more true outside the US (excluding Europe). Most Christians worldwide are fundamentalists in Africa, Central and South America. I know it feels better to think that most Christians aren’t fundamentalists, but that’s growing further and further from the truth every day.
I do hope, however, that you are able to get more Christians to be like you.
Have a good weekend-
Equinox

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 2:34 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 10:18 PM Equinox has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 384 (430710)
10-26-2007 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by GDR
10-26-2007 2:03 PM


What it all means
I don't see why it is necessary to treat it as a myth though.
I agree, especially since its quite obvious that a large amount of text in the Bible is historically accurate. As a for instance, it was believed for a long time that the Hittite civilization was just a myth-- that no such people named the Hittites ever existed.
The argument entailed that, if the Hittite civilization was as vast and encompassing as the Bible claimed, why was there no direct evidence? Of course, soon after discovery after discovery was made pertaining to the Hittites, every bit as impressive as the Bible detailed.
As I said, I'm not a literalist but I do believe that the story is essentially correct although there is probably some Jewish symbolism in the part about the walls.
I don't really know what a literalist is any more than I know what a fundamentalist is. The meanings have become too obscured, especially since those who call themselves literalists recognize the difference between allegory and commonality.
As far as being directed by God to kill everyone I would suggest, as I said, that them saying that God endorsed what they were doing justified their actions. It doesn't mean that they actually had God's approval.
What I see sometimes is passages that state something happened only to have someone speculate that it was sanctioned by God just because its found in the Bible. Often times it is just listed as a historical fact that is not giving any indication as to how God dealt with it. Others are not so unambiguous. It all depends on the passage.

"Whatever weakens your reasoning, impairs the tenderness of your conscience, obscures your sense of God, or takes away your relish for spiritual things-- in short, if anything increases the power and the authority of the flesh over the spirit, that to you becomes sin, however good it may be in itself." -Suzanna Wesley

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 2:03 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by GDR, posted 10-26-2007 10:28 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 63 by PaulK, posted 10-27-2007 5:38 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 73 by Brian, posted 10-27-2007 8:33 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024