Is Fundamentalism a Religious Movement or a Psychological Disorder?

[Spartan]

Why, doing what you haven't ─ reading the bible.
First thing to mention is that I listed 'it's a tale Jesus' followers made up' as one of a list of explanations that, being possible in reality, are many orders of magnitude more likely than any supernatural explanation.

A point which you haven't challenged and which you'll find very difficult to challenge.

Second, while it's possible there was an historical Jesus, there's no clincher either way. (Much as I enjoy Bart Ehrman's writing, he doesn't persuade me on that point.) I think the question remains open. None of the NT authors ever met an historical Jesus. No one who would have been a contemporary of an historical Jesus ever mentions one. Paul's earthly bio of his Jesus fits in a couple of lines. The only purported bio of any substance is in Mark. The Jesuses in Matthew, Luke and John are simply their authors rewriting the Mark version to their taste. Mark is written some 45 years after the traditional date of the crucifixion. Its major episodes can be mapped onto various parts of the Tanakh, so that an available explanation for Mark's version is that he knew no bio of Jesus of his own, so devised one by moving his hero through a series of scenes that he thought might serve as messianic prophecies from the Tanakh.

If there was in fact an historical Jesus, then we can say he appears to have been a Jew of unmiraculous birth (as indeed Mark's Jesus is), and we can guess he was a small player in Jerusalem's religion industry (he went entirely unnoticed in his time), may have preached, as JtB did, that all should get ready because the Kingdom was at hand and would come in the lifetime of some of his hearers, may have been executed by the Romans for offenses against civil order, and if he was then again no one noticed. (They'd certainly have noticed a resurrection; and/or Matthew's dead faithful running around the streets of the city; and/or any sustained daytime darkness, and/or the unexplained rending of the temple veil ─ but no, not a peep.) And he may have left a small band of followers who are the ones mentioned by Paul.

That's amazing conjecture, but zero evidence to back that all up. Thanks anyway.

 

[Spartan]

If god exists it is the shameful one, if what the Bible says about it is true. There is nothing wrong with being gay, it is anti-gay bigots who are WRONG using the not so good book to back up their evil prejudice!

Yada yada yada...

 

[Spartan]

Does it matter the full context? God demanded the unborn be ripped from the womb.

Still wondering which specific scripture # you're talking about.

I used to think like that. But then I got out into the world and discovered it's just not like that.

According to the Bible, God has a different viewpoint, and his is the last Word.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Still wondering which specific scripture # you're talking about.

So can I take this as an admission you are rather ignorant of the Bible?

According to the Bible, God has a different viewpoint, and his is the last Word

Everyone has a different viewpoint. That doesn't make moral rightness am issue of relativity.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Conservatives generally help church related charities and use help as a guise to proselytize. Ugh. You need to read up on the kickbutt welfare laws in the OT. Sabbatical and Jubilee Years...No, that is not what the Bible says about S&G. You all love to make stuff up.

In the last 20 years I've not met or debated even one liberal who didn't have some serious theological issues regarding Christ and God's morality. A great many of them think Jesus was just some itinerant preacher. Others say he was just a man but not God. Others contend Jesus was gay or embraced sodomy and shacking up. Others say you can't really know anything real about him because the Gospels were anonymous and unreliable. Others deny the Trinity and the deity of the Holy Spirit. Late-term abortions are also in with many. It's just one screw up after another with the left-wing Democrats. And in case you guys weren't aware, the scriptures say that unless you believe Jesus is divine, you will die in your sins. John 8:24 .

Generally, the bullies that try to espouse a narrow religion are countered by those who do not. Religions are made up, so who cares anyway? Think what you think, just don't pretend it's the only way or actual history. That's where people have a problem. Live and let live but no, Christians and Muslims force the issue, even to death.

 

[Sand Dancer]

GARBAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My parents created me, not a god, which more than likely doesn't exist.

Your responses to people's posts are getting more extreme and appear to back up the suggestion that extremism could be a psychological disorder.

Maybe your mom was cheating on your dad with Yahweh.

 

[Spartan]

Generally, the bullies that try to espouse a narrow religion are countered by those who do not.

Truth is normally narrowly viewed. But broad and wide is the path to destruction.

Religions are made up, so who cares anyway? Think what you think, just don't pretend it's the only way or actual history. That's where people have a problem. Live and let live but no, Christians and Muslims force the issue, even to death.

So you fell for "made-up" stories for 20 years as a Christian? Where's your evidence the Gospels are made up?

 

[Spartan]

So can I take this as an admission you are rather ignorant of the Bible?

No, that's your spin-cycle fantasy. If you knew the Bible you wouldn't be a Christ denier.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

No, that's your spin-cycle fantasy. If you knew the Bible you wouldn't be a Christ denier.

In Kings, Chronicles and Leviticus wedding examples were Jehovah is not pro-life. Even in Psalms, the high example of David stated "happy is he who dashes your little ones against the rocks."
And I know the Bible, quite well, actually. It's this knowledge that helped me be able to leave it all behind,and going from firm Christ believer much as yourself to where I am today. And I don't deny the likeliness that there was a "historic Jesus" who probably inspired the character found in the Gospels. What I deny was this person was divine, that he was a messiah, and the resurrection.

 

[blü 2]

That's amazing conjecture, but zero evidence to back that all up. Thanks anyway.

Not a problem. But you're mistaken to think five distinct Jesuses and six irreconcilable resurrection tales amount to 'zero evidence'. The NT is a curious set of ancient documents. You should read it some time.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Truth is normally narrowly viewed. But broad and wide is the path to destruction.

Truth is not narrow because it shows higher truths, which come from different places. Fact is narrow because it reflects reality.

So you fell for "made-up" stories for 20 years as a Christian? Where's your evidence the Gospels are made up?

Not saying they are all made up, but the stories were not meant to reflect factual happenings. I think Jesus was a real person in history, just not deity.

 

[Spartan]

Not a problem. But you're mistaken to think five distinct Jesuses and six irreconcilable resurrection tales amount to 'zero evidence'. The NT is a curious set of ancient documents. You should read it some time.

I have read it. Got two degrees in Biblical Theology, which you apparently don't have.

I don't know of even one scholar - liberal or conservative, who actually think the Gospels portray five distinct, different Jesuses. At best they might portray Jesus as a Son of Man (who is divine - Daniel 7:13-14), Jesus as a Savior, Jesus as a healer and teacher, and Jesus as the divine God. Those aren't four of five Jesuses, but one multi-faceted individual.

 

[Spartan]

In Kings, Chronicles and Leviticus wedding examples were Jehovah is not pro-life. Even in Psalms, the high example of David stated "happy is he who dashes your little ones against the rocks."

Tsk tsk...

"In Psalm 137:9, it cannot be assumed that the inspired writer was saying that God commanded anyone to dash the heads of children against a stone. The idea that the text merely describes what the Medes and the Persians would do in the future fits the context perfectly. The way the word “happy” is used throughout the Bible allows for the author to be using it in Psalm 137:9 in a way that can describe a fleeting feeling that can be the result of evil actions. This feeling has nothing to do with a blessing or commendation from God. The way the skeptic pulls this passage from its context and misinterprets it says more about the skeptic’s dishonesty when dealing with the biblical text than it does about God’s morality."

Psalm 137:9—Dashing Babies’ Heads Against a Stone

And I know the Bible, quite well, actually. It's this knowledge that helped me be able to leave it all behind,and going from firm Christ believer much as yourself to where I am today. And I don't deny the likeliness that there was a "historic Jesus" who probably inspired the character found in the Gospels. What I deny was this person was divine, that he was a messiah, and the resurrection.

You can deny Jesus as the divine, resurrected Messiah, but not on good grounds.

I really do wish you skeptics would do something unusual and actually read the evidences FOR the resurrection. All you do is make excuses not to read this book. Read it and you won't be so dedicated to denying the resurrection.

"The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus, " by scholar Gary Habermas

 

[Shadow Wolf]

"In Psalm 137:9, it cannot be assumed that the inspired writer was saying that God commanded anyone to dash the heads of children against a stone.

Yup. Too bad for you I never claimed such and used to point out that David is supposed to be one gods guys, but there is saying absolutely barbaric and savage things.

I really do wish you skeptics would do something unusual and actually read the evidences FOR the resurrection. All you do is make excuses not to read this book. Read it and you won't be so dedicated to denying the resurrection.

I have read it, and I still deny it. You have to consider, I'm not your run of the mill atheist skeptic. I'm not an atheist, and I used to be one of y'all.

 

[Spartan]

Yup. Too bad for you I never claimed such and used to point out that David is supposed to be one gods guys, but there is saying absolutely barbaric and savage things.

I have read it, and I still deny it. You have to consider, I'm not your run of the mill atheist skeptic. I'm not an atheist, and I used to be one of y'all.

You've read it and deny the resurrection? On what grounds?

 

[Spartan]

Truth is not narrow because it shows higher truths, which come from different places. Fact is narrow because it reflects reality.

1+1=2 That's a narrow truth. There is only salvation in Jesus (John 14:6, Acts 4:12) - another narrow truth.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

There is only salvation in Jesus (John 14:6, Acts 4:12) - another narrow truth.

Jesus can't save you from Ammit.

 

[Spartan]

Jesus can't save you from Ammit.

Come on. Get serious. You don't believe the resurrection because...?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Come on. Get serious. You don't believe the resurrection because...?

I dont believe something that has died can come back to life because the dead do not return to life.

 

[Spartan]

I dont believe something that has died can come back to life because the dead do not return to life.

Science has never proven that. If you think it has show me the replicated studies that show that God and the supernatural do not and cannot exist.