Fundamentalist Christianity

M

mac1

Well-Known Member
Messages
79
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Suffolk, England
I think it is ridiculasly unlikely, but is anyone here consider themselves a fundamentalist christian?

(I would imagine the open minded nature of this site would deter any fundamentalists, but if you are members, please do say so, as I have a lot of questions I would like to put to you.)
 
To me, Fundamentalism seems to oppose logic. I would like to here a few biased arguments in favour of fundamentalism though. Facinated by the whole "I have faith" (but don't know why) side of things. As a christian, I will assume you believe in God, and the crucifixion, and resurrection of Christ (that much I would assume is at least fundamental to being a christian of any description). If you do believe in God, without evidence, may I ask why? Or have you experienced things that have brought you to this conclusion?

This next point is not aimed at anyone in particular, but simply an observation I have made. I have met far too many people who simply believe in God because that is how they were brought up, religious belief through social upbringing. Anyone who disagrees only needs to ask themselves - "If I was born in Hong Kong, India, or Malaysia, would my beliefs remain the same?" If the answer is no, then your belief system is based primarily on geography, and not on experience. Very often, but not always, organised religion has a tendancy to prevent free thought, and this is a dangerous thing. To me, fundamentalist christianity is pretty much the pinacle of this. A belief that the bible is right (and the exact word of God - to the letter), everything else is wrong, and that those who simply disagree have no faith. I don't think I even need to ask the question "Why Have No Faith?" so I won't! Anyone agree/disagree with any of what I am saying?
 
In case you missed it in "The Lounge". This is what Bill Hicks had to say about fundamentalist chistians.

"And you know what's wild, people's, er, attitudes in the States about it. Talking about Kennedy, people come up to me:

"Bill, quit talking about Kennedy, man. Let it go. It's a long time ago - just forget about it."

And I'm like alright, then don't bring up Jesus to me.

As long as we're talking shelf life here.

"Bill, you know Jesus died for you."

Yeah, well it was a long time ago. Forget about it!



How about this. Get Pilate to release the fucking files. Quit washing your hands Pilate - release the goddam files. Who else was on that grassy Golgotha that day?

"Bill, it was just, you know, hur, taking over of democracy by a totalitarian government, let it go."



That's another good thing about Bush being gone, man, cos for the last 12 years with Reagan and Bush, we have had fundamentalist Christians in the White House.

Fundamentalist Christians who believe the Bible is the exact word of God, including that wacky fire and brimstone Revelations ending, have had their finger on the fucking button for 12 years.

[Eyes roll back in head]

"Tell me when Lord, tell me when. Let me be your servant Lord."



Fundamentalist Christianity - fascinating. These people actually believe that the bi.., er, the world is 12 thousand years old. Swear to God.

What the..? Based on what? I asked them.

"Well we looked at all the people in the Bible and we added 'em up all the way back to Adam and Eve, their ages - 12 thousand years."

Well how fucking scientific, okay.

I didn't know that you'd gone to so much trouble. That's good.

You believe the world's 12 thousand years old?

"That's right."

Okay I got one word to ask you, a one word question, ready?

"uh huh."



Dinosaurs.

You know the world's 12 thousand years old and dinosaurs existed, they existed in that time, you'd think it would have been mentioned in the fucking Bible at some point.

"And lo Jesus and the disciples walked to Nazareth. But the trail was blocked by a giant brontosaurus... with a splinter in his paw. And O the disciples did run a shriekin': 'What a big fucking lizard, Lord!'

But Jesus was unafraid and he took the splinter from the brontosaurus's paw and the big lizard became his friend.

And Jesus sent him to Scotland where he lived in a loch for O so many years inviting thousands of American tourists to bring their fat fucking families and their fat dollar bills.

And oh Scotland did praise the Lord. Thank you Lord, thank you Lord. Thank you Lord."



Get this, I actually asked one of these guys, OK, Dinosaurs fossils - how does that fit into you scheme of life? Let me sit down and strap in.

He said, "Dinosaur fossils? God put those there to test our faith."

Thank God I'm strapped in right now here man.

I think God put you here to test my faith, Dude.

You believe that?

"uh huh."

Does that trouble anyone here? The idea that God.. might be.. fuckin' with our heads? I have trouble sleeping with that knowledge. Some prankster God running around:

"Hu hu ho. We will see who believes in me now, ha ha."

[mimes God burying fossils]

"I am God, I am a prankster."

"I am killing Me."



You know, You die and go to St. Peter...

"Did you believe in dinosaurs?"

"Well, yeah. There was fossils everywhere"

Thuh [trapdoor opens]

"Aaaaaaarhhh!"

"You fuckin idiot."

"Flying lizards, you're a moron. God was fuckin' with you!"

"It seemed so plausible, ahhhh!"

"Enjoy the lake of fire, fucker!"

You ever noticed how people who believe in creationism look really unevolved? Ya ever noticed that? Eyes real close together, eyebrow ridges, big furry hands and feet.

"I believe God created me in one day"

Yeah, looks liked He rushed it.



They believe the bible is the exact word of God - Then they change the bible! Pretty presumptuous, hu huh?

"I think what God meant to say..."

I have never been that confident.



Next we have a bible out called 'The New Living Bible', it's the bible in updated and modern English. I guess to make it more palatable for people to read. But its really weird, when you listen to it.

"And Jesus walked on water. And Peter said, 'Awesome!'"

Suddenly we got Jesus hanging ten across the Sea of Galilee. Christ's Bogus Adventure, you know. Deuteronomy 90210, you know.



Such a weird belief. Lot of Christians wear crosses around their necks. You think when Jesus comes back he's gonna want to see a fucking cross, man?

"Oaww"

May be why he hasn't shown up yet.

"Man, they're still wearing crosses. f*ck it, I'm not goin, dad. No, they totally missed the point. When they start wearing fishes I might show up again, but... Let me bury fossil heads with you Dad, f*ck em - Let's f*ck with them! They're fuckin with me now, lets get em. Give me that brontosaurus head, Dad."



You know, kinda like going up to Jackie Onassis with a rifle pendant on, you know."
Click to expand...

Scarily True
 
I am a Christian in that I do allow the teachings of Jesus to determine my outlook and behaviour. Jesus did not dictate doctrine and in fact railled against it, particularly the Pharisees, who were famously good at inventing doctrine. I think therefore there is a message completely overlooked.

As for why I am a Christian, that is difficult and due to a combination of factors. I see more at work in the world than rational processes allow explanation of. I also consider the teachings of Jesus extremely wise, even if Victor does think them used out of context.

Some would say I am not a Christian because I do not accept doctrine. I do not reject doctrine but remain uncertain. I keep focussed on what I believe is the more important. Words and deeds, not dogma and salvation shopping lists.
 
Ah an honest open mind. The only way to be in my opinion. I do agree with most of what you have said, in terms of creating a moral code by which to live your life by, religion in any form, is generally a very positive thing. I myself, although I do not directly follow the teachings of Jesus, do acknowledge the wisdom in them. It is hard to disagree with the messages in the bible as they are generally have strong moral messages with which I can relate. May I just say, that I was raised as a Roman Catholic, but have since turned away from all the dogma raised to believe, after the realization that all I had been taught had simply been conjecture. I don't dismiss any part of the bible, but it only took a small amount of soul-searching to come to the conclusion that I don't actually "have faith" in any of it either. Internet guru Stephen Roberts was once quoted as saying:-
I contend that we are both atheists.
I just believe in one fewer god than you do.
When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours.
Click to expand...
I do not consider myself an atheist, after all what evidence do I have to say there is no God. The concept of a higher being of some desciption is quite a plausible one after all, whether we were created by it/them or not. I do however find the above quote is quite useful in heated conversations about religion with people who strictly adhere to some sort of doctrine. A fundamental part of Catholisism is the belief in "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic church." The dismissal of all other religions as simply "wrong" is unforgivable, and you will find most organised religions are not very accepting of each other. The age old notion that disbelievers will burn in the firey chasms of hell is far too closed-minded for my liking . That quote makes perfect sense in its beautiful simplicity. In my opinion, it makes far more sense to live my life only having total faith in what I have witness, but always speculating or accepting suggestion into what else may exist outside of that bubble of definitive belief.
 
An honest and open mind is all that Jesus asked for. He did not ask for doctrine or scripture outside of the Torah or else He would have written it Himself. He did not ergo it is not necessary.
 
[quote author=Bigmacscanlan link=board=7;threadid=85;start=msg369#msg369 date=1049918042]
Ah an honest open mind. The only way to be in my opinion. I do agree with most of what you have said, in terms of creating a moral code by which to live your life by, religion in any form, is generally a very positive thing. I myself, although I do not directly follow the teachings of Jesus, do acknowledge the wisdom in them. It is hard to disagree with the messages in the bible as they are generally have strong moral messages with which I can relate. May I just say, that I was raised as a Roman Catholic, but have since turned away from all the dogma raised to believe, after the realization that all I had been taught had simply been conjecture. I don't dismiss any part of the bible, but it only took a small amount of soul-searching to come to the conclusion that I don't actually "have faith" in any of it either. Internet guru Stephen Roberts was once quoted as saying:-
I contend that we are both atheists.
I just believe in one fewer god than you do.
When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours.
Click to expand...
I do not consider myself an atheist, after all what evidence do I have to say there is no God. The concept of a higher being of some desciption is quite a plausible one after all, whether we were created by it/them or not. I do however find the above quote is quite useful in heated conversations about religion with people who strictly adhere to some sort of doctrine. A fundamental part of Catholisism is the belief in "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic church." The dismissal of all other religions as simply "wrong" is unforgivable, and you will find most organised religions are not very accepting of each other. The age old notion that disbelievers will burn in the firey chasms of hell is far too closed-minded for my liking . That quote makes perfect sense in its beautiful simplicity. In my opinion, it makes far more sense to live my life only having total faith in what I have witness, but always speculating or accepting suggestion into what else may exist outside of that bubble of definitive belief.
[/quote]

I like that last sentence. It speaks a great deal about my own position on religious matters also. That is why I myself react to dogma.
 
I freely admit that I stand a better chance of becoming a Wiccan than I do a Fundamentalist type of Christian (I'm an Episcopalian type). The beliefs and attitudes I've read from Fundamentalists are a bit, well, foreign to me, and I cannot agree with some of the things they've said or the way they've said them. Jesus said we are to love God with all our heart, with all our soul, and with all our mind. From what I've read, sometimes that last gets overlooked. I'm not trying to bash Fundamentalists; it's just that there are some hurdles between my faith and theirs which I'm not inclined to climb over. I like the view from my side of the fence. Among other things, it includes WHKeith in a hot tub! ;D

CJ
 
Hi Seige, and welcome to comparative-religion.com!

Yes, the problem of fundamentalism...yet, alas, this appears to be a pan-faith problem - or perhaps I should say "pan-path" or "pan-human perspective".

Although Christian Fundamentalism can be particularly infamous, frankly I see the infection everywhere in terms of attitude. Perhaps the worst epitome I see on messageboards is actually from anti-Christian Fundamentalism - especially from Atheists, but also some pagans I've encountered online - who think nothing of letting off a string of abusive expletives at any passing Christian.

Christian Fundamentlists I can handle and am used to debating with. But with Atheist Fundamentalists often there is nothing presented for debate, just twisted abuse.

Frankly, the original idea of a COC wasn't to stop to the Christian Fundamentalists expressing themselves here (I've actually met some great polite fundamentlists) - as much as to stop hardcore Athiest Fundamentlists asserting a right to be here, and absuive with it to boot.

I was once involved in the running fo a debate group on MSN - Open Christian Debate. The idea was that Free Speech would be upheld. This was in response to apparent censorhsip of pagans and non-Christians at another big Christian Debate community.

But within 6 months Open Christian Debate had been turned upside down. It became a cess pit of violence between gangs of athiests and rapid fundamentlists - with a couple of bitter pagans thrown in for good measure.

It was quite a lesson to see those most forthrightly advocating Free Speech actually had the least to say. Not unless it involved the word "f**k" anyway.

Eye-opening to the human condition of hate.
 
Hey, Bigmacscanlan. I'm not a fundy now, but I USED to be. Shhh. Don't let my secret out. I'm feeling MUCH better now. Really!

For one thing, I get to see Siege in that hot tub she mentioned, something my poor fundy brain would never have been able to accept! 8) [Hi, Siege!]

Anyway, I can say frankly that my greatest sorrow now is in the singular narrowness of mind I exhibited back then. At times, I performed some truly amazing mental gymnastics, believing six impossible things before breakfast, as the Queen in Alice says.

I can also say that fundamentalists take incredible joy in feeling SECURE. The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it. You can pack away your brain and not worry about overheating it on tough questions--like who gets saved and is there a Hell and does the fact that God allows evil mean that God IS evil (Amos 3:6) and does 1 Kings:23 really mean that Pi is equal to 3.0? Besides, it feels so GOOD to have all the answers, as you watch others struggling through life without a clue. And then, hey! You get to step in, show them the light, and feel like a hero! All by the grace of God, of course.

Sadly, as brian points out, fundamentalism is not peculiar to Christianity and Islam. As a Wiccan, I know a few fundy Wiccans, of all weird things. You're not a "real" witch unless you worshiup a certain way, trained to a certain degree, and so on. We're right, you're wrong . . . Ugh!

Here's an interesting thought fir possible debate. Does the Christian fundamentalist's insistence on the absolute inerrancy of scripture constitute a form of idolatry?

In any case, Bigmacscanlan, if no REAL fundies take you up on your post, I'll be glad to answer any question you might have from a Biblical fundamentalist's point of view. I still have it in me--unfortunately!
 
Well, between us, WHKeith and I might have something that will help with the "Fundamentalist Atheist" crowd, or at least with one argument I've seen them use. That's the "No truly intelligent person can be an anything but an Atheist argument." You see, he and I are friends in real life, and among the vices he introduced me to is Mensa. That silly little card in my wallet isn't good for much, but this is one situation where it does come in handy. Me, I joined because they give good parties and understand the importance of good chocolate, good conversation, and good massages!

CJ
 
I find the whole nature of Divinity to be beyond my comprehension. Maybe that is why I am ever uncertain how to perceive Jesus as Christ, and in what way. Should I be trinitarian or allow other perspectives. Everything is confused so I seek a reading that makes most sense without doctrine. I fear that fundamentalists seek a reading that makes most sense of their own doctrine.
 
Christian fundalmentalism is intimately tied to the perception of the Bible as the literal word of God. The fear is that departure from the text will lead to perdition. The problem is that this assumes a single correct hermeneutic, or system of interpretation.
We bring to scripture our preconceived notions, our private expectations, our personal experience, our prejudices.
Fundamentalists insist that everything they teach be based solely on the Bible, but they do not recognize the primacy of tradition in their churches. Tradition is every bit as important to most "fundies" I know as it is to Catholics.
One interesting paradox I've noticed in this Bible-belt part of America that I inhabit......most of the students I teach have been brought up in church. Ostensibly, they've heard doctrine taught and preached all their lives. But when questioned about such basics as the trinity, salvation by grace, the incarnation, etc., they actually know next to nothing about their own faith tradition.
 
And welcome to comparative-religion.com, Eldanuumea! It's very nice to see you here as well. :)

It would be fascinating for you to explain more about the Mennonite Church one day - perhaps in another thread?

Either way, you're quite right about the power of tradition. I've often been amazed at how easily priests can sometimes define their members' beliefs - as if the decisions of what to believe, and why to believe so, are left to a third party - the priest - to decide.

I've also been sometimes surprised by a general ignorance of Christianity itself in general - a particular example being of how little some have actually read of the Bible.

On the one hand, I can entirely understand that if someone finds themselves in a position of Personal Faith with God, that reading books is not necessarily going to strengthen, diminish, or even validate that relationship with the Divine.

On the other hand, though, Christianity is generally a sphere of specialised beliefs, and certainly can be so within denominations. So to call oneself "Christian" without a deep exploration of the subject seems more than a little strange.

I guess that's the case with belief and traditions in general.
 
Dead-bang on target, Eldanuumea! In my fundy days, we thought of the Bible as THE revelation of God to his followers. Lip-service was paid to the notion that He was found in His creation, as presented in Romands 1:20, but in my circles that was still a bit suspect. After all . . . how does talking to an oak tree bring you to an understanding of Jesus and salvation?

So, the Bible was it, the ONLY way to see the mind of God clearly. Revelation worked, yeah, but look how often people used their minds and wandered off into heresy? One needed the Bible to check one's more, um, direct communiques from God, to make sure they weren't leading to error.

And this single-mindedness about scriptures, to my mind, is fundamentalism's single greatest weakness. It embraces a dangerous all-or-nothing pattern of thinking: either the Bible is ALL literally true, or there's no way we can know WHAT is true and what is metaphor. More than that, there is no room for alternate interpretation and, to my mind, at least, there are numerous passages that MUST be personally interpreted, because the passage itself is not clear on the point. Example: is the Beast and the Whore of Babylon described in Revelations a historical reference to Nero and Rome? Or to the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church? Or to a yet-to-be revealed Antichrist? Or to all three at once?

I mean no offense to any on this forum. My point is that all four of those interpretations have been advanced by people interpreting Revelations literally. Many hold that Revelations is referring to ALL THREE, a kind of stacking of prophecies one upon the other to really drive home the theme. In fact, there is no internal evidence that any one (or all!) of these interpretations is THE correct one . . . and they ARE all interpretations--i.e. someone had to read the passages and put his own meaning to them. The meaning is not self-evidently clear or obvious.

Paul built a lot of his theology of faith-over-works on a seemingly literal interpretation of that unfortunate misunderstanding in the Garden of Eden. If Adam and Eve were not literal people eating literal fruit offered by a literal serpent, what did that say about a literal resurrection and literal salvation? For the fundamentalist, the whole concept of salvation hangs upon the rather slender thread of Original Sin, the idea that because of Eve's sin, we all are somehow tainted--"For all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God."

Once the fundamentalist Christian starts questioning the literal interpretation of even one passage in the Bible . . .

Oops! He could end up like me!
 
Fundamentalism seems to be a fear reaction. Someone who fears is more aggressive. The fundamentalists are afraid of losing faith, it is an insecure faith, so they strike out in defence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top