Fundamentalist Christian: A Checklist.

I'm agnostic currently, but was raised Christian. All the items in your checklist I've already come to conclusions about on my own, including many more contradictions and logical fallacies with the belief. However, if you're singling out Christianity, you must realize that every religion feels the same way about there own. In my opinion, religion is more of a guideline for how to be spiritual; in the end I just think that being spiritual may hold incredible value. Unfortunately, Christianity's guideline involves pushing the believer into a false sense of love by saying that you either chose to love your Creator with "free will", or you burn for eternity. This is an entirely fear-driven doctrine.

As for the concept of intelligent design itself, putting aside religions as a whole, I find it to be very sound. Atheist tout science and logic from a perspective that labels ALL intelligent design as unreasonable; and they defend their position by attacking only Christianity. Call it fairy tales, etc. From my point of view, it's relatively weak to use one or 2 religions as your basis for saying that there is ABSOLUTELY no higher intelligence; typically these people lack any ontological thought process. There are countless ways I could argue that intelligent design doesn't seem so irrational, on the contrary I think it's important for someone to consider all the viewpoints without using bias and logical empiricism as your foundation. If you really can say that the universe sparked into existence along with all these moments of [quantum] consciousness, without cause, for no reason; and then say this idea is the only rational one because science has yet to discover our origins; that is simply close-minded.

With that said, your thread really won't do much use against Christians. Nothing about it is supposed to be logical, it's simply an indoctrination that the individual is afraid to walk away in light of all the disconnects. I realize you're trying to make a point, but all these points have been made 1000x times on ATS alone and it doesn't really get us anywhere.

not only that, but christianity is the only* faith where the people worship a convicted felon




*ok i haven't researched all the faiths out there...

reply to post by repressed


True, Repressed. Lets keep in mind that Mohammad was a military leader who made sure that his followers would put unbelievers to the sword, and also deal with those same infidels with love and tolerance. Meanwhile, the body count rises. Its only a matter of time before mother church goes PMS and we get another bloodbath, in my book.

Originally posted by auraelium

I'm pretty sure you wouldn't do that to a Muslim, Hindu, or Buddhist. Thanks for proving my point about how vehement, vile, and disgusting some Atheists can be when it comes to mocking Christ.

reply to post by OldCorp


Thank you. Truth is free.

reply to post by OldCorp


LOL! This threads amazing

And Oldcorp, Ive never had a fundy budhist come up to me and scream im going to hell. They dont give us that kind of fodder. But I have seen some pretty funny pictures making fun o buddha! So relax, if the tables turned and another religion acted like these fundies, i bet we'd still make fun of em.

Originally posted by chancemusky
reply to post by OldCorp

 

LOL! This threads amazing

And Oldcorp, Ive never had a fundy budhist come up to me and scream im going to hell. They dont give us that kind of fodder. But I have seen some pretty funny pictures making fun o buddha! So relax, if the tables turned and another religion acted like these fundies, i bet we'd still make fun of em.

Yeah, well I'm a Christian who would never say that you were going to Hell; in fact, even though most Christians believe in Hell, they aren't rude enough to rub your face in it while maintaining an air of superiority.

I also believe in a 4.5 billion year old Earth and evolution. Kinda blows the OPs theory straight to Hell doesn't it?

reply to post by OldCorp


No, because you're not a fundamentalist then, by the standards set in OP. Which is why we don't mind you, you're not yelling it at us.
OP is calling out those who do. I bet they feel the same about athiests who call you stupid for having a religion.

We mock the extremists, not the normal

reply to post by OldCorp



How has anyone blown the "troll" out of the water, you have a religion that is different from one house to the next, how do you feel about "Christianity" being something that changes with whatever preacher or "feeling" someone has... and how in the heck can something that is so "true" be so easily distorted one Sunday to the next ??

Consciousness is a powerful thing, can make people believe in anything, we are powerful enough to make any imagination of thought FEEL like it is real, such as being in the Holy Spirit.

Brainwashing, and mantras are so VERY , very VeRy strong.

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare
-Boldly deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions and cultures, feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.

By definition, this does not apply. While some Christians and those you term "fundamentalists" may be guilty of this, it is not in line with the example and instruction that Christ gave and does not characterize what a true Christian should be.

The problem with your statement is that instead of stating that some within this ideological camp are guilty of this, you created your own definition of fundamental Christianity. And since the behavior you referenced is in conflict with the principles of the ideology, your statement is by definition false.

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare
-Feeling insulted, “dehumanized” or offended when scientists assert that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.

I think you may be misinterpreting or unaware of why Christians disagree with Darwin's theory on the origin of life. The issue is really quite simple - as Christians hold the Bible to be true, they believe that God created life, not that life began without a creator.

Regarding fundamental Christians being offended by the concept of humans evolving from "lower" life forms - this conflicts with the Christian priorities taught by Christ. If there are individuals who fit your description, I suggest that they are placing much more importance to the physical body than Christian ideology allows.

Originally posted by OldCorpYeah, well I'm a Christian who would never say that you were going to Hell; in fact, even though most Christians believe in Hell, they aren't rude enough to rub your face in it while maintaining an air of superiority.

This sales pitch is the biggest turn-off whenever people consider taking Christianity seriously. You are definitely a rare breed in the fact you don't open your pitch with a threat of eternal damnation. Bravo for that.

I attend church with my grandmother (long story, let's just say I do it so she doesn't persecute me as much - she's well-aware I am forever undecided on all things related to religion, but this eases her mind a bit) and I hear this pitch multiple times during the services, even to those who are not self-professed Christians who are uneducated on the Bible's teachings, or are young children.

What I want to understand is, if Christianity is so wonderful, which many Christians claim it to be, why do Christians try so hard when recruiting, to the point where they open their pitches with eternal damnation? It's a bit hypocritical, in my view, and plays a large role in why I'd never consider taking it up. Nor any other religion for that matter - and this includes Amway.

Anyway...

Look at these 2 scenarios. This will give you some insight on why Christianity is so commonly targeted by those who choose not to affiliate with it.

Scenario 1:
You walk into a store looking for a stove. The salesman immediately points at a certain stove and tells you "If you don't buy this particular stove, all of your food will be burned for eternity. But, if you buy it, your food will be cooked perfectly each time for the rest of eternity. There are some additional perks too. Interested?" ... "What if I already own a stove?" Say's the customer. "Doesn't matter. Now that you're aware of this stove, the damage is already done." Say's the salesman. "Umm.. You're a little delusional, right? Forget to take your meds today?" Say's the customer. "Shut up! Buy the stove, or suffer burnt meals forever! It's your choice." Say's the salesman "Haha.. Nah, I'm just gonna check out another store." Say's the customer.

Scenario 2:
You walk into a store looking for a stove. The salesman immediately points at a certain stove and tells you "This stove is a wonderful stove. It has all of the bells and whistles. It is perfect, really. You will love it, I assure you. Also, this is the only stove comes with a lifetime parts, service, and support guarantee, as well as expert tips and tricks for improving your way of cooking that will dramatically improve your health and well-being. What do you think, sound good?" "Sure!" Say's the customer. "Great, lets get the paperwork handled." -Processes Sales- "Oh, before you leave, there is one last thing that I need to tell you. You made a great choice today. This stove you bought has a secret power." "Really?" Say's the customer, "Yes. Your food will be cooked perfectly each time for the rest of eternity. Amazing huh? But, if you decided to go with one of those other ones, or not buying this particular one, you'd end up burning your food anytime you cooked, for the rest of eternity. Plus, even if you change your mind later down the road and get a different stove, you're still guaranteed to get perfect meals every time." "Awesome. Well, it sounds a little far-fetched, but I like the sound of all this!" Say's the customer. "Great! Well, enjoy your new stove! Take care!" Say's the salesman.

Point is...

If the Heaven/Hell paradigm was treated more of a 'secret' or 'bonus' (after being saved) instead of a 'threat' (in order to convince someone to get saved) it'd probably help ease people's minds when considering devoting themselves to the religion. The teachings in the Bible itself, are greatly valuable in certain areas, so I just don't get why people disregard these aspects when trying to get their point across.

This line of thinking may have worked in the past, but we all know that every religion is slowly losing population, and this is likely a large reason why.

Just my opinion.

P.S. Sorry if I left anything out. It's a bit late.

what if...

reply to post by ExistentialNightmare


awesome post, those people are nuckin futs

that dogs butt really does look like jesus!!! lol

reply to post by BeyondPerception


I don’t think christians even know how to sell their carrot

I was about 16 and I had to listen to some religious person drone on about christianity, I asked him what he though heaven was like – his answer was heaven was a wonderful place where every one would praised god for all eternity

At that time heaven to me was hanging out with my friends or playing guitar or better yet meeting girls - praising some god for all eternity in the company of people who thought praising some god for all eternity was heavenly was very much my idea of hell


so I guess the only thing left for christians is go with the stick

reply to post by faithparadigm


I'll start with the necessary background.

The scientific procedure consists of sets of rigorious demands, which must be followed:

Verifiable observation/information/data.

And already here philosophy/logic gets into it. At the basic level assumptions are sorted out, and axiomatic observations only are used. On the criteria: It must be repeatable, observable independent of who the observer is and IF anomalies manifest they must be considered.

Science does NOT operate with predetermined black/white 'answers', but from a gradual range of ideas, hypotheses, theories and generally accepted theories, where every step is a result of experiments, leading to the formulation of explanations and other experiments testing the explanations.

Along this processing-procedure certain 'tools' are used, a major one being 'logic' (which in this context means deductive logic). In the further development of more complex science, deductive logic is used to start from basic generally accepted scientific theories as a foundation for the later more complex ones.

As I don't want to turn this thread into an evening class in beginners science, this should suffice.

Concerning your question, which I take to be this from your initial post:

Quote: ["Why do you believes the earth is billions of years old?"]

The scientific answer is based on a combination of atomic theory and astronomical observations. How 'matter' has been formed and how astronomical bodies are composed, are positioned and how they move.

The further direction of this thread, amongst the options possible from OP, I will leave to the thread-author and what contributions to the thread manifest as. I doubt the intention is a full-blown and exclusive creationist debate though; but that is not my decession to make alone.

reply to post by SuperiorEd


You wrote:

["There is only one God that refuses to be represented by matter. This God stands alone in this fact. All other Gods are counterfeit to the one God by character. The Bible says, "Know them by their fruit." Matt. 7:16 The important thing is not knowing God, but God knowing us. Our relationship to Him is defined by His knowledge of us, not the ohter way around."]

Which is a faith-argument trying to prove itself. Standard circle-argumentation; and as a methodoly it can be used by ALL religions the same way.

Quote: ["Evolution is and creationism are paradoxes of the same truth. When two truths are asserted, each bearing an image of the same truth, the third perspective (Excluded Middle) can unify both."]

Pseudo-philosophy, presented with trite and vague 'maybe' suggestions. The real and functional version of this approach is syncretism. But real syncretism must be used exceedingly precise. Wishy-washy application is non-sense.

Quote: ["Father (Light/particle/Prima Materia), Son (Word/Wave/Logos/force/laws) and Holy Spirit (Consciousness). God is one person, represented to the world as the duality of particle and wave, animated by consciousness."]

This statement has reached dogmatic status in your posts. It's presented time and again, and time and again it has demonstrated, that this is homecooked pseudo-science. I can supply anyone with interest and enough scientific competence to understand the debate with links. I'm not going to repeat the arguments for the umpteenth time here.

Quute: ["Man is the material representation of this trinity in the form of body (particle and wave) and consciousness (Spirit). Christ was the Living Word of God that came to bring us Holy Consciousness. He is the Logos, creator of this reality, the wave that spoke existence into form. This is the associated force that brings particle to form. One God is One. There is no confusion."]

As much or as little 'confusion' as there would be in a similar promotion of the flying spaghetti monster.

Quote: ["Know them by their fruit. Islam can stand on the actions of their beliefs. Either they love others or they steal, kill and destroy. This is the distinction between loving God and others (Biblical) or taking from others for selfish pride (Genesis 3 Pride of the world)."]

Genesis 3 is a circle-argumented moral system, which has AUTHORITY at its center.

Quote: [" A study of the ancient Phoenician lexicon (Ancient Hebrew) reveals that the root of all civilization and belief originates with the root morphology of this language. God is the Father represented by the Ox and the shepherd's staff. This is the leading of the Father by the strength and understanding of the shepherd's staff. Christ is the son, the good Shepherd."]

And THIS is supposed to be an 'explanation' of the religious intolerance demonstrated by factions of the christianities.

Quote: ["All other beliefs are branches from the root. The Greeks see the world from a western world view as abstract / Scientific. The original Hebrew cultures viewed the world from their concrete language and nomadic lifestyle. The Hebrew language is represented by 22 letter, parent root, child roots and adopted roots. These roots then branch out into all the Hebrew words that make up the original Torah. These roots and branches make a story that tells of God (Father) leading man as a good shepherd."]

Psycho-babble.

Quote: [" Buddha, Confucius, Hermes, Plato, Jesus and so on were all part of the larger picture. Jesus was the culmination of all thought and the key to rightly dividing truth for all others."]

An assumption.

Quote: ["Science is a poor description of God,"]

Science isn't describing 'god', and doesn't try to.

Quote: ["$20 if you can name a single thing you do apart from thinking and moving your body."]

Geez. And who will be the referee?

Quote: ["If you look closely, you see that we are on autopilot. Do you make your hair grow? Do you activate the cones and rods in your eyes for sight? Do you digest your food? Do you make the sun shine or the earth warm? Look close. All functions of the human and his reality are produced by God."]

Intelligent design once more, and "it's 'god' what did it" filling knowledge-gaps.

Quote: ["No proof. It's only evidence for faith. Plenty to go around. Faith comes form a life lived and the fruit it bears."]

Get the facts vs. faith positions straigthened up, before you start on such rhetorics.

Quote: ["All prayer is looking with outstreatched hands toward the leading of God. You do not do the leading, you pray for understanding as you travel the path that is laid before your destiny by God. Prayer is not a vending machine."]

So when it doesn't function it 'proves god' and when it in 0.01% (ofcourse an estimate) seemingly does function, it ALSO 'proves god'.

reply to post by OldCorp


You wrote:

["I would have given you a thousand stars for that post if I could. I don't think I've ever seen such a concise, unambiguous smackdown of a Christian-hating troll anywhere on the internets."]

You probably start from criteria MEANT to approve such.