Does Extermism / Fundametalism damage Christianity?

--amadeus--

I'm going to be careful how I word this because I don't want this to come across as attacking any individual poster (or posters) but...

In a movement as diverse as Christianity you are bound to get a few people who hold views that are a little...unusual. The Bible - with it's powerful imagery and millenarian theme - can often provide people who may have a weakness for conspiracy theories with a rich vein of content.

So do people who claim to see visions of saints in pieces of foodstuffs, who peddle stories of supernatural beings (visitations from angles or whatever rather than the more "routine" revelations that born again Christians have) or who preach that governments are a front for Satan, etc cause any great damage to Christianity? I'm not talking about the stuff that atheists would consider fundamentalist (creationism for example) or the extreme church leaders such as Phelps. I'm talking about the internet tin foil hat wearers. Because from where I'm at they provide better propaganda for atheism than any number of ads on buses. But what do you lot think?? Damaging by association or harmless as any discussion of religion is a good thing?

Fanny Cradock

Damaged by association? Yes.

BrianCalgary

I think so.

I also think that anyone who would use the views put forth by such folk are just as bad.

Galvasean

BrianCalgary wrote: »

I think so.

I also think that anyone who would use the views put forth by such folk are just as bad.

You mean like to use said views to purposely tarnish the reputation of all Christians?

--amadeus--

I don't think most atheists would use the extremist views to argue against religion as such, although I would imagine that most would see religion as a continuum with the tin foil hats and whackjobs at one end and the local vicar with his cucumber sandwiches at the other.

Gareth37

--amadeus-- wrote: »

I'm going to be careful how I word this because I don't want this to come across as attacking any individual poster (or posters) but...

In a movement as diverse as Christianity you are bound to get a few people who hold views that are a little...unusual. The Bible - with it's powerful imagery and millenarian theme - can often provide people who may have a weakness for conspiracy theories with a rich vein of content.

So do people who claim to see visions of saints in pieces of foodstuffs, who peddle stories of supernatural beings (visitations from angles or whatever rather than the more "routine" revelations that born again Christians have) or who preach that governments are a front for Satan, etc cause any great damage to Christianity? I'm not talking about the stuff that atheists would consider fundamentalist (creationism for example) or the extreme church leaders such as Phelps. I'm talking about the internet tin foil hat wearers. Because from where I'm at they provide better propaganda for atheism than any number of ads on buses. But what do you lot think?? Damaging by association or harmless as any discussion of religion is a good thing?

I would have held this view in the past but not any more. We are all carriers of Satan's words and aspirations. We must accept that Satan works in all of us. The smaller the spiritual connection that we make with the Holy Spirit the greater the connection of Satan.

The best way to make a connection with the Holy Spirit is through deep prayer. We can just pray and hope that Governments and their media acknowledge that Satan exists and that he is a spirit that manifests in people and through the interaction of people.

The media is very powerful so Satan will attempt to influence the workers of such an area greatly. Likewise, governments have great power to create great evil with both war and through the creation of a Satan based society with huge value on substance, lust, money and status/power. The normalisation of sin through the rules of society is the greatest mistake that Governments can make, even greater than war.

For me both God and religeon is in a great crisis here on earth. Us young people are to blame. Satan is well in control of us, through our thinking and our actions. We must acknowledge that Satan exists and that he is continually trying to take us down.

Fanny Cradock

Galvasean wrote: »

You mean like to use said views to purposely tarnish the reputation of all Christians?

There are ways to promote Christianity and ways to hamper it. In my experience, Christians tend to emphasise the positive effects that Jesus has on your life here and now. This is seen as a hugely beneficial relationship with a loving God.

However, of late, there has been a trend on this forum to obsess on the less positive aspects some people associate with Christianity, as well as some incidences or practices that are, IMO, utterly without biblical justification. I don't believe it is my place to go pointing fingers - I don't claim to have a unerring knowledge of Christianity - but I really feel that these people, however sincere in there belief, are favouring the stick and the crutch rather than the positive, here and now, life-affirming relationship with Jesus that so many Christians I know speak of.

Schuhart

Extermism?

Fundametalism?

--amadeus--

Schuhart wrote: »

Extermism?

Fundametalism?

Yawn

Got a point to make other than I have lousy typing and that my in browser spell check doesn't work on the title bar?

Schuhart

--amadeus-- wrote: »

Yawn

Got a point to make other than I have lousy typing and that my in browser spell check doesn't work on the title bar?

No, that's about it.

PDN

Religion deals with subjects that people feel very deeply about and which are important to them. Therefore, when somebody is mentally unbalanced or ill, their condition often manifests itself in religious terms.

Some atheists (eg Richard Dawkins) do love to seize on such instances and use them to discredit religion as a whole. This is why Dawkins devotes several pages of The God Delusion to some anti-abortionist whom I have never heard of. The guy doesn't merit such attention in any serious discussion on Christianity - but it gives Dawkins the opportunity to take a cheap shot as if this guy is somehow typical of other Christians.

Such an approach ignores the fact that crazy people also behave similarly to non-religious objects of great significance to them. In societies where atheism was enforced such craziness was often focused on Stalin or Mao. Others have fixated on Hitler, Napoleon or even the Beatles.

Rev Hellfire

Extermism and Fundametalists can only thrive in environments where knowledge is lacking.
Take for example the extreme examples peddled out by the more militant atheists and Christians to attack each others positions. Nobody here is convinced by these arguments since most people here accept them for what they are caricatures that do not reflect the normal views and actions of either camp.

Handsome Bob

Certainly. If people don't try to fully understand something, then that unknown is going to manifest itself in fear and hate by association. Just look at the problems that ethnic minorities had in the wake of the 9/11 and 7/7 attacks in America and the UK respectively; they were treated as extremists and terrorists due to the colour of their skin or their religion.

In regards to Christianity, it has become increasingly regular to brush every Christian with the fundamentalist brush. For instance when Heath Ledger died the Westboro Church threatened to picket his funeral because he played a gay cowboy in a film. I have two friends, one a Catholic and the other an atheist, and the atheist upon finding out about Phelps's threat insulted my friend. My friend calmly pointed out that he wasn't a member of the Westboro Church and all he got in reply was "it's all the same". How do you open the eyes of a person if they don't want to know?

Gareth37

PDN wrote: »

Therefore, when somebody is mentally unbalanced or ill, their condition often manifests itself in religious terms.

I would like to see the scientific research, spiritual guidance or otherwise to back this up? What is your basis for such a theory?

Im sure plenty of people said that Jesus and His followers were all mentally ill. My own opinion is that the teachings of the Bible should not be moderated in order to satisfy society or atheists.

Thanks.

PDN

Gareth37 wrote: »

I would like to see the scientific research, spiritual guidance or otherwise to back this up? What is your basis for such a theory?

My basis for this theory is 25 years of pastoral care and counselling. In that time I have had to refer people for psychiatric or psychological treatment and have met more than my fair share of crazy people. One extremely polite woman once tried to kill me because, due to a manic episode caused by her failure to take her medication, she had decided that I was the antiChrist. Another time I had to explain to a hospital that a particular guy was not a suitable candidate for their chaplaincy programme based on the letters he had sent me detailing how Satan buggered him on the kitchen table severall nights a week.

If you don't believe my 'theory' then ask any psychologist or psychiatrist.

Im sure plenty of people said that Jesus and His followers were all mentally ill. My own opinion is that the teachings of the Bible should not be moderated in order to satisfy society or atheists.

Indeed. And neither should the teachings of the Bible be misrepresented by those who would be better off in a hospital.

Gareth37

PDN wrote: »

My basis for this theory is 25 years of pastoral care and counselling. In that time I have had to refer people for psychiatric or psychological treatment and have met more than my fair share of crazy people. One extremely polite woman once tried to kill me because, due to a manic episode caused by her failure to take her medication, she had decided that I was the antiChrist. Another time I had to explain to a hospital that a particular guy was not a suitable candidate for their chaplaincy programme based on the letters he had sent me detailing how Satan buggered him on the kitchen table severall nights a week.

:eek:

PDN wrote: »

If you don't believe my 'theory' then ask any psychologist or psychiatrist.

I take your word because you just wouldn't make something like that up.

PDN wrote: »

Indeed. And neither should the teachings of the Bible be misrepresented by those who would be better off in a hospital.

From the above I can see what you mean, but what I would say is, in my opinion, is that followers of Christ are often laughed at, mocked and regarded as "religeous nutters" simply for having very strong faith. I have seen it myself with many people and I am still very young. Ive probably done it myself in the past. Its important to recognise true conversion and devotion from mental illness, something for which society in general fails.

oeb

Where do you draw the line? Lets someone claims that they heard a voice, it was god and he told them to kill someone. I would agree that this person needs help.

Would you also agree that someone who claims that they hear the voice of god who instructs them to do something relativly benign (or even something that would be generally seen as good) also needs help? For example someone who claims that god told them to give all their money to the church, or that god told them to run for political office, or even that god told them to go out and help the sick.

rockbeer

One of the difficulties with an ancient faith such as christianity is that what is perceived as acceptable - even divine - in one era is regarded as deranged or insane in another. Many of the actions reported in the Bible would be certifiable today.

As far as I can see, this is a real problem that all christians - all believers in ancient faiths, in fact - have to face up to eventually: the cultural context of scripture has changed so dramatically that any literal interpretation leads inevitably to madness while any metaphorical one leads just as inevitably to dilution and eventual irrelevance. The gap between what is written and what it must be interpreted to mean becomes increasingly wide, until eventually there is no longer any meaningful connection between the two.

BrianCalgary

Galvasean wrote: »

You mean like to use said views to purposely tarnish the reputation of all Christians?

Yes absolutely. What I have found on these boards is that the Irish view of the church equals Catholicism. So, if the RC chruch did something bad Christianity is bad.

Critics are very likely to bring up items from the Westboro church.

Granted there are posters here who do not do such things and recognize the who the crack-pot is no matter where they come from.

rockbeer

It can be difficult to know just who the crackpot is, Brian, since each christian claims to represent the same god and the same faith as all the others even though they say wildly different things. Can you offer any guidance on whose word I should accept about which christians are crackpots and which ones are the real thing?

PDN

rockbeer wrote: »

It can be difficult to know just who the crackpot is, Brian, since each christian claims to represent the same god and the same faith as all the others even though they say wildly different things. Can you offer any guidance on whose word I should accept about which christians are crackpots and which ones are the real thing?

Jesus said, "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them." (Matthew 7:18-20)

This gives us a criteria by which we can judge one another's actions. If someone claims that God has spoken to them and stabs someone them then that is bad fruit. Therefore we can view them as a crackpot.

If someone, like Mother Theresa or Martin Luther King, produces great results from their obedience to what they claim was God's voice, then that is a good indication that they are the real thing.

Fred Phelps claims to be obeying God but spreads nothing but hatred. Rick Warren claims to be obeying God and saves thousands of Rwandan children from starvation. I think most reasonable people can spot the difference.

Gareth37

rockbeer wrote: »

Can you offer any guidance on whose word I should accept about which christians are crackpots and which ones are the real thing?

You can call me a crackpot if you want. Ive been called worse

Apologies if any of my posts come across as extreme

rockbeer

PDN wrote: »

This gives us a criteria by which we can judge one another's actions. If someone claims that God has spoken to them and stabs someone them then that is bad fruit. Therefore we can view them as a crackpot.

If someone, like Mother Theresa or Martin Luther King, produces great results from their obedience to what they claim was God's voice, then that is a good indication that they are the real thing.

That all sounds very reasonable, PDN. But then how can I be certain that you're not the crackpot? :P

AtomicHorror

Gareth37 wrote: »

From the above I can see what you mean, but what I would say is, in my opinion, is that followers of Christ are often laughed at, mocked and regarded as "religeous nutters" simply for having very strong faith.

Being laughed at does not mean that they're not nutters.

It's a common statement often made by fringe "scientists" that "they laughed at the Wright brothers". The suggestion of course being "I'm a misunderstood genius". They did laugh at the Wrights. But a quote attributed to Carl Sagan follows this with "they also laughed at Bozo the clown".

AtomicHorror

PDN wrote: »

Jesus said, "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them." (Matthew 7:18-20)

This gives us a criteria by which we can judge one another's actions. If someone claims that God has spoken to them and stabs someone them then that is bad fruit. Therefore we can view them as a crackpot.

If someone, like Mother Theresa or Martin Luther King, produces great results from their obedience to what they claim was God's voice, then that is a good indication that they are the real thing.

Fred Phelps claims to be obeying God but spreads nothing but hatred. Rick Warren claims to be obeying God and saves thousands of Rwandan children from starvation. I think most reasonable people can spot the difference.

Yes, but in the vast majority of cases it is not at all as clear cut as Mother Theresa versus Fred Phelps. I have countless times made valid arguments in defence of some part of science or other which contradicts an interpretation of scripture only to have the "personal revelation" card thrown at me. Naturally I'm pretty satisfied to consider that kind of thinking to be delusional, but how do you as a Christian make a call in these much more subtle situations?

Gareth37

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Yes, but in the vast majority of cases it is not at all as clear cut as Mother Theresa versus Fred Phelps. I have countless times made valid arguments in defence of some part of science or other which contradicts an interpretation of scripture only to have the "personal revelation" card thrown at me. Naturally I'm pretty satisfied to consider that kind of thinking to be delusional, but how do you as a Christian make a call in these much more subtle situations?

Its not our call to make. Don't worry God will make all the calls in the end. I have evidence of this too. It is in the Bible so I know 100% that it is true for its God's word

AtomicHorror

Gareth37 wrote: »

Its not our call to make.

Of course it is. For the sceptic, when a person makes an assertion their sanity is quite relevant. For the faithful, the veracity of their personal revelation is similarly relevant.

Gareth37 wrote: »

Don't worry God will make all the calls in the end. I have evidence of this too. It is in the Bible so I know 100% that it is true for its God's word

And how do you establish that it is God's word? Beyond personal revelation, which may or may not be real, how can you establish this?

Sorry if I'm now dragging us off topic here. I think maybe we're straying a bit.

CerebralCortex

Gareth37 wrote: »

Its not our call to make. Don't worry God will make all the calls in the end. I have evidence of this too. It is in the Bible so I know 100% that it is true for its God's word

If there was a competition to make the smell of bull**** literal, I'd give this my number one vote. Seriously Gareth37 you could try being a bit more courageous with you arguments.

Gareth37

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Of course it is. For the sceptic, when a person makes an assertion their sanity is quite relevant. For the faithful, the veracity of their personal revelation is similarly relevant.



And how do you establish that it is God's word? Beyond personal revelation, which may or may not be real, how can you establish this?

Sorry if I'm now dragging us off topic here. I think maybe we're straying a bit.

Look it, I know the Big Man exists 100% but I cannot prove it to you here. So we better agree to disagree I wish you love and good health in your life, I hope one day you will "find God".

Gareth37

CerebralCortex wrote: »

If there was a competition to make the smell of bull**** literal, I'd give this my number one vote. Seriously Gareth37 you could try being a bit more courageous with you arguments.

Its not you or any other human that I have to prove myself to. Its God Almighty so like AH I wish you a good life of love and respect and hope that you too find the peace of God.

CerebralCortex

Gareth37 wrote: »

Its not you or any other human that I have to prove myself to. Its God Almighty so like AH I wish you a good life of love and respect and hope that you too find the peace of God.

Well no you don't and I take offense because you are implying that the peace I experience is lessened somehow because I don't believe what you believe which shows neither love nor respect. In fact you are consistently disrespectful to the atheist position. I suspect you are being completely insincere.

AtomicHorror

Gareth37 wrote: »

Look it, I know the Big Man exists 100% but I cannot prove it to you here. So we better agree to disagree I wish you love and good health in your life, I hope one day you will "find God".

Please read back over my previous posts. I'm not asking you to question the existence of God, nor to prove it.