Author Topic: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?  (Read 8449 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mellenORL

  • Pedal Pushing Puppy Peon
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Gender: Female
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #15 on: April 28, 2014, 11:15:03 am »
Biblical Literalists, or, Scriptural Dogmatists? Mostly because the word "Christian" is left out of either term. "Biblical" automatically infers Christianity, since the term "Bible" is exclusive to Christianity, so I like the first term for being specific and indicative, yet it tacitly also avoids implying a taint against non-fanatical Christians by not using the term "Christian" or "Christianity" overtly. Anyway, that's my outsider opinion, as an atheist.
Quote from: Ultimate Chatbot That Totally Passes The Turing Test
I sympathize completely. However, to use against us. Let me ask you a troll. On the one who pulled it. But here's the question: where do I think it might as well have stepped out of all people would cling to a layman.

Online RavynousHunter

  • Master Thief
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 7710
  • Gender: Male
  • The Mad Dog of Shimano
    • My Twitter
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #16 on: April 28, 2014, 01:31:25 pm »
I just call them all Cultists.  It fits better.

Too much baggage, I prefer to just call them morons.
Quote from: Bra'tac
Life for the sake of life means nothing.

Offline Old Viking

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1454
  • Gender: Male
  • Occasionally peevish
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #17 on: April 28, 2014, 03:28:44 pm »
@Magus Silveresti: Bart Ehrman may be your source. 
I am an old man, and I've seen many problems, most of which never happened.

Offline Witchyjoshy

  • SHITLORD THUNDERBASTARD!!
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 9044
  • Gender: Male
  • Thinks he's a bard
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #18 on: April 28, 2014, 05:41:40 pm »
@Magus Silveresti: Bart Ehrman may be your source. 

That sounds familiar, thanks.
Mockery of ideas you don't comprehend or understand is the surest mark of unintelligence.

Even the worst union is better than the best Walmart.

Caladur's Active Character Sheet

Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2954
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #19 on: April 29, 2014, 07:45:07 pm »
Does anyone really believe in Biblical Literacy anymore?

Offline fancy_kitten

  • Bishop
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
  • The fanciest little kitten
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #20 on: April 29, 2014, 08:02:00 pm »
Biblical literacy or Biblical Literalism? 
It's me, the little fancy kitten


Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2954
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #21 on: April 29, 2014, 08:16:27 pm »
Biblical Literalism (and no-one believes in my literacy anymore)

Offline Witchyjoshy

  • SHITLORD THUNDERBASTARD!!
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 9044
  • Gender: Male
  • Thinks he's a bard
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #22 on: April 29, 2014, 08:26:39 pm »
Does anyone really believe in Biblical Literalism anymore?

In the past month I've argued with four different fundies that believe in a literal Word of God, and that it's the KJV version of the Bible, and no other.

So... yes.  Yes they do.
Mockery of ideas you don't comprehend or understand is the surest mark of unintelligence.

Even the worst union is better than the best Walmart.

Caladur's Active Character Sheet

Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2954
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #23 on: April 29, 2014, 09:07:41 pm »
How do they determine what stories are parables?

Offline mellenORL

  • Pedal Pushing Puppy Peon
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Gender: Female
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #24 on: April 29, 2014, 09:52:59 pm »
They don't. Their world view is; holy magic! And miracles happened in Bible TimesR
Quote from: Ultimate Chatbot That Totally Passes The Turing Test
I sympathize completely. However, to use against us. Let me ask you a troll. On the one who pulled it. But here's the question: where do I think it might as well have stepped out of all people would cling to a layman.

Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2954
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #25 on: April 29, 2014, 10:00:06 pm »
I find that they still arent complete literalists because they inavariably havent given all their money to the poor and consider Mark 10.25 and Matthew 19.24 - That it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle than a rich man to enter heaven - as a metaphor.

Offline Witchyjoshy

  • SHITLORD THUNDERBASTARD!!
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 9044
  • Gender: Male
  • Thinks he's a bard
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #26 on: April 29, 2014, 10:39:14 pm »
I find that they still arent complete literalists because they inavariably havent given all their money to the poor and consider Mark 10.25 and Matthew 19.24 - That it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle than a rich man to enter heaven - as a metaphor.

Then perhaps I should amend my statement to say: "They believe in a literal Bible (as told to them by their pastors)"
Mockery of ideas you don't comprehend or understand is the surest mark of unintelligence.

Even the worst union is better than the best Walmart.

Caladur's Active Character Sheet

Offline Sigmaleph

  • Ungodlike
  • Administrator
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3503
    • sigmaleph on tumblr
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #27 on: April 30, 2014, 04:52:26 pm »
I find that they still arent complete literalists because they inavariably havent given all their money to the poor and consider Mark 10.25 and Matthew 19.24 - That it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle than a rich man to enter heaven - as a metaphor.

It's one of those cases where it's important to distinguish levels of belief. If you ask a Biblical literalist whether the Bible is literally true, they will honestly* answer "yes". If you then ask them some obscure detail about the number of warriors slain at the Battle of Fill-in-the-blanks, they might give you an answer that doesn't correspond to scripture. It might be that any answer they could give you doesn't correspond with scripture because the Bible is self-contradictory on that point. If you want to argue that they are not really biblical literalists because they have beliefs inconsistent with a literal bible, I'd probably shrug and say "meh, semantics" (or, depending how much I want to argue, I'd make some sort of comment about how humans in general will often have beliefs that are inconsistent with other beliefs because we are not logically omniscient).

*This is one of those times where "being honest" and "telling the truth" don't mean the same thing.
Σא

Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2954
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #28 on: April 30, 2014, 07:25:27 pm »
I find that they still arent complete literalists because they inavariably havent given all their money to the poor and consider Mark 10.25 and Matthew 19.24 - That it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle than a rich man to enter heaven - as a metaphor.

It's one of those cases where it's important to distinguish levels of belief. If you ask a Biblical literalist whether the Bible is literally true, they will honestly* answer "yes". If you then ask them some obscure detail about the number of warriors slain at the Battle of Fill-in-the-blanks, they might give you an answer that doesn't correspond to scripture. It might be that any answer they could give you doesn't correspond with scripture because the Bible is self-contradictory on that point. If you want to argue that they are not really biblical literalists because they have beliefs inconsistent with a literal bible, I'd probably shrug and say "meh, semantics" (or, depending how much I want to argue, I'd make some sort of comment about how humans in general will often have beliefs that are inconsistent with other beliefs because we are not logically omniscient).

*This is one of those times where "being honest" and "telling the truth" don't mean the same thing.


Apart from the fact that this is not something which appears to be directly contradicted by anything else in the bible. Nor is it something which is obscure, it is one of the best known passages in the Bible. The reason I used it is because I have often seen people who were otherwise Biblical literalist who believed in the inerrant word of God, and who also believed that they were abiding by it and not in sin. However once you bring up this passage they always say its an allegory, or is to show that with God anything is possible. It is a passage clearly misread so that they can accumulate wealth without feeling in Sin.

Offline Witchyjoshy

  • SHITLORD THUNDERBASTARD!!
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 9044
  • Gender: Male
  • Thinks he's a bard
Re: Should fanatical Christians really be called "fundamentalists"?
« Reply #29 on: April 30, 2014, 07:31:34 pm »
Fundies tend to be hypocrites.  Is that surprising?
Mockery of ideas you don't comprehend or understand is the surest mark of unintelligence.

Even the worst union is better than the best Walmart.

Caladur's Active Character Sheet