It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

On being an "eccentric" Christian fundamentalist

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by 11azerus11
so under all the bs and propaganda there is a fundamental truth to all religions.... and the fundamental truth is all we need...



As the guy said above ^^

The fundamental truth is all we need - why clouding your mind with seperate man-made & competing religions as fundamentalists? are those actions beneficiary to the mankind?

IMO - Fundamentalism in religion is sadly & clearly the true adversary to any free-thinking and the open-mindness which we so dearly need to evolve as human beings, together on this Earth, to be understanding & forgiving and better persons ourselves.

Therefore, powerful evil interests are using Fundamentalism as a tool to keep us all seperated from the Universal truth - Fundamentalism is the evil tool of the adversary to hinder mankind from uniting together as human beings.

Peace!




posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Partygirl
I can see the athiest brigade has shown up...as well as the even more extreme Mr. "Left-hand path 666." Biased much?


I sure am. So are you, and everyone else. Nothing wrong with being biased unless it leads to blindness.


Regarding hell, I won't quote scripture to nonbelievers as I have learned they throw up walls around their ears and hearts in the face of the Word. But to dissect the issue a little, Mr. LHP666 is putting words in my mouth by claiming I and other Christians think we are "better" than those who will burn in the Lake, or by thinking they somehow deserve it.


It was another that said "hell" was deserved, not you. But I bet that you do believe this. Am I right or wrong?

What I said is that your post was self-serving, trying to make you look somehow a less extreme fundie.

Tell me, where did that word 'hell' come from? Hint: it's not greek or hebrew.


None of us know or can know where we stand in the Lord's graces. It is blasphemous and impossible to try to determine this matter.


That is not what your bible says.

Joh 10:9 I am the door; by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and go out, and shall find pasture.

That is a function of a person exercising the will. Notice that 'jesus' didnt say that he would drag you to the door and push you through the opening.

Act 2:21 And it shall be, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Again, a person exercising his/her will.


See, its a force beyond your personal control that decides this. The same is true with many mysteries of the Lord, including the issue of the Lake of Fire.


No it's not. It is well within ones personal control, if you believe the scriptures I posted above are true. Those aren't the only ones. I used to be a christian too, so I know more.

What you believe is your business. But imo you should at least be able to defend what you believe. If you can't, why bother holding on to those beliefs? They just hold you back.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Partygirl
 



Originally posted by Partygirl
Some people see the word "fundamentalist" as an insult of some kind. To me it is a badge of pride. I think I am more or less correct in describing myself as a fundamentalist because:

-I believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God.


Where's the pride in believing this obvious falsehood?



-I believe in the literal truth of bodily resurrection, Judgement Day, the Virgin Birth, and so on.


Where's the pride in believing something that is not verified by any evidence?



-I believe salvation is only possible through Christ (John 14:6) and that one must be Washed in the Blood, born again, and establish a personal relationship with Christ.


Again, where's the pride in believing in something that is not verified by evidence? Furthermore, where is the pride in believing this fundamentally immoral, ghoulish, and downright unjust view of the universe?



So this makes me a fundamentalist. But I don't fit the mold of what people think about fundamentalists, for the most part, because:

-I am an environmentalist.


Not all the uncommon actually.



-I do not hold the political views most of my co-religionsts do (i.e., Republican) -- I have what are perhaps more radical and unusual political beliefs: I believe government of the world should be turned over to young people, for example, and I'd like to see the FED/banking system dismantled.


To each their own. Happy to see you buck a trend though.



-I tend to keep quiet about my faith, except in forums like this where it is specifically the topic, or in situations when I am specifically promoting it.


That's also good. I have the same deal with my absence of faith.



-I dress, act, and talk in a way that is outwardly more "secular" than "Christian" if you know what I mean.


Ah, the ones that think that "worldly" is a bad thing.



-I am willing to entertain alternative (and sometimes very unsual) interpretations of Scripture.


Ok, what about this one: It's mostly wrong.



If you can provide an analysis that is rooted in scripture, I will be open to consideration of the logic, even if it seems bizzare to most people. I enjoy pushing hermaneutical boundries.


Ah...so you'll only accept self-referential, circular arguments rather than something that overturns your already established dogma that you are unwilling to reject.

I'm sorry, but if you really, really wanted to buck a trend and be a real 'eccentric', try actually thinking critically about your religion...I'll meet you at an atheist convention once you start doing that.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
It's funny madness that you pick apart posts the same way you pick apart scripture.

Just find some peace for yourself...recognise and accept this is a faith based belief.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by kinglizard
 


...I do recognize that it's a faith based belief, which is why I oppose it. Faith is a bad thing. It's not something to be admired, respected, or respectfully not brought up or challenged. Faith has been a pox upon our species since it finally managed to come up with the great alternative to faith known as critical thought.

You have faith in your near death experience...something that scientists have concretely shown is a product of brain chemistry to the point where they have recreated such experiences in controlled conditions. Instead of exercising critical thought you using a coping mechanism to deal with the cognitive dissonance. You say "But I'm a reasonable person and it happened to me, I couldn't have been wrong for so long" and then explain away the refutations even though you have no good reason to.

As for peace for myself...well, I'm at quite a great level of personal peace and to accuse me of not having any is to be ignorant and presumptuous. Of course, you're a Christian of a certain tradition that holds that anybody who doesn't have Jesus is somehow not at peace. Or at the very least those who question your religion are somehow not at peace. We're somehow angry or spiteful or depressed.

Guess what: I'm not. I'm hopeful for a world in which these horrifically stupid ideas don't get propagated anymore.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Partygirl
 



Regarding hell, I won't quote scripture to nonbelievers as I have learned they throw up walls around their ears and hearts in the face of the Word.


What does my heart have to do with anything? Is the pumping of blood somehow instrumental to analyzing your religious text?

Kidding aside, I don't do as you've said. All I do is simply ask for evidence to justify the claims made in the book. You seem to have an objection to individuals who don't take your book as fact without supporting evidence for that belief. That's silly.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinglizard
It's funny madness that you pick apart posts the same way you pick apart scripture.

Just find some peace for yourself...recognise and accept this is a faith based belief.


That's what they did in Sovjet concerning theists or active non-communists. From ideological reasons DEFINE them as mentally dysfunctional.

"If you're not like me (us) there must be something wrong with you".

Are you seriously suggesting such a method of classification to have any merit?
edit on 7-6-2011 by bogomil because: typo



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
...I do recognize that it's a faith based belief, which is why I oppose it.


If you truly recognised it is a faith based belief you would not continually demand scientific proof.

Your ATS name is "Madness in my soul"....you are not at peace even if you claim to be. You actions and posts on this board prove it.

Feel free to oppose faith based belief but attempting to prove it wrong through scientific evidence is madness.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by kinglizard
 


Honestly I think, that there deep down in these elaborate argument-chains on (especially the missionary part of) christianity lies an agenda:

"We have special dispensations for preaching, pushing and (in some cases) invading. Ordinary rules don't apply to us"

And if missionaries are met with opposition, even one adapted to the precise gravity of the situation, they appear to be surprised, because you're 'only sharing'. And for those christian missionaries, who try to achieve extra-parliamentary results, opposition to that is 'persecution'.

So in short, that type of christians are considered invasive and conceited by non-theists.

That your message, .......by non-theists often considered as somewhere between ridiculous and insane (depending on which of the 34.000 types it is) is expected to be taken on your word or because of endless semantic gymnastics, .....doesn't go home, seems to escape your attention. Possibly even your interest.

And the missionary efforts go on and on and on. Is it really so strange, that such insistence is met by requests of evidence? For Dog's sake, you're telling a fairytale, a myth, to adults, to go down with a thin layer of sugarcoating and nothing more.

On this thread I have asked the question: "Where is the limit between offering and pushing?" I didn't expect an answer, and I didn't get one either.

But until your crowd start with some introspection and find that limit, you just make yourself increasingly impopular



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by kinglizard
 



Originally posted by kinglizard

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
...I do recognize that it's a faith based belief, which is why I oppose it.


If you truly recognised it is a faith based belief you would not continually demand scientific proof.


This is something a lot of people 'of faith' don't tend to realize. I'm trying to help people overcome cognitive dissonance and compartmentalization. Please, tell me which of the following are you willing to allow people to take "on faith":

Healthcare
Technology
Safety precautions
Architectural principles


That's just four, I could have made a longer list but it would be redundant. Your claims are about the very nature of the universe on a metaphysical level, all the more reason that they shouldn't be taken on faith.

Furthermore, I highlight situations where faith is in direct opposition to evidence, like the oxygen starvation of a brain leading to near death experiences.




Your ATS name is "Madness in my soul"....you are not at peace even if you claim to be.


And your username is "King Lizard", and I doubt that you are a lizard, a king, or Jim Morrison. Oh...and that name was decided upon by you seven years ago...mine was decided by me nearly six....



You actions and posts on this board prove it.


Wow, an outright personal attack based upon my supposed actions. Well, that's no more valid than saying "Your actions on this board prove you're a poopy head!"

How do my actions prove that I'm not at peace?



Feel free to oppose faith based belief but attempting to prove it wrong through scientific evidence is madness.


I'm not trying to prove it wrong, I have no need to. You're making an unsupported assertion, so I need not prove it wrong anymore than I need to prove pixies, centaurs, or Yog-Sothoth wrong. All I'm pointing out is that it lacks evidence and oftentimes goes directly against evidence.

Last thing
To address something you said before:


It's funny madness that you pick apart posts the same way you pick apart scripture.


I pick everything apart like that. It's called thinking critically. Right now I'm in the process of picking apart Blade Runner and Alien in that exact same manner (granted, that's for a University assignment). I pick apart any scientific claim, even if made by someone I trust.

Use your brain.
edit on 7/6/11 by madnessinmysoul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul


You have faith in your near death experience...something that scientists have concretely shown is a product of brain chemistry to the point where they have recreated such experiences in controlled conditions.

You wish, is all I can say! Scientists have shown no such thing, of course. The full experience has never been replicated under controlled conditions. If you're going to quote Susan Blackmore at me, I can refute all of her somewhat cracked assertions.


Originally posted by madnessinmysoulAs for peace for myself...well, I'm at quite a great level of personal peace and to accuse me of not having any is to be ignorant and presumptuous.


It doesn't look like it! You seem to be the most bitter, depressed and angry of all the angry-atheists here. If this is peace by you, I am not having any, thanks!



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vicky32

It doesn't look like it! You seem to be the most bitter, depressed and angry of all the angry-atheists here. If this is peace by you, I am not having any, thanks! :lo


He (or she) does seem to get particularly worked up, doesn't he? High blood pressure is a killer...

I appreciate the effort and attention but these arguments can serve no purpose. Ultimately they are Religion 101 arguments, and personally they bore me. But to each their own...


edit on 7-6-2011 by Partygirl because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Partygirl

Originally posted by Vicky32

It doesn't look like it! You seem to be the most bitter, depressed and angry of all the angry-atheists here. If this is peace by you, I am not having any, thanks! :lo


He (or she) does seem to get particularly worked up, doesn't he? High blood pressure is a killer...

I appreciate the effort and attention but these arguments can serve no purpose. Ultimately they are Religion 101 arguments, and personally they bore me. But to each their own...


edit on 7-6-2011 by Partygirl because: (no reason given)


Where the christian equalent to 101 is endless and repetetive preaching on the fabricated original sin doctrine.

I am constantly offering a debate on the same terms for both parts; only a very few christians respond to that option. There's no will for a dialogue, missioning is the main motive.

And opposition to your missioning is ofcourse 'persecution', because you are the elitist elect
edit on 8-6-2011 by bogomil because: syntax



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 04:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Vicky32
 



Originally posted by Vicky32
You wish, is all I can say! Scientists have shown no such thing, of course. The full experience has never been replicated under controlled conditions.


Except with fighter pilots in centrifuges...though there is the issue of medical ethics there. Depriving the brain of oxygen for whatever amount of time is necessary to clinically kill them is...well...very unethical.



If you're going to quote Susan Blackmore at me, I can refute all of her somewhat cracked assertions.


Woo, preemptive assumption. If you want, I'll go around PubMed and through the journals I have access to via my University to show you how much evidence there is.

Also, if Blackmore is so wrong, please just go and break down all of her arguments here in advance. Oh wait, she hasn't written much about them for the last....six-seven. Why would I be citing her? I don't really care about her and I think this is a general problem with religious individuals. We don't stick with luminaries unless they continue their work. In fact, Stephen Hawking, one of the most recognizable icons of science, is sort of ignored in serious circles within his field for the most part. Why? Publish or perish. There have been so many advances in the fields of neuroscience that to go with anything other than the bleeding edge is often to be leaps and bounds behind.

Also, you must admit that Blackmore has awesome hair.




Originally posted by madnessinmysoulAs for peace for myself...well, I'm at quite a great level of personal peace and to accuse me of not having any is to be ignorant and presumptuous.


It doesn't look like it! You seem to be the most bitter, depressed and angry of all the angry-atheists here. If this is peace by you, I am not having any, thanks!


Considering that I just chuckled quite heartily and the idiocy of this personal attack, I'm not all that sure why you're calling me very bitter, depressed, and angry. Speaking of not being angry, I'm going to go play with my dog because he's a hell of a lot more entertaining.



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 04:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Partygirl
 



Originally posted by Partygirl
He (or she) does seem to get particularly worked up, doesn't he?


You've not been here long, so I'll clarify: he. And no, I don't get all that worked up. I do get a bit frustrated when I have to bang my head against the wall repeatedly as I have to re-re-re-re-re-re-re-explain the same point for the thousandth time on Origins and Creationism. I can't even count how many times I've had to explain what a 'theory' is or what the actual definition for 'evolution' is (if you're interested, it's in my signature).

Oddly, a lot of people have actually PM'd me saying that they're astounded by my patience....odd, huh?




High blood pressure is a killer...


Sufferer from chronic low blood pressure.



I appreciate the effort and attention but these arguments can serve no purpose. Ultimately they are Religion 101 arguments, and personally they bore me. But to each their own...


...I'm sorry, but they really aren't Religion 101 topics, I'm sure to avoid them. Hell, my membership on ATS predates that thread by nearly a year...of course, I did read the thread back then because this forum was a bit of a mess before it.
edit on 8/6/11 by madnessinmysoul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 05:44 AM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


You know, I walk side by side with you a looong part of the road, though our positions eventually differ on some of the speculative points. It's never been a reason for antagonism.

I so much hope for, that some christian one day will turn up, understanding the concept 'position' and being willing to examine that.

I also find the "is, isn't, is, isn't" on postulates tiresome and a waste of time.

ESPECIALLY when christians refuse to take my semi-religion of the flying spaghetti monster seriously. It's after all based on the same type of argumentation as practically all of the christianities are.

Sorry to drag you into my complaints about me being a persecuted/ignored religionist.



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 06:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
Speaking of not being angry, I'm going to go play with my dog because he's a hell of a lot more entertaining.

First time I've heard it called that!

(You often give me the impression you're typing one-handed....
V



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 06:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by Partygirl
... I do get a bit frustrated when I have to bang my head against the wall repeatedly as I have to re-re-re-re-re-re-re-explain the same point for the thousandth time on Origins and Creationism. I can't even count how many times I've had to explain what a 'theory' is or what the actual definition for 'evolution' is (if you're interested, it's in my signature)...


No offence, but then why bother? Your membership says you have been here since 2005; have you been having the same arguments since 2005? I'm not picking on you at all, I'm honestly curious. It's not an insult in and of itself because, after all, to be a missionary or an evangelist is ultimately to patiently subject yourself to the same repetitive arguments for a lifetime. So I understand that this involves patience and dedication. My only question is: Why? Why bother? For a Christian, the answer is simple: He is called on to do so as part of his faith. But for an athiest...I have to wonder what the motivation is? Especially since athiests almost universally assure us that they do not themselves carry out missonary work for their faith in the slightest.

Respectfully,
Partygirl



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 06:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Partygirl
 



Originally posted by Partygirl
No offence, but then why bother?


Because there are so many people who are 'on the fence' so to speak on this issue. There are many who come to forums and begin to have doubts about certain religious issues and they drift over to these subforums and lurk around seeing the discussion.

I'm here to convince them to look at my position by having an open discourse with those who don't agree with me.




Your membership says you have been here since 2005; have you been having the same arguments since 2005?


Well, I did take a two year hiatus between 2008-2010...and no, I've not been having the same arguments. My position has become more informed and refined in the trial by fire that is discussing things with people who don't know what they're talking about.



I'm not picking on you at all, I'm honestly curious. It's not an insult in and of itself because, after all, to be a missionary or an evangelist is ultimately to patiently subject yourself to the same repetitive arguments for a lifetime.


And to patiently ignore them.



So I understand that this involves patience and dedication. My only question is: Why? Why bother?


Because religion hurts people and I want the world to have less suffering.



For a Christian, the answer is simple: He is called on to do so as part of his faith.


Yep, and my justification is a hell of a lot better.



But for an athiest...I have to wonder what the motivation is?


To improve lives, improve the planet, and make things generally a better place for others.



Especially since athiests almost universally assure us that they do not themselves carry out missonary work for their faith in the slightest.


Hard to carry out something in the name of a faith I don't have. Atheism involves zero faith, that's actually the thing I have more of a problem with.

No, we don't carry out missions, what we do is engage in discussions. We don't go around telling people to be atheists, but we do challenge theists when they bring up a point. We seek to confront, not to convert. It's all very Socratic.



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

I'm here to convince them to look at my position by having an open discourse with those who don't agree with me.

Open, no, hostile, yes...



Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
Because religion hurts people and I want the world to have less suffering.

Oh how noble!
You don't get that that's just your (somewhat emotional) opinion?

There's nothing Socratic about it, really... You're kidding yourself!



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join