Automotive Deals HPCC Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it $5 Albums Fire TV Stick Sun Care Handmade school supplies Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer showtimemulti showtimemulti showtimemulti  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Segway miniPro
Customer Discussions > Religion forum

Yay for fundamentalism. Give me that old time religion.


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 26-50 of 52 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 2:58:58 PM PDT
Nice one Astrin.

Let's start a "cake or death" religion.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 3:01:44 PM PDT
Bubba says:
OPEN MINDED?? According to the archbishop of Canterbury website:

1. No authorisation of blessings services for same-sex unions.
2. No consecrations of bishops living in same-sex relationships.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 3:03:48 PM PDT
Astrin Ymris says:
Bubba,

They must not know about Pius IX's 'Syllabus of Errors', which explicitly condemns freedom of religion and separation of church and state.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 3:16:38 PM PDT
Astrin Ymris says:
Bubba,

Well, the Church of England must be doing SOMETHING right, because the RCC is enticing reactionary Anglican and Episcopalian priests, disgusted by the gay-friendliness of the Anglican Communion, to convert and serve as married Catholic priests.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 3:19:56 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 3, 2012 3:36:53 PM PDT
Bubba says:
Is it priests from the whole of the Anglican Communion or just the Episcopalians that the RCC is seeking?

ETA: Perhaps the No authorisation and No consecrations edicts were added as a reaction to the RCC poaching Anglican priests. From what I understand, those sorts of edicts are unenforceable, though.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 3:24:17 PM PDT
Astrin Ymris says:
Nicholas M Robinson,

The Wiccans already serve cakes at the closing of their sabbats. There's no "...or death" part, though. ;-D

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 3:37:34 PM PDT
Yes Bubba, the Church of England is open-minded, but that's a relative term, we are talking about a religion after all.

I believe the Church of England will be dragged, kicking and screaming into the 21st century as regards homosexuality, possibly forced to do so by equal rights legislation, but that's an excellent example of the whole point of my topic. I believe in religious freedom, which means I believe Christianity should not be forced to give up its sexist, misogynistic ways. But such relative fundamentalism would result in it being sidelined in modern society, with a consequent diminution in respect and membership - and eventual extinction. Hurrah! This is why I think moderation and consequent modernisation is a bad thing . Give me that old time religion.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 3:37:41 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 3, 2012 4:01:15 PM PDT
" In the prelude to the Dark Ages the original Christian Apologists engaged in a similar pseudo-rational debate with the Greek philosophers, who at first ignored the Christians and subsequently lampooned them as fools. But within three generations the fanatics of Christ had taken over the Roman Empire and the laughing stopped..."

NMR asks: " Does anyone else here believe that religious moderates are more harmful than fundamentalists? "

Nicholas: I'm sure you will find plenty of " takers " here but, as a general rule, moderates - almost by definition - are considerably less dangerous than extremists.
And that codition has been verified with everything from Foreign policy to recreational drug use and alcohol consumption.
And are you aware of the irony that the American version of the " Fudamentalist meme " was largely put into circulation by the combined influences of Oil and Tobbacco :

"Scofield's Bible appeared in 1909. Remarkably, the very next year, another major propaganda thrust for the newly canonized Christian Zionist religion took form on the other side of the American continent. Union Oil (California) founder Lyman Stewart spent $250,000 to distribute a series of pamphlets called "The Fundamentals" which advocated the dispensational pre-millenialist (Christian Zionist) viewpoint. The pamphlets, three million copies altogether, were distributed free to churches throughout the United States. Stewart was apparently inspired by the successes of the tobacco industry, which was giving out free samples to addict young people to their products: he wrote to his brother Milton, "... the American Tobacco Company was spending millions to distribute free cigarettes to give people a taste for them and that Christians should learn from the wisdom of the world".

And who knows how much Henry Luce { Time magazine} spent { or is still spending } in his efforts to convert Asia -particularly China ?

Could be a Parable in here somewhere...

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 3:43:41 PM PDT
Astrin Ymris says:
Bubba,

It's members of the Traditional Anglican Communion, who have renounced the Archbishop of Canterbury's leadership, and "...oppose the direction Anglicanism was taking, such as moves in some countries to allow the ordination of women and gay bishops..."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16380343

I don't know all the theological details.

Posted on Jun 3, 2012 4:04:05 PM PDT
Astrin,

You Tube "Are you a gay christian?" and "The devil is he all bad?". Both from the brilliant Not The Nine O'Clock News. Mel Smith appears to be playing a Catholic priest, but the vibe is much more that of a trendy C of E vicar.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 4:49:12 PM PDT
So let's say a miracle occurs and the dominionists take over the US. Are the Catholic dominionists and protestant dominionists going to share the country, split it down the the middle, or is it whichever branch takes over the country first wins?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 4:59:13 PM PDT
Bubba says:
I don't think that it will be a miracle when the dominionists (including the RCC) take over the US, they are working on it right now. The RCC, Mormons, and Fundies were able to get together to form NOM and to get Prop 8 passed, I am sure that they will work it out.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 5:26:48 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 3, 2012 5:27:52 PM PDT
Joe Anthony says:
Nicholas M Robinson says:

"Although absolute percentage of Christians doesn't differ that much US 87%/UK 75%, the number who attend church weekly US 43%/UK 10% is a telling statistic. Plus we have the Church of England (the leading denomination in the UK) - which is so open-minded and wishy-washy at times, that it has a special place of affection in my hard atheist heart. It worries me that the President of the most powerful country in the world, may press the nuclear button thinking that he is doing God's work and will be rewarded with an eternity in paradise - the ultimate suicide bomber. Don't even get me started on Mitt, I don't want to derail my own thread."

I say:

I think that the reason why religion and particularly Christianity is failing in Europe is because you Euros made religion boring and morbid by turning it into a state-run institution. Anytime the state gets involved in running things, it becomes a gray and glacially-paced bureaucratic web.

Religion is vital to the American fabric. I'm happy to belong to nation that is comprised primarily of good and decent people who believe in something bigger than themselves; this we Americans do while still standing up for the right for all to worship or not worship as they please.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 5:47:53 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 3, 2012 5:48:23 PM PDT
witchie+ says:
Yes, and the lies that the group that funded Proposition 8 in California were horrendous. I had to mute the advertisements during that time because they were blatant lies.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 5:57:20 PM PDT
Bubba says:
They were Lying For Jesus

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 7:17:24 PM PDT
Astrin Ymris says:
Bubba,

Actually, I think if the Dominionists DID achieve their goal of knocking down the Wall of Separation between Church and State, a "turf war" between the three factions wouldn't be far behind. The Protestant Evangelicals have the numbers, but not the organization. Mormons have impressive organization, but they're a tiny sect in absolute population. The RCC has the organization and numbers "on paper", but in practice a lot of Catholics pay little heed to their putative "leaders". If it were a sporting event, I'd want the popcorn concession.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 7:43:28 PM PDT
Bubba says:
The Protestant Evangelicals have the Southern Baptists, which is somewhat organized - and they are not far behind in the RCC in numbers. My guess is that the SBC may have considerably more actual members than the RCC in the US. I think that the RCC has considerably more people on the rolls than have been to church in several years, even if they are still alive. Of course as you mentioned, there are the RCs in name only, and the pew warmers.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 3, 2012 8:29:48 PM PDT
B. Josephson says:
Bubba, SBs have less numbers than the RCC, and they are losing numbers, largley because they are becoming more and more fundamentalist with their mission and faith statement. Some SB congregatons left the SBC because they felt that this statement made the Bible more important than Jesus.000

However, those who have not left are stronger in their convictions, so that still makes me worried about them.

But I stil think even these more commiteed members are not, for the most part Dominionists.

I still think the idea of Dominionism is a minorty view among SBs and other evangelical Christians.

I do not get the feeling that most fundamentalists who come ot Amazon are Dominionists, though one clearly made comments indicating he was.

Best Wishes,
Shaamba Kaambwaat

Posted on Jun 4, 2012 2:47:48 AM PDT
Joe Anthony says:
@Scientific Mind, Nicholas Robinson and others:

OK, so religion and particularly Christianity is bad and according to you guys and many others on this thread the world will be so much better off without it. So let's say that one morning we all wake up and it's all gone; all the crosses, Bibles, Gospel music CDs are in the trash and every church on earth closes their doors forever and every person who is now religious "sees the light" and renounces everything, proclaims how wrong they were and all 7 billion people the world over identify themselves as atheist.

So, now that everyone thinks just like Scientific Mind and Nicholas Robinson and now that every church is being permanently demolished or being preserved as a museum to what fools people were in the bad old days; what am I to believe happens next?

First of all, would it make you, as an atheist, happy to see it all gone?

Think about that for a moment...just because everyone changes to YOUR way of thinking, does it mean that things will automatically change for the better?

We'd still live in a world of limited resources. Take the Israeli-Palestinian problem for example. Even without the religion, we'd still be dealing with two groups who are fighting over land in a tiny country where land is scarce. Even without Islam, The Palestinians would still want their land back and even without Judaism, the Israelis would still insist that it's a matter of national security and protecting the resources they have.

Indeed, we'd still have the problem of greed, lust, anger and hatred; and as bad as you folks say religion is; for many people, religion is the thing that helps people to manage those emotions.

Every religion, if not all of them, seem to have a component that involves a perfect place, a Garden of Eden that is believed to have existed and may just exist again. The Christians call it heaven. Some of the Buddhists call it the "Pure Land". The Norse pagans called it Elysium.

I don't think you atheists are much different. You talk about how much better you are than the dreamy eyed Christians who are building their treasures in heaven and waiting for Jesus to come back and make things right again. However, your thoughts and this discussion has betrayed you, because it's all the same. The Jehovah's Witnesses once came to my house and showed me artistic conceptions of "Heaven on Earth" and that's what you guys are also peddling: get rid of religion (or get everyone to think exactly as you do) and the world will somehow magically improve.

Again, once religion dies, then what happens next? Everyone starts sharing and living as one, just like John Lennon said as he was writing "Imagine" while riding in the back of his limousine...right?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 4, 2012 3:41:18 AM PDT
Joe Anthony says:
Nicholas M. Robinson says:

"Does anyone else here believe that religious moderates are more harmful than fundamentalists?"

I say:

I think that we need a clarification of terms. What is a "moderate Christian"? Is it those Congregationalists near my house who have the rainbow flag in front of the church where the minister does same-sex marriages? Is it the left-leaning bleeding heart liberal Christians such as George McGovern and Walter Mondale (both sons of Methodist ministers)? Is it the ecumenical Christians who engage other denominations and religious bodies in "dialogue". Or is all the people who go to church on Christmas, Easter, weddings and funerals, and call themselves Christians but don't really take much of it seriously?

What gets lost in these discussions concerning the fundamentalists is that there is a Christian Left as well as a Christian Right. The Christian Left takes some very different approaches to societal issues and international politics. I wouldn't say that they're "moderate" as that would imply that they are less strident or less faithful; but the Christian Left is very different from Rick Santorum or the late Jerry Falwell. Martin Luther King who was a Baptist minister and Ted Kennedy who was a devout Catholic, were on the Christian Left.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 4, 2012 4:31:02 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 4, 2012 4:53:40 AM PDT
Joe says: " Again, once religion dies, then what happens next? Everyone starts sharing and living as one, just like John Lennon said as he was writing "Imagine" while riding in the back of his limousine...right

Joe: seems like we're workin pretty much on the same microwave red shift here.
The more militant { or nofun -damentalist ? } among the atheists here are just itching to get rid of all religion without even considering C.S. Lewis' cautionary observation that { to paraphrase} if you think christians are bad now just imagine what they were like before their conversion " or what they might up to if they weren't off to Bible study.
One way to expand this arguement is to trace the development of the Faith from earliest times up to the present and note the progress that has been made { particularly moral progress } - that can be credited to religion's influence :

" John Boswell began his book on child abandonment in Western History, The Kindness of Strangers, by citing several early Christian theologians who inveigh against their parishoners going to houses of prostitution, not because they might cheat on their wives, but because they might commit incest. How? By sleeping with their own children - male and female - whom they had abandoned at birth and had been collected and raised to become sex slaves (p. 3). Mind you, this is not the Christian communities of the imperial period, when large numbers of people became Christian merely for the advantage of being on the Emperor's side; this is 2nd and 3rd centuries, when the early fires of Christian zeal were at their peak. " from Richard Landes at " Augean Stables "

{ rcd comment: Ok this makes it look kinda bad for the Chrestos A team but consider at least the christians were freaked out about incest whereas your typical Pagan Bubbah would be like :" Well they never told me nothin about me being her Daddy, so that's their problem - i paidem good money so i ain't done nothin wrong " }

Though Landes is on the pretty much the same page too , quoting from Jeff Jacoby's op-ed, Created by God to be good," :

" Jacoby challenges the the core message of the American Humanist Association: "that God and the Judeo-Christian tradition are not necessary for the preservation of moral values and that human reason is a better guide to goodness than Bible-based religion."
" Can people be decent and moral without believing in a God who commands us to be good? Sure. There have always been kind and ethical nonbelievers. But how many of them reason their way to kindness and ethics, and how many simply reflect the moral expectations of the society in which they were raised?
In our culture, even the most passionate atheist cannot help having been influenced by the Judeo-Christian worldview that shaped Western civilization. "We know that you can be good without God," Speckhardt tells CNN. He can be confident of that only because he lives in a society so steeped in Judeo-Christian values that he takes those values for granted. But a society bereft of that religious heritage is a society not even Speckhardt would want to live in. "
Jeff Jacoby as quoted by Richard Landes at " Augean Stables

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 4, 2012 6:52:15 AM PDT
Joe Anthony: OK, so religion and particularly Christianity is bad and according to you guys and many others on this thread the world will be so much better off without it. So let's say that one morning we all wake up and it's all gone; all the crosses, Bibles, Gospel music CDs are in the trash and every church on earth closes their doors forever and every person who is now religious "sees the light" and renounces everything, proclaims how wrong they were and all 7 billion people the world over identify themselves as atheist.

NMR: Hurrah!
Also who said that Christianity was particularly bad. I think you're putting words into peoples mouths. The reason Christianity gets most of the criticism on this forum, is that most of us live in Christian societies, are most familiar with Christian theology are most affected by the Christian religion and most of those who argue against us are Christians.

Joe Anthony: First of all, would it make you, as an atheist, happy to see it all gone?

NMR: Yes, delighted.

Joe Anthony: Think about that for a moment...just because everyone changes to YOUR way of thinking, does it mean that things will automatically change for the better?

NMR: Yes, assuming you accept the premise that religion is a bad thing, then removing it WILL automatically make things better. The only exception would be if it were replaced by something worse and there is no good reason to believe it would be.

Joe Anthony: We'd still live in a world of limited resources. Take the Israeli-Palestinian problem for example. Even without the religion, we'd still be dealing with two groups who are fighting over land in a tiny country where land is scarce. Even without Islam, The Palestinians would still want their land back and even without Judaism, the Israelis would still insist that it's a matter of national security and protecting the resources they have.

NMR: Of course the problem would still exist. But is there anybody here that seriously believes religion wasn't a major component in both the build up of the problem and in its enduring nature.

Joe Anthony: Indeed, we'd still have the problem of greed, lust, anger and hatred; and as bad as you folks say religion is; for many people, religion is the thing that helps people to manage those emotions.

NMR: What people can't figure out that these things are bad for themselves? Do theists only avoid raping, killing and pillaging 'cause God told them not to. Are theists idiots?
PS Don't badmouth lust.

Joe Anthony: I don't think you atheists are much different. You talk about how much better you are than the dreamy eyed Christians who are building their treasures in heaven and waiting for Jesus to come back and make things right again. However, your thoughts and this discussion has betrayed you, because it's all the same. The Jehovah's Witnesses once came to my house and showed me artistic conceptions of "Heaven on Earth" and that's what you guys are also peddling: get rid of religion (or get everyone to think exactly as you do) and the world will somehow magically improve. Again, once religion dies, then what happens next? Everyone starts sharing and living as one, just like John Lennon said as he was writing "Imagine" while riding in the back of his limousine...right?

NMR: I'm not proposing the extinction of religion would solve all Earth's problems or create a paradise on Earth, nor did I imply that in any way. The world would just be better without it. Consider racism. A bad thing. Agreed??? If I say getting rid of it would make the world a better place, then this is automatically true. Would it mean that the world would be perfect. Absolutely not. Is it something worth striving for? Absolutely.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 4, 2012 8:42:01 AM PDT
I don't see the religious moderates as being harmful.

I also don't see any way that religious fundamentalism will permanently disappear everywhere on Earth. It is a mode of thinking which will always have adherents because for some humans it can provide an explanation and meaning for existence; it can be a powerful social organizer; and it has survival value in many different socioeconomic situations.

Posted on Jun 4, 2012 8:46:04 AM PDT
Joe Anthony,

Religion is a placebo. It has the disguise to do good when actually belief causes more harm than good. It makes some people do things against fellow humans that they normally wouldn't do if they were not under the spell of belief. They do harmful things and lie to other humans for their imaginary man in the sky, their long ago dead guy named Jesus and try to control other humans with what is written in their bible book. It is harmful to the brains of children by putting nonsense into their minds. It is a drug for the mind. Depending upon the severity of your addiction, you may not realize the extent or even that you are addicted. Dabbling in belief has potential harm and at the very least it is junk food for the brain.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 4, 2012 10:17:34 AM PDT
Astrin Ymris says:
Joe Anthony,

Re: "...The Norse pagans called it Elysium..."

Um, no, that would be the GREEK Pagans.

The Norse beliefs were rather diverse. Some believed that warriors who died bravely would enter Vahalla, and others would go to Niflheim or Hel (a bland and boring, rather than torturous place). Some believed in reincarnation, others didn't believe in life after death.

It's uncertain how much the slow percolation of Christian eschatology influenced Norse beliefs about the afterlife. Loki's role certainly changed from a pranskter-hero to a satanic analog due to Christian influences. Modern Asatru is also diverse, but tends toward a pragmatic "we'll find out when we get there" approach.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Religion forum

  Discussion Replies Latest Post
Announcement
Amazon Discussions Feedback Forum
1650 6 days ago
How can atheism be true or false? 813 3 minutes ago
Art & Spirituality 572 18 minutes ago
What's happening with SSM in the post Prop 8 world? 3296 21 minutes ago
Even if There Were a 'God,' No Human Could Know It 2763 43 minutes ago
Today in Muslim History 8648 45 minutes ago
Another 10,000 Quotes... 7018 47 minutes ago
YOUR STORY 239 49 minutes ago
All Religion 17 2 hours ago
nondualism 360 2 hours ago
I cannot get goblueresurrection to address my evidence that atheism is true 744 4 hours ago
Noah's Ark - the "WTH?"Thread 217 5 hours ago
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Religion forum
Participants:  15
Total posts:  52
Initial post:  Jun 3, 2012
Latest post:  Jul 8, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions