A social experiment with fundamentalist Christians

[lunamoth]

But you specifically referred to "those who adhere to the five fundamentals...but are otherwise nice people not into conspiracies". Did you not mean fundamentalists?

Rick Warren is a fundamentalist in the sense of adhering to the five fundamentals, but he not crazy-mean in the way of your OP. I know Baptists and others who would say they agree with the five fundamentals, but would be appalled at the idea of killing homosexuals or even being mean or anything but hospitable to people who don't agree with them. They do not join discussion boards like the one in the OP.

My atheist Grandfather, on the other hand, was pretty certain that the world was ruled by a handful of men who belonged to a secret club, and who was into every kind of crazy conspiracy. He was pretty normal and loving until you got him talking about politics.

Well let's be clear here. I do think some "lumping" is warranted. As I explained, in order to be a fundamentalist Christian, you have to meet certain criteria such as rejection of much of science, strict Biblical literalism, rejection of much of modernism (e.g. multiculturalism), strict adherence to authority, and black/white thinking. Now, if you or anyone else can show me a group of people that meet those criteria and aren't nuts, backwards, and at least somewhat hateful, I'd be extremely surprised.

I disagree with them, think they are tragically misguided, will work against them in my schools and voting district. I might have them over for dinner, though. I don't think they are mean and crazy.

Keep in mind we're "lumping" based on a narrow set of beliefs and characteristics. This isn't like saying "All black people..." or even "All Christians...". It's more like saying "Islamic fundamentalists who behead their wives for family honor are disgusting monsters". We're observing a suite of behaviors and beliefs that define a group of people and making a judgement about that group based on them.

If you are saying only the bat-**** crazy people are bat-**** crazy....OK then!

 

[lunamoth]

But again, it's simply not working.

Perhaps in your view. I would not judge success by numbers, but by the good that is done.

And as I said before, if the next generation is less religious than the one before because of it, I see that as a good thing.

If the next generation is more selfish and lacking in hope, I would not see that as a good thing. If religions are not helping us be less selfish and giving us hope, then it will be no great loss if they diminish.

So you don't believe the unsaved don't go to heaven and/or go to hell?

Who is not saved? What is heaven? What is hell?

 

[Jose Fly]

Rick Warren is a fundamentalist in the sense of adhering to the five fundamentals, but he not crazy-mean in the way of your OP. I know Baptists and others who would say they agree with the five fundamentals, but would be appalled at the idea of killing homosexuals or even being mean or anything but hospitable to people who don't agree with them. They do not join discussion boards like the one in the OP.

What are these five fundamentals? You do realize that fundamentalist Christianity was in part started in response to modern science, multiculturalism, and non-literal Biblical interpretation, right? So if those folks don't meet those criteria, they aren't really fundamentalists.

I disagree with them, think they are tragically misguided, will work against them in my schools and voting district. I might have them over for dinner, though. I don't think they are mean and crazy.

But you think they're "nuts"....

If you are saying only the bat-**** crazy people are bat-**** crazy....OK then!

In a sense, yes.

Perhaps in your view. I would not judge success by numbers, but by the good that is done.

Ok.

If the next generation is more selfish and lacking in hope, I would not see that as a good thing. If religions are not helping us be less selfish and giving us hope, then it will be no great loss if they diminish.

I haven't seen evidence that that's the case. There is good evidence that young people are leaving Christianity specifically because of how it's viewed as being backwards, bigoted, and out of touch. So if they end up being progressive, tolerant, and critical thinkers, so much the better.

Who is not saved? What is heaven? What is hell?

Can I take that as a "No, I don't"?

 

[lunamoth]

What are these five fundamentals?

Found them:

There are five fundamentals of the faith which are essential for Christianity, and upon which we agree:
1. The Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; John 20:28; Hebrews 1:8-9).
2. The Virgin Birth (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23; Luke 1:27).
3. The Blood Atonement (Acts 20:28; Romans 3:25, 5:9; Ephesians 1:7; Hebrews 9:12-14).
4. The Bodily Resurrection (Luke 24:36-46; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, 15:14-15).
5. The inerrancy of the scriptures themselves (Psalms 12:6-7; Romans 15:4; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20). [FONT=&quot][1][/FONT]

You do realize that fundamentalist Christianity was in part started in response to modern science, multiculturalism, and non-literal Biblical interpretation, right? So if those folks don't meet those criteria, they aren't really fundamentalists.

I am very well-versed in the history of fundamentalism. Which is why I know that some people adhere to the fundamentals, and so are fundamentalists, without being as crazy (I'll start saying whacko instead of bat-****) as the people in your OP. It does not mean that they are xenophobic and homophobic.

But you think they're "nuts"....

I did not think my grandfather was insane, and he was very kind and generous, and I never heard him suggest anyone ate babies or should kill people not like himself. He had some ideas I call nuts, but he was not whacko, not mean, not even in private. I think it is nuts to deny evolution, but creationists, while wrong and potentially harmful to education, are not all whacko-mean xenophobic homophobes. Some are - some are not.

So if they end up being progressive, tolerant, and critical thinkers, so much the better.

If they are more so than they would be in their religion, I would agree. I know many progressive, tolerant, intelligent critical thinkers who are also Christians.

Can I take that as a "No, I don't"?

You can take it that way if you wish, or you could answer the questions.

 

[Debunker]

Jose, I have not read every response you have made but I do have a few questions for you about your experiment. First, why do you even care about these fundamentalist? Are you a Christian apologist and what to set the record in correct perspective or are you any type of Christian at all. I am not sure what you are trying to say through your experience. Are you a socilogogist, psychologist, a theologian or do you have any special knowledge that qualifies you to have a constructive opinion on anything at all? I don't say you are not informed but it is not clear to me what you really want to say. Just say it clearly and we will all judge it for clarity.

 

[Debunker]

That did occur to me. But prior to picking that forum for the experiment, I found similar groups where crazy, hateful things were the norm. But they were either too restrictive (one dissenting post and you were kicked out) or not active enough.

I will grant that the level of crazy and hate was pretty high at this specific place, but as I said, in general it confirmed an impression of fundamentalists I'd formed from having grown up around them. Even some of my relatives can seem normal and cheery in public, but once they get together in a "safe" environment and start talking among themselves, it gets ugly very quickly.

I'm not saying all fundamentalist Christians think gays eat babies and the sun orbits the earth, but I have read some material on the psychology of fundamentalism and what I experienced the last few months fits right in with the overall profile of fundamentalism.

If you go to a forum where you think the folk are crazy, you will probably find a bunch of crazy people. You try that persona here on fundamentalist, you will find a different respondent. Don't you understand that simple fact?

 

[Debunker]

Well thank you!


I see your point, but I didn't really set out with any sort of goals like that. I honestly was just looking to see what happened. Also, I looked over a lot of fundamentalist Christian forums and they were all pretty consistent in the sorts of topics discussed; they varied mostly in terms of activity and restrictive management. And as I said previously, there is a bit of literature out there about the psychology of fundamentalism and what I saw in all the forums fit a general mold pretty well.

But you have jogged my memory about one other thing I learned that was somewhat surprising. It has to do with being a female. I'll add it as an edit in the OP.

I don't see that you have a single definition of Christian fundamentalist that differentiates from emotional illness.

 

[Debunker]

I agree. The sort of lunacy that's just accepted without question is indeed scary. Of course, if the sorts of things I read from them were just fringe beliefs of a handful of internet loons, I wouldn't be very concerned. However, a lot of the topics and opinions there reflected the sorts of things I see in our national political and social discourse more and more often.

Like I said in the OP, in one thread I was told over and over by multiple people that the civil rights act was a clear example of fascist mentality. When I expressed the slightest bit of dismay at that view, I was pounced upon and called a fascist myself (a tag that stayed with me until I left). That resembles the sort of dialog that took place about Rand Paul and the civil rights act during the last elections.

Public opinion polls also show that where the crazy paranoid right used to constitute ~2-5%, they now make up between 20-25% of the population.

That is absolutely a cause for concern.

Shut man! I can point you to a number of liberal politicians on this very forum who are like you describe and atheist too.

 

[Debunker]

I doubt that's going to be forthcoming. It's probably one of those categories that you just have to accept as being rather nebulous.


I've also grown up around conservative Christians, and I have seen that sort of behavior and views. What I've always noticed though, is they're not always forthcoming in sharing them. Oftentimes it's only when they feel "safe" that the true crazy comes out.

Haven't you ever noticed how with religious internet forums, those that have open membership and open dialog usually end up being dominated by middle-to-left people? And the only places where fundamentalists dominate are those forums where membership and content is tightly controlled?


First, it depends on what "group" we're talking about. If it's Christianity, I agree. If it's fundamentalist Christianity, I disagree. Second, I would be more inclined to agree with you if I saw more cases of conservative Christians speaking out against the sorts of hateful, crazy things their allegedly extreme colleagues were saying. Unfortunately, not only are they not condemning them, they seem to be actively promoting them.

If it is a real experiment, you do have to give a clear definition or else admit you do have no idea of what to make of your experience. Of course, if you don't know. we should not care about what you think.

 

[Kathryn]

I completely agree with your second sentence. You first sentence, shows the slippery logic being applied here. The OP starts out saying fundamentalists are all bat-sh** crazy. I agree that many of them probably are and that fundamentalism is a problem here and around the world. However, not all fundamentalist Christians are mean and insane, and it is slander to say so.

However, now the goal post continues to move, and it's not just the angry, fearful, conspiracy theorists that self-select their presence on boards where their warped views are accepted and encouraged. Now all conservative Christians are being lumped in and being called nuts because they share some views with the bat-sh** crazy people.

And, then we see basically all Christians of any viewpoint lumped in because they are somehow not vocal enough in their rejection of fundamentalism, even though they are and this has been pointed out throughout the thread.

Examples are provided and those examples are not sufficient. You fight against creationism in the schools, that's not enough. You fight against the nuts burning the Koran, not enough. Post you disagreement on discussion boards like this, not enough. Write a book that points out the evils of fundamentalism? Not enough. The goal post moves.

The next move in the game, now that all Christians have been lumped together as somehow supporting extremism in one way or another, is to describe how the fundamentalists are the true Christians, the ones you can respect for their 'honesty,' and those who speak against fundamentalism are not really good Christians, but wishy-washy, pick and choose Christians.

Wow, you nailed it.

 

[Debunker]

They are colleagues in that they are part of the larger group of conservative Christians, and I'm not always too sure about the faculties of conservative Christians either.

The difference between that group and trying to lump Stalin in with atheists is that I don't know of any atheists or atheist groups who don't condemn Stalin and his atrocities, and who wouldn't actively oppose such a thing. As I mentioned earlier, not only do conservative Christians not condemn their whacko fundie cousins, they oftentimes support them. Don't believe me? Read the World Net Daily on a regular basis; visit the American Family Association's website and blogs; listen to conservative Christian talk radio; check out the visitor logs at the creation museum in Kentucky...

But I don't know any atheists whose thinking processes could not lead them to and justify their being like Stalin. Not that all atheist are Stalinist but the potential is there. Give some of the liberals and atheist around here a leader and you could see such a philosophy come alive.

 

[Debunker]

Your defensiveness is showing. I am simply reporting what I've observed and it's obvious it's struck a nerve with you. I understand that moderate Christians are embarrassed by these sorts of people, but the problem is it pretty much ends there.

Why aren't moderate Christians actively opposing the craziness that comes from their far-right cousins? I guarantee you if a Stalin or Mao type group of atheists were as numerous as fundamentalist Christians, I would be actively opposing them.


Um.....no.


Ah, see...now you're assuming I'm lumping all Christians in with the fundies. That's an error on your part.


See what I mean? I never once said fundies were representative of average or mainstream Christianity, yet here you are acting as if I had.


But it's not just visiting. If you feel such idiocy as young-earth creationism isn't representative of Christianity and is making it look bad, why aren't you actively opposing it? Where are the campaigns from conservative Christian groups saying "This doesn't represent our faith"?

Instead, the museum funnels millions through each year and makes millions of dollars in the process. And now they're planning a Noah's Ark theme park with government support! That doesn't seem like such a fringe minority to me. All you have to do is pay attention.

You are reporting what you were looking to report and it is clear that you were going to find that for which you were looking.

 

[Debunker]

9-10s, I don't disagree that the lines can blur sometimes, just as they can with any group. And I for one don't care much for most Baptists - I hate to say it, but I think they've gotten more extreme in recent years and I don't much care to associate with some of them because of their strident intolerance.


Even so, I do know many Baptists who would call themselves members of the Southern Baptist Convention, who are appalled at some of the recent directives and developments within that group, and yet refuse to leave it, hoping to create change from within.

"Some of my best friends are Baptist" - including my worrisome mother in law, who I am sure is convinced my husband and I are going to hell in a handbasket because we drink and dance!

And we're METHODISTS - that's pretty bad as it is...

Still - even with 16 million members (haven't verified that but I'll take your word for it for now), the Southern Baptist Convention body encompasses a wide range of faith expressions.

That being said...

Not sure if you know many Baptists, but I know a slew of 'em, and they are a joinin' bunch if ever there was one. I mean, if their preacher says be there Sunday morning for church AND Sunday school, and again Sunday night, and then Wednesday, and then you best do a group bible study as well each week, then by golly they are going to do it.

And make a potluck meal out of it too.

(To any Southern Baptists out there, I do apologize for blatant generalizations, but I'm speaking generally - I know there are exceptions out there, but dang it, you guys go to church a lot - can I get an Amen?)

That is troublesome - especially when it comes to voting. However, I have yet to see any of them strap a bomb on themselves or fly a plane into a building.

As long as they're not breaking any laws, or infringing on my rights, they can have at it all they like.

Same goes to the rest of you.

Kathryn, The United Methodist church uses much of the Baptist material in their religious practices and they are almost as big as the the Southern Baptist. There is not nearly as much differences among Christians as there are among atheist, agnostics, and Muslims; therefore don't pay any mind to the convoluted criticism of simple minded college kids that think they have learned something about life and religion. They really know very little compared to what you know.

 

[Kathryn]

But there's two problems I see with that response. First, you and Kathryn are telling me the fundamentalist attitudes are a fringe minority within Christianity. So one would think if you were losing followers because the faith is being mischaracterized by that fringe, you would do something about it. And that brings me to my second point...if you believe that Christianity is the path to salvation, I would think the mass exodus of young people would be a concern of monumental proportions to you, especially if it's because the fundies are making your faith look bad. But you both seem to be kind of like, "Meh...whatever" about it all.

You are talking about activism when you ask "What are you doing about it?"

I wish everyone in the world would find the joy I've found in Christianity. But that's unrealistic. I balance my religious beliefs with my beliefs on individual freedom - no, I take that back, my religious beliefs INCLUDE my beliefs on individual freedom of choice. So - though I live my faith openly, testify readily to the joy and peace that my faith brings me, and share my faith willingly with anyone who cares to listen - I am also sensitive to others' privacy and their own personal beliefs. I can win no one by being offensive. I will not ever intentionally offend someone with my faith.

I believe that Christianity offers the fullness of religious belief, but I do not believe that everyone who is not a Christian is going to hell. If I DID believe that, my take on things, and my actions, would differ.

As for "doing something about" fundamentalists, as I've said repeatedly - I DO something about it, at every opportunity. Even with my regular customers, on the job, if they say something bigoted (which is rare), I will gently state my own beliefs, even if it bothers them. After all, they bothered me first.

I am not "Meh...whatever" about any of it. In spite of your incessant attempts to portray me as such.

 

[Debunker]

You mean to show that I'm not making all this up and it's just a figment of my imagination? If so, then yeah...I suppose so.

You do admit you went in with an idea and you came out with the same idea. Very scientific for a college kid.

 

[Kathryn]

I was specifically referring to Kathryn's posts to me where she said she was too busy and didn't really care.

You know what - I was going to go back through your posts from today and address them one by one, till I ran across this little jewel.

If that's what you insist on reading into and taking away from what I've posted here, I am CLEARLY wasting my time with you.

As Groucho Marx said so much better than I can, "Go - and never darken my towels again."

 

[Debunker]

Speaking for myself, I'm only lumping those people in together when they share those bat-**** crazy views... and I do include "conversion therapy" in that category.


Well, no, it's not enough. As long as a person gives with one hand and takes with another, it's not enough.

If a Christian supports the Southern Baptist Convention, the LDS Church, the Catholic Church, or any one of a number of other groups, then they do support hate. They may voice their dissent, vote the "right" way and do everything else, but their opposition will always be tempered by that measure of support.

In fact, I think there's more of a danger from the figures on the margins of "moderate" than there is from the extremist. Everybody can see that someone like Fred Phelps is a nutbar; we don't really need to worry about him, because he marginalizes himself just fine. IMO, the biggest problem, and the greatest harm, comes from the people who "clean up nice" and make the right sort of noises, but still support vile things: Rick Warren, James Dobson and their ilk. They're the ones who command influence.


That's where I stop short: while I do think that there's more consistency in the fundamentalist position than the more moderate position, if I have to choose between a kind, "wishy-washy" Christian and a mean, consistent Christian, I'll pick the wishy-washy one.

Now! Now! The way you liberal typical, usual suspects openly hate GWB, it just don't make sense for you to point to all those Christians you named to call them out of haters of these sinful minorities. These Christians have as much liberty to disapprove of certain behaviors as you do without being called such vile names.

 

[Debunker]

It must be concluded that this thread was not a report of an experiment but rather a thread for Christian bashing with the usual suspects leading the attack.

 

[Kathryn]

If a Christian supports the Southern Baptist Convention, the LDS Church, the Catholic Church, or any one of a number of other groups, then they do support hate. They may voice their dissent, vote the "right" way and do everything else, but their opposition will always be tempered by that measure of support.

So in other words, any Baptist, Mormon, or Catholic is guilty as charged?

Wow.

And yet you espouse tolerance.

(sniff sniff) I smell hypocricy.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So in other words, any Baptist, Mormon, or Catholic is guilty as charged?

They, along with all members of their church, support some rather nasty things.

Maybe they aren't aware of the nastiness, maybe they think that the nastiness is outweighed by good in some other regard, maybe they think they've been commanded by God to support that church, but when a tithing Catholic or Mormon says that they support gay rights, for instance, this is tempered by the fact that they've given material support to an entity that works directly against gay rights.

I don't know if that makes them "guilty as charged", but it does mean that they share partial responsibility for the actions that they enabled.

Wow.

And yet you espouse tolerance.

(sniff sniff) I smell hypocricy.

Don't you think that people are responsible for their actions? Is tithing or church membership somehow exempt from this? These are real actions with real consequences.

And I don't see any hipocrisy - you're welcome to call me to task for my actions, too.