|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,411 Year: 3,668/9,624 Month: 539/974 Week: 152/276 Day: 26/23 Hour: 2/4 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Fundamentalism and the True Christian | |||||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
This topic is a spinoff of the 'creo/evo creative movies/books/plays' thread. The current discussion there has evolved from the mention of the play and movie Inherit The Wind, via a few posts on the nature of Christian fundamentalism, into a descant over what type of person is a "true Christian".
I want to respond to this from Columbo:
quote: But the whole point is that Christ IS God, and as docpotato pointed out God's behavior in the OT is reprehensible to put it mildly. He could almost be called pure evil. The OT is riddled with examples of God's malevolence, they've been mentioned on this message board repeatedly and should be well known to anyone who's been paying attention. It is not enough to say that Christ brought a "new covenent", or that in those ancient times God saw it necessary to rid the world of the enemies of Israel, or some other such nonsense. There can be no justification for ordering rape, pillage, enslavement, torture or murder of whole societies of innocent people, but that's how God behaves if we accept the OT as "inerrant". If this is God, and Jesus is God, then why the hell are we supposed to be so scared of Satan? As I see it, the true Christian, if that is a good thing, would have to be one who rejects the OT outright (except perhaps for the 10 Commandments since Jesus mentioned those), rejects at least those NT passages that rely on the OT, places the greatest emphasis on the Gospels and tries to conduct his or her life as he or she truly believes that the Christ therein represented would have them do. This person would not be a fundamentalist, at least not as we understand that term here in the US South. [This message has been edited by berberry, 01-16-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Karl Inactive Member |
Well what this Christian does is to suggest that wherever the OT concept of God and God as revealed in Jesus are in conflict, it is the latter that wins.
This is because, it is my contention, revelation is progressive. On my website I wrote:
quote: No webpage found at provided URL: http://freespace.virgin.net/karl_and.gnome/believe.htm As you say, God as taken literally in the OT can be a complete ogre at times.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3974 Joined: |
Thread moved here from the Coffee House forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3974 Joined: |
Elsewhere, Angeldust posted the following. I thought that this was a significant point, that better belonged in this topic. Another possibility would have been the "Fundamentalists" topic.
quote: Adminnemooseus Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to Change in Moderation? or too fast closure of threads
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
truthlover Member (Idle past 4080 days) Posts: 1548 From: Selmer, TN Joined: |
Karl, that believe page of yours has got to be the best analysis of Christianity by a believer that I have ever seen on the web. I've thought about the issues you address, and drawn similar conclusions, but the thoughts leading to those conclusions were nowhere near as clear or lucid as yours.
I printed it off. I know a couple people who will be really anxious to read something like that. I'll let you know if your page makes it to the Friday night village meeting :-).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
Adminnemooseus quotes Angeldust:
quote: A google search produced this site:
The Fundamentals Homepage When I was in college about 22 years ago my Western Civ professor had copies of these books. I read portions of them. They are laughable today but might well have seemed plausible at the time they were written. I think the main purpose of the books was to counter and attempt to stop studies in higher criticism and evolution. BTW, the site linked above seems to still be under construction, but substantial portions of the books are available there. [This message has been edited by berberry, 01-29-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Smitty500 Inactive Member |
I definately have to agree that revelation is somewhat progressive. However to say it is imperfect is a stretch. For example the first four chapters of Genesis do not in my opinion ascribe the attributes of a "narrow tribal God" in any way.
God Bless
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
[/qs]But the whole point is that Christ IS God[/qs]
Jehovah, the father is the god of Jesus, god Jehovah's son. He is also the god of Jesus, as Jesus states over and over in the NT. The son, Jesus, always does the will of the father, Jehovah. Jehovah is the head of Jesus in authority. The function of the father and the son are different. Jesus is the mediator through whom we reach the father, either in relationship or communication in prayer. The new covenant/testament age under Jesus is not the same as the old. If you need scripture references to any of the above I can furnish for all. It will take some time so if you don't want them I won't bother.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
defenderofthefaith Inactive Member |
I would like to respond to a statement made by berberry in the thread where this all came from:
but from my perspective it hardly matters whether such people are or are not Christian. The fact is they believe themselves to be Christian and they believe they are doing God's work. I hesitate to bring this up again, but because the last thread was closed soon after I made this point I will repeat it for everyone here. Remember the wholesale massacres perpetrated by Stalin and Mao Zedong in the last century? Atheism also has had many adherents who did very nasty things. And following on logically from your statement, berberry, it doesn't really matter whether they were atheists or not as long as they believed themselves to be...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Sylas Member (Idle past 5281 days) Posts: 766 From: Newcastle, Australia Joined: |
defenderofthefaith writes: I would like to respond to a statement made by berberry in the thread where this all came from:
but from my perspective it hardly matters whether such people are or are not Christian. The fact is they believe themselves to be Christian and they believe they are doing God's work.
I hesitate to bring this up again, but because the last thread was closed soon after I made this point I will repeat it for everyone here. Remember the wholesale massacres perpetrated by Stalin and Mao Zedong in the last century? Atheism also has had many adherents who did very nasty things. And following on logically from your statement, berberry, it doesn't really matter whether they were atheists or not as long as they believed themselves to be... I can't find where you got this purported quote. I can't find it anywhere in this forum, by any poster. In defender's own posting history, he has only once posted in a thread that was subsequently closed. His last post to that thread was Message 35; and it was nothing to do with actions of anyone. This new post appears more than a month after the last post. It refers without any link or reference for context to another post. When that thread was eventually closed, it was because no points of any kind were being made by anyone, and it had become dominated by a rather spectacularly clueless individual, who had tried to use a new ID to get around a suspension. The problems had nothing to do with making points that lead to closures. The not so subtle implication that this is a point which causes threads to be closed is false. Moderators may request people to stay on topic in a thread. If there is a relevant periphsal matter, just start a new thread in the appropriate forum. You can link back to the original thread for context. It is quite possible I might even agree with the point being made; but how about a better indication of where the quote came from?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Intelligitimate Inactive Member |
quote: The numbers of deaths attributed to Stalin and Mao (along with motives) is mostly 30+ year old anti-Communist bullshit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1488 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
The numbers of deaths attributed to Stalin and Mao (along with motives) is mostly 30+ year old anti-Communist bullshit. I've noticed that every time this subject comes up, you pipe up with something along these lines. The problem is that, without some supporting evidence, it looks a little like the kind of argumentation that generally characterizes things like Holocaust denials. Do you suppose you might open a thread sometime and explore some of the history and evidence about this?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Intelligitimate Inactive Member |
quote: I've already discussed this issue and referenced relevant articles in peer-reviewed journals like the Slavic Review. The belief that Stalin/Mao killed X million people is based on bad demographic analysis and nothing more.
quote: There doesn't appear to be an appropriate forum for it. I have no problem discussing anything in this thread or in the other threads I have posted in. Frankly, most people who make those claims don't even know how those figures are arrived at in the first place, so there usually isn't anything to talk about.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
Here's the thread defender was talking about, I think. It's the one I mentioned in the first message of this thread. Perhaps I should have provided this link in that first message; my bad.
That topic had meandered into a discussion about the nature of religious fundamentalism. Since that was far afield from the thread's original subject I created this thread.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
defenderofthefaith writes:
quote: I think you very seriously misunderstand the nature of atheism. For most atheists it is simply a lack of belief in a deity. We are quite simply not theists. Most of us are not out to destroy religion. Some are, I'll grant you, and Stalin was a supreme example. Atheism is not a religion. If it can be defined by any belief at all, it would have to be the belief that religion is either illogical or irrelevant (or both) and therefore undesirable. Just because one is an atheist, one does not necessarily see oneself as a member of an anti-God army.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024