Is Fundamentalism a Religious Movement or a Psychological Disorder?

[Spartan]

You need something a lot stronger than the Bible to make that claim.

No I don't. You need something besides baseless and unsubstantiated denials to make your case.

 

[BilliardsBall]

So God is just a superscientist, eh?

Then you agree science is on the right track, exploring how these things can be done. No magic, just knowledge gained by looking, checking, reasoning and rechecking.
Relative to a photon, you and I move at the speed of light all the time. And we have evidence to support the idea that Now is not a point but a smear in time, during which sequences internal to that smear can be what we might call by way of analogy reversed. It's a very very tiny smear, so we're not talking about humans ─ but again, as we keep advancing our understanding of reality, our ability to control previously uncontrolled aspects of it comes into being and increases. Who knows what we'll be able to do with time in another fifty years?
Alas, it's not so simple. There's not one credible example of 'prescience' ─ supernatural foreknowledge ─ in the bible. (To be fair, there are no credible examples anywhere else either.) If you'd like to offer a favorite example, I'll take it apart for you.

Okay--the Bible describes the mean-spirited trolling that atheists do on this forum. You are pathologically incapable of being even the slightest bit respectful or me or my belief system on this forum. If you were to grow nice, you would disprove the Bible's prescience.

 

[Spartan]

So Jesus WASN'T the messiah then.

Not anointed / Χριστός / Christ at all!

Interesting theology ...

I don't know where you get that nonsense from.

Luckily that argument fails because each of the Jesuses of Paul and the four gospels expressly denies he's God.

But you know this already because you have two degrees in theology, or you've read the NT, I can't recall which.

Go spin your follies to somebody else. You refuse to learn anything from the information that's been provided you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It will. And there have been times in Judaism when the remnant of true believers was not a majority either. So do be thinking about that.

When and if it does then you will have a valid claim. Until then you have nothing.

And whenever one talks about "true believers" one is almost always making a No True Scotsman fallacy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No I don't. You need something besides baseless and unsubstantiated denials to make your case.

Actually you do since so much of it has been refuted. It is just another book of myths until it is supported.

And please, I thought that you were a Christian. I can and have supported my claims. If you do not understand the proper action for a"true" Christian to take is to ask questions. Not to make false accusations breaking the Ninth Commandment in the process.

 

[Spartan]

When and if it does then you will have a valid claim. Until then you have nothing.

And whenever one talks about "true believers" one is almost always making a No True Scotsman fallacy.

So you're not a true believer in what you present around here?

 

[Spartan]

Actually you do since so much of it has been refuted. It is just another book of myths until it is supported.

And please, I thought that you were a Christian. I can and have supported my claims. If you do not understand the proper action for a"true" Christian to take is to ask questions. Not to make false accusations breaking the Ninth Commandment in the process.

I'm having a real hard time trying to recall anything you've refuted about Biblical Christianity.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you're not a true believe in what you present around here?

You do not understand. "True believer" is a term that is used improperly far too often. All Christians, even those that disagree with you, arguably even the worst Christian that you can name, is a "true believer" it is a useless garbage phrase.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm having a real hard time trying to recall anything you've refuted about Biblical Christianity.

That is because you either were not paying attention or were not debating honestly. Tell me, do you believe the myths of Genesis? Those have been refuted countless times alone.

Don't blame others for your flaws.

 

[Spartan]

That is because you either were not paying attention or were not debating honestly. Tell me, do you believe the myths of Genesis? Those have been refuted countless times alone.

Don't blame others for your flaws.

Where's your refutation of Biblical Christianity? You don't even have any formal education in it, do you?

 

[Spartan]

You do not understand. "True believer" is a term that is used improperly far too often. All Christians, even those that disagree with you, arguably even the worst Christian that you can name, is a "true believer" it is a useless garbage phrase.

The true believers are those in the eyes of God, not skeptics.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Where's your refutation of Biblical Christianity? You don't even have any formal education in it, do you?

Perhaps you should have defined your terms before making false claims and wow! Amazing projection on your part.

Try again.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The true believers are those in the eyes of God, not skeptics.

This is pure nonsense since you have no clue as to who a "true believer" is by that weak definition . You are probably not a "true believer" by that definition.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Where's your refutation of Biblical Christianity? You don't even have any formal education in it, do you?

By the way, you changed your argument. Do you not realize this is not honest? Originally you said: "I'm having a real hard time trying to recall anything you've refuted about Biblical Christianity." You totally changed your claim when you realized that you were in error to include all of Biblical Christianity.

You see I understand that refuting the myths of Genesis does not refute the poorly undefined term "Biblical Christianity". But since for many Christian believing the myths of Genesis is part of their beliefs it is a legitimate claim to say that I have refuted something "about Biblical Christianity".

If you had a formal education yourself you would see that you were inconsistent in your claims.

 

[JJ50]

The true believers are those in the eyes of God, not skeptics.

A statement with no evidence to support it.

 

[Spartan]

By the way, you changed your argument. Do you not realize this is not honest? Originally you said: "I'm having a real hard time trying to recall anything you've refuted about Biblical Christianity." You totally changed your claim when you realized that you were in error to include all of Biblical Christianity.

You see I understand that refuting the myths of Genesis does not refute the poorly undefined term "Biblical Christianity". But since for many Christian believing the myths of Genesis is part of their beliefs it is a legitimate claim to say that I have refuted something "about Biblical Christianity".

If you had a formal education yourself you would see that you were inconsistent in your claims.

You didn't refute squat.

 

[Spartan]

Perhaps you should have defined your terms before making false claims and wow! Amazing projection on your part.

Try again.

So you don't have any formal education on Christianity. That goes along nicely with your "no great arguments against Biblical Christianity" agenda.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You didn't refute squat.

Like I said, you were not paying attention. Or perhaps your own education is lacking.

Tell me, do you believe the myths of Genesis? Like it or not they have been refuted.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you don't have any formal education on Christianity. That goes along nicely with your "no great arguments against Biblical Christianity" agenda.

No, you tried to change the argument. You really should apologize.

 

[Jose Fly]

Okay--the Bible describes the mean-spirited trolling that atheists do on this forum. You are pathologically incapable of being even the slightest bit respectful or me or my belief system on this forum. If you were to grow nice, you would disprove the Bible's prescience.

That's rich, coming from a person who calls people racist, for no other reason than that they recognize evolutionary biology as valid science.

If only everyone could be as "respectful" as you.