Fundamentalists

There are alot of people on this site with the mentality best expressed by prophecyexclaimed as "The Bible isn't wrong! My beliefs aren't wrong." I don't know what it is, but it is almost impossible to relate to these people. Their mentality has to be the antithesis of an intellectual. Are these people just lazy thinkers and want believe they have all the answers? I just don't get it. Am I maybe too close minded to relate?My main question is how does one become like this? This goes out to everybody with that mentality on this site. What makes one think they have all the answers to everything in a book that is contradicted by countless years of scientific investigation and discovery? There only answer to this is 'The Bible isn't wrong! My beliefs aren't wrong'. How does one come to think like that?JustinC[This message has been edited by JustinCy, 08-21-2003]

I think it should be specified is that the thing that makes it impossible to talk to fundies is not the statement "the bible isn't wrong, my beliefs aren't wrong." It's what the statement implies."The bible can't possibly be wrong, my beliefs can't possibly be wrong. If you have evidence to the contrary, your evidence must be wrong, because it CAN'T BE THE BIBLE. LALALALANOTLISTENINGTOYOUREVIDENCELALALALALA."

1) The origin of biological complexity is crucial to my understanding of transcendent reality and my conduct toward others.2) Science should make me feel good.3) I am entitled to an opinion on a subject I know next to nothing about. In addition, my opinion is also just as valid as that of someone who has studied the subject all of his or her life.4) The word "God" is an explanation that requires no explanation.5) If someone disagrees with me, one of us is wrong. Morally wrong.------------------
En la tierra de ciegos, el tuerto es el Rey.

Hi,I actually dont mind people who have that stance as long as they try to back it up.I know myself that there is very little in the bible that is historically accurate, the theological stuff you can argue over all day because there is no real way to test it.I know from my studies that there was no enslavement in Egypt, no exodus, no military conquest of Canaan, there is simply no archaeological evidence to support these claims. I also know that all attempts to try and harmonise these events by people such as William Albright, John Bright, Nelson Glueck et al, have all failed, there isnt a single Syro-Palestinian archaeologist who supports the Bible version of these events. I am actually quite happy that a fundy will argue withme over these things IF they actually provide evidence to support their assertions.I agree that it is annoying when most, not all, of these fundies post arguments that are indicative of a very restricted education and intelligence, but not all fundies are like that.I think there are many reasons for the stance that you mention. One could simply be indoctrination by their parents, and it is difficult to admit that your parents are wrong about the most important thing in their lives.On the other hand, there is the fundy who has went through a conversional religious experience and think that if there is one comma out of place in the Bible then it is all untrue. These are the people who have not actually studied the Bible at a decent academic level, and they never will because their whole world wold collapse when they realise the truth.The Bible may indeed turn out to be theologically accurate, but historically accurate it certainly isnt.Brian.

Well, IMHO it ultimately stems from the ability of humans to construct systems of thought which are based on axioms that fundamentally disagree with other axioms held by different individuals. Van Tillian presuppositionalism is a prominent culprit for this phenomenon. Basically, intellectual Christians (believe me, they exist ) assert that all systems of thought are founded upon a priori axiomatic postulations, and that they are therefore entitled to construct new systems of thought founded on uncommonly accepted axioms such as "God exists," "The Bible is God's Word," and "The Bible is infallible." Once they've postulated those, their claims can be perfectly validated within that system. Attacking their axioms is to them similar to what a logician would regard a person challenging the axioms "A = A" or "A <> ~A."Not that I think their postulations are warranted at all, but this, I believe, is fundamental to fundamentalism.Axioms:
1.) Their exist no contradictions in the Bible
2.) If a contradiction is presented, see #1.Blessings,::

If these people realize their limited knowledge on the subject of origins, then I have no problem with them. but I frequently get the response from fundies I debate to the effect of 'But I KNOW I'm right and you are wrong'.....and that's it. That's their argument. That mentality really bothers me for some reason.What else bothers me is that it seems that creationism is on the rise in america. Is this true or am I just becoming more aware of it? Many of my friends subscribe to creationism without doing any research on the subject. It almost seems trendy among Christians to abandon reason and evidence and accept ignorance with open arms. A Creation Science Seminar, including none other than Ken Ham, was recently held at a nearby college (Geneva I think) and many of my friends attended the seminar. They got back so pumped and excited and started up debates with me. Not to sound arrogant, but I refuted all of their major claims (I've been debating creationists for awhile). But these explanations can be derived with even the most basic understanding of Evolutionary Biology. Why have none of them read any books on the subject? Do they just want to believe what they want?As for why they are like this, I guess it is alot about their upbringing. But I basically had the same as them, strict catholic families. And when you look at evidence for a claim and the logic of the claim, isn't it hard to just ignore it?JustinC

Hi, It is called 'cognitive dissonance' and it appears to be a prerequisite for a creationist/bible inerrantist, at least the ones that I have spoken too anyway.A quick note on Ken Ham. He came to the UK expecting to find the same euphoria that surrounds the creationist carnivals in the USA only to scuttle away with his tail between his legs muttering something abut the UK being 'lost'. All because the UK Christians realised how ludicrous his arguments were and let him know about it.Brian.

I've actually talked to him on an evolutionist bashing segment on Word FM (Christian Radio). I asked him to explain why different radiometric dating mathods should agree if all the assumptions are erroneous. He said he'd have to look into that.....interesting.JustinC

This whole topic is a stereotype.------------------
"I believe in christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."-C.S. Lewisholla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com

quote:

---

A quick note on Ken Ham. He came to the UK expecting to find the same euphoria that surrounds the creationist carnivals in the USA only to scuttle away with his tail between his legs muttering something abut the UK being 'lost'. All because the UK Christians realised how ludicrous his arguments were and let him know about it.

---

So you were next him when he was "muttering"?
Thanks
-messenjaH------------------
"I believe in christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."-C.S. Lewisholla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com

Oh and thanks for the extra Ken Ham bashing, maybe I should include something bad about Darwin when I post. lol
Thanks again,
-MessenjaH------------------
"I believe in christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."-C.S. Lewisholla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com

I taught a lesson at a High School on creation myths from around the world and the head of the Religious Studies Dept thought he would introduce some scientific evidence for creation to the students. It was a videotape featuring Ken Ham of all people. These students were only 15 and 16 years old and laughed almost all the way through Ken's drivel.But Ken and others of his 'kind' who promote this nonsense have a lot of followers, and I think these are the people that are too lazy or too intellectually challenged to see the flaws in their arguments.Brian.

quote:

---

This whole topic is a stereotype.

---

I'm not referring to every creationist, I'm specifically referring to the ones I described, particularly some of my friends.JustinC

Ah, but to appreciate the real absurdity of Presupposiitonalism you have to understand that it is not enough for them to be relativists. No, they have to be objectively correct. So to "prove" that they go around asserting that all other systems of thought are necessarily inconsistent. But instead of arguing for that (because they can't - like a number of other fundamentalists they usually don't so much have a world view as a collection of assumptions) they instead prefer to knock over strawman versions of other people's ideas.

Of course they would laugh, you introduced creation to them as a myth. You didnt give a hint of "this may be true" so yeah Ken Ham got laughed at, big difference of a story from the previous one you mentioned.------------------
"I AM THE MESSENJAH"holla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com