It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


What's with the uptick in religious fundamentalism on ATS

page: 5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 10:51 AM
reply to post by kenochs

First of all, I want to thank you for your respectful tone while bringing up this topic. Most of the time when these threads come along, the OP is phrased very divisively but I commend you for bringing up a concern while remaining respectful.

Now here's my thoughts on it.

1). Thread derailment on a non religious topic into a religious angle. I'm a very religious person but can understand how this could be frustrating. I don't like it either even though religious topics are my passion. I understand there is a time and place so I agree with you there. However, statistically speaking, this is actually very rare. Also, sometimes the angle can be interesting so I don't let it get to me too much but still respect those who it may frustrate. It's also an occurrence for the 'anti-funies' to come in and derail a non religious topic into a discussion hostile to religion.

2). Science and facts vs. theology and faith. We're talking about two separate planes here. Although the two are not mutually exclusive, it's simply common sense that different subjects demand different approaches. There is some faith in science and there is some fact in theology. But for the most part, one is objective and one is subjective. There is nothing wrong with either. It would be like trying to say who was right or wrong in terms of masculine or feminine or right brain or left brain. Neither is more important than the other but both are needed to compliment the other.

3). The alleged increase of religious fundamentalism on the board. If one really cares to notice, the vast majority of opinions on the board when religion is the topic is that of a critical, skeptical nature. Many more members are hostile towards fundamental religious views than there are in favor. It also stands to reason than when religious fundamentalism or mainstream organized religion is attacked that believers will come in to debate the topic.

We've had several threads making the accusation that 'the fundies are taking over the board.' This has always had a stench of censorship to me. Debates go both ways. You're going to have the believer as well as the skeptical. Having one sided discussions where everyone agrees and only one side is given a voice prohibits us from learning anything new.

I'm sure there are those who only want one side of the debate to take place but that is not reasonable nor is that what ATS is about.

Concluding, if you see blatant thread derailment, please alert it. However, religious discussions are a two way street. Also, the 2012 forums and threads do tend to bring on the apocalyptic crowd. And there will always be those in the world and on ATS who are skeptical of evolution and climate change, like you mention. Just like there will always be members in support of the theories. Those who accept evolution as a valid theory far outweigh those who do not. Therefore I really don't see the point in fretting about something that is a minority held view from stating their opinions.

So just go with the flow. Some members, like yourself, are of the analytical/scientific mind while others are of the philosophical bent. It takes all kinds. I even mete out applause in that fashion in terms of those who make a really good post based on their member style: Well researched and sourced posts for the more science-minded member and a unique or interesting perspective posts for the more philosophical minded. To say only one is appreciated or should be respected more would make the board very one-sided and dull.

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 10:57 AM
reply to post by AshleyD

Thanks for the reply, I absolutely have nothing to add to that other than to say... umm, yeah, you're right.
Thanks again.

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 11:29 AM

I would be very careful, if I were you about ascribing atheist beliefs to me.
My religious beliefs are my own, and that is as it should be.

The bible quote you used is hardly an offer of clarity on your position. As you said, your religious beliefs are your own. However, you seem to have no problem using sarcasm to tear down anyone who would believe in such things as Noahs ark, Genesis or any prophecy written in the bible.

Forgive me but your content suggests nothing but atheism and thats ok with. Every discussion requires an open mind, otherwise it is futile.

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 12:54 PM

Originally posted by Sky watcher

Originally posted by kenochs
reply to post by oozyism

You're right of course... it was a thread born of frustration.

My eyes were opened and now I cant stop reading about it because it (Bible) the coolest story ever when you break it all down. You will see.

Star for you, cause that's exactly what happened to me.

I mean, I was raised Catholic, and it wasn't until I quit that, that I started really reading the Bible and found out what I was missing all those years.

Course, I asked God to show me the truth of the matter, first.

God Bless

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 01:52 PM
Hi Feral Monkey---

I was SPECIFICALLY speaking of right wing fundamentalist english-speaking 'Christians' that have no working knowledge (for the most part) of the ancient languages they purport to 'believe in.'

It was so funny the other day, one of these right wing wacko 'Jehovah's Witnesses' came to my door, and she and her 'friend' started telling me that I had to 'accept' the 'Lord Jeeezuzz' (whatever that means), and I asked them point blank:

'Are you perhaps referring to R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir who armed his disciples with swords during an Insurrection at the 100th anniversary of the Invasion of Palestine (BCE 63) by the Roman General Pompey in 36 CE at Pesach?'

And both of them looked blank at me and said...'whaaaaaaat?'

Then I said, 'Well you DID know (didn't you?) that Rabbi Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir WAS EXECUTED by Roman Crucifixion, a specific punishment for armed insurrectionist seditionists who take arms against the State in what we today would call terrorist actions (see Luke 22:35-45) following on the heels of a Riot he instigated in the Temple at Jerusalem...' (see the 2nd canonical Greek gospel 'according to Mark' whoever he was, chapter 11:15-18 and parallels in the other synoptics &tc)

And they interrupted me and said to me in a straight face ' Our Lord would never cause a riot, he was the prince of peace and always preached love and compassion and would never arm his disciples...'

So I interrupted them (politely of course) and said to their faces : ' DON'T believe what it says in 'Luke' chapter 22:35ff about all that SELL YOUR OUTER TUNICS (on a cold night too !) AND GO OUT ASAP AND BUY A SWORD !!!!? What did the author of the 3rd canonical Greek gospel (whoever he was) do, make it all up? Then riddle me this: HOW (Exactly...) DID THE SLAVE OF THE HIGH PRIEST'S EAR MANAGE TO GET CUT CLEAN OFF (the 4th Canonical Greek Gospel, 'according to John' whoever he was, calls him 'Malchus', isn't that SWEET?), what were the armed followers of this 'Jeeeezuzzz' person you worship use---a BUTTER KNIFE left over from the LAST SUPPER? !!'

They didn't like that last part much and started scrambling through their warped translation of their 'New' translation of the 5446 Greek MSS of the NT (and yes, I've actually seen some of these up close and personal when I did my Master's I do know they exist and what a mess they are, let me tell YOU...) and started trying to co-relate some idle prophecy about 'he was numbered among the evil ones and buried with the wicked rich ones in his death' which didn't seem to tally much with what the canonical Greek Gospels try to portray the Yosef of Har-Amathea (whoever he was), rich...yes, but evil...maybe but they leave the evil part out apparently.

These Fundies apparently didn't have any PaleoHebrew under their belt at all. They did not even know the Vorlag Hebrew Underlays to the various Greek Old testaments of Aquilla and Symmachus as well as Theodotion (which the Apocalypse of Yohanon the Levite aka Book of Reveleation is so fond of quoting especially when it comes to quotes from the Scroll of the Book of the prophet Daniel for some reason).... and they had no working knowledge of any of the Dead Sea Scroll material from caves 1, 4 and 11 (which I do by the way having a degree in Intertestamental Literature, contrary to your jejune assertion to the contrary !!)

I started feeling a little bad for them when I saw that look on their faces (they flushed a bright red when I pointed out the zionist racism of their alleged founder in Matthew chapter 15, a chapter neither of them had read before, they said---which should tell you something) e.g. the Bar Enasha (permit me to translate the Aramaic for you from Aramaic Daniel chapter 7:13-15--you DID know the book was written in TWO languages, didn't you? well THEY DIDN'T)--'SON OF MAN' was SENT ONLY TO THE ELECT OF THE LOST SHEEP OF THE HOUSE OF YISRO'EL....AND SINCE WHEN IT IS RIGHT TO TAKE THE CHILDREN'S BREAD OUT OF THEIR MOUTHS & THROW IT AWAY ON THE DOGS UNDER THE TABLE...'

There it was right in front of them, and they had never read or heard of that verse EVER in their whole illiterate lives !

At that point, they asked to be excused and started knocking on the next door neighbour's door and nearly got them to accept one of their WatchTower pamphlets. I called after them but they asked me to go away.

Now THAT is what I call TURNING THE TABLES, if you get my pun (I assume even you might get that one !!)

Be very very very very very very careful about the assumptions you make about some of the people on these lil'ole threadlets. You might get burned if you're not those poor old ladies the other day who came to the WRONG door.

But I like it when these ignorami come up to me and mis-quote texts they can't even read...I think I gave them something to think about...that is, if they have anything left between their ears capable of that particular process !

[edit on 15-1-2010 by Sigismundus]

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 04:30 PM
reply to post by Sigismundus

Thats an awesome story. You sound like a real nice person to meet. I'm sure you have tons of friends.

I've actually read that story somewhere on the internet before..Care to link? Sorry if it was you that wrote that in another instance across the web, but I have a hard time believing that someone would learn such an outdated language and reasearch the bible to such an extent just to "turn the tables" on a few door knockers.

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 04:38 PM

Originally posted by Dr Love

Actually, "gravity" was created by God to keep us all from floating out into space.


Is that the same god that convinced the catholic church that the earth was flat, and convinced the church to imprison or executed anyone who used science to prove otherwise

[edit on 15/1/2010 by OzWeatherman]

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 05:05 PM
Yeah -- seems like there are several of these causes masquerading as issues. A bunch of threads try to be for "xyz" only followers. The goal seems to be to disseminate a cause as a subject of interest to draw attention towards it. An odd kind of advertising campaign?

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 05:18 PM
reply to post by PowerSlave

As I said my beliefs are my own, but I will say this.

Why do you assume I am atheist just because I poke fun at people who believe that the book of Genesis is literally true?

I have tried to be respectful, but I find it very difficult to keep my head from exploding when I meet people who actually believe a 100 year old man but a really big boat and put all the animals in the world on it two by two.

But beyond that, I have a much greater issue (putting aside literal interpretations of the OT) with a being who would blithely destroy his creation.

Believing in God, and believing in the biblical mythos are two entirely different things.

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 05:25 PM
reply to post by OzWeatherman

Nope that was the Catholic Church... kinda like God, but a lot smaller, and generally older.

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 05:33 PM

Originally posted by OzWeatherman

Originally posted by Dr Love

Actually, "gravity" was created by God to keep us all from floating out into space.


Is that the same god that convinced the catholic church that the earth was flat, and convinced the church to imprison or executed anyone who used science to prove otherwise

Yes it was the Catholic Church's scientists that convinced the Admin of the church that the world was flat.

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 05:42 PM
reply to post by Bilw85

Yeah, I ended up feeling bad for the Jehovah's witness gals.
And for the record in this case, I feel the same way about that kind of intellectual proselytizing as I do about religious proselytizing.
I can have an honest rational discussion with someone (in most cases) about the literal truth of the OT, no big deal.
This thread was created to allow me to bemoan the tendency of christian posters to view every thread as a new opportunity to do missionary work.

[edit on 15-1-2010 by kenochs]

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 05:52 PM

Originally posted by mike_trivisonno

Originally posted by troubleshooter

Originally posted by mike_trivisonno
reply to post by kenochs

I think Julian Jaynes' "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" will shed light on why religion and feelings of faith arise in virtually every single instance of human development and how the vestiges of our past are carried forward into the present through the expression of religious and political structures used for social control.

Brilliant man.

How did you get 'social control' from Julian Jaynes book 'Bicameral Mind?

It's been a while since I read Jaynes. But one of the main themes was that our political and religious institutions provide social control through the use of external authority. These structures for social control appeal to individual's tendency to seek external authority. They are vestiges of our bicameral past.

I read it a couple of times a few years ago too.

What I got out of it was Jaynes trying to explain the belief in 'gods' and them talking to people by saying that it was all in their heads.

He presented the idea that originally the two hemispheres of the brain were divided and functioned as separate entities...
...and in times of crisis the global right 'spoke' acoss the fragile link between the two...
...and this was peceived as a 'god' talking to them.

He also had the notion that before the link was strengthened men functioned as a collective mind in tribal groups...
...and they were overwhelmed by men who could think as individuals.

Trouble is Jaynes never had any evidence to support this theory...
...because it was based on psychological organization...
...and he only had scant literary works like the Illiad to base his ideas on.

Jaynes actually makes the claim in the book that Jesus was documented evidence of the first truely conscious man...
...because of his ability to act independantly and in contrast to the social organization around him.

So the conclusion I reached is the antithesis of what you have retained from the book.

[edit on 15/1/10 by troubleshooter]

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 06:51 PM
Hi Biulw85

Why do you doubt the possibility that people sometimes work hard enough in their studies to be able to matriculate at British Universities and get advanced Theology degrees?

People like me actually DO exist in the big, wide world you know--although I admit I'm something of a rarity in Dumbed Down America !

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 09:08 PM

Originally posted by Sigismundus
Hi Biulw85

Why do you doubt the possibility that people sometimes work hard enough in their studies to be able to matriculate at British Universities and get advanced Theology degrees?

People like me actually DO exist in the big, wide world you know--although I admit I'm something of a rarity in Dumbed Down America !

What an ego you have. I guess you can be what ever you want behind a screen name. Ok I'll play.

Lets say you have these advanced degrees in theology, which I assume you mean christian theology seeing your interest in this topic. Wouldn't deep study in the bible have any effect on someone? You OBVIOUSLY have a lot of pride in yourself, and seeing your earlier post, you like making others feel uncomfortable and question their faith with your superior knowledge. Wouldn't telling the JW's no thank you, have a nice day be a better solution than pulling out an old fashion hebrew name that is just another way to describe Jesus. And how are they "illiterate" if they can't read a different language.

As for your education...Why study a translation of the Bible in an outdated language anyways? Yes, translations, just like we have today in our own language. No original autographs of any book has been found to this day. The english translations that we have today have been studied and put together by some of the best teams in the world. They all, for the better part, agree with each other.

So after however many years you spent at a university and however many thousands of dollars, you show us in your written words that you have very few traits that make up a christian, and you suffer from a super inflated ego; A very Short-complex personality.

posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 09:32 PM
reply to post by Bilw85

I think he lost me at dumbed down America.
I'm not sure he's worth your trouble.

posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 10:56 PM
Excellent & attractive post.I'm a trained skeptic and used to really enjoy the give and take with those far more credulous and generally it's been a lot of fun.


Mod Edit: Please see Terms And Conditions Of Use 4) Advertising. Thank you - Jak

edit on 15/9/10 by JAK because: Removed Advert

posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 11:08 PM
reply to post by kenochs

You are witnessing the rise of christian dominionism. If they have their way, we will soon return to the Noahide Laws (Seven Steps to Justice). This is the real "NWO". Politics and religion will merge and function as one.

The UN is a front for the World Bank; and the bank is funding many diverse projects of interfaith groups. They are purchasing large tracts of land to establish their "promised Paradise(s)" and are being funded under wildlife and forestry preservation funds, etc.

But don't worry; there will not be a war with guns. The next war will be fought with peace. The punishment of those who 'sin' or fail to go along with the system will just be "put out." They will not be employable, nor will they be able to function in society.

Maybe you could turn your journalistic efforts toward investigating and exposing what is going on with the Kingdom Now movement and some of the others.

posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 12:45 AM
From what I have read on this site, there is a definite, almost militant movement of anti-religious and anti-Christian constantly trying to beat their view home.

I put these people on the exact same level as the people that are trying to beat their religious views into people.

I would love it if these two groups were quarantined into some misbegotten section of the site.

Although I find myself on the side of what would be considered pro-Christian and, even just plain pro-religion, this is definitely not why I come to this site.

As a matter of fact, I would love it if I never saw another topic on these boards, depicting either side again.

I am sure there are people from both sides that feel the way I do. Which is, "baited".

When coming to this site, and hoping to see something cool about Science, or UFO's, or Cryptozoology, I am not happy to have to filter through a bunch of posts that are attacking my beliefs.

It sucks.

And, I definitely do not like seeing people make statements that elude to me being intellectually inferior to them, because I believe in God, etc.

But, I guess it's allowed by the site owners and mods, so what am I gonna do?

Just keep filtering through the crap.

top topics

<< 2  3  4   >>

log in