What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

[jon1959]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

I have no idea why truthpaste is such a serial and outrageous liar. Every single time I have asked him to produce direct quotes of mine to back up his lies, he fails every single time. Every time. Every single time.

So much for one of the commandments that this enormous and warped hypocrite is supposed to obey.

Truthpaste has taken to presenting himself as one half of a Christian double act with Gofer Blue.

They may indeed both be Christians, both willing to argue their case on a football messageboard, and both say they are anti religion (by which I take it they see organised Christianity plc of whatever type as antithetical to what they take to be 'Christ's teachings') - but there is a world of difference between Gofer and Truthpaste.

Gofer is humble and respectful of others, responds to other posters' actual views, explains himself without hammering others over the head with random biblical quotes, and shares his doubts and faith journey. Truthpaste shares none of those qualities.

I have nothing in common with Gofer's beliefs and faith - but I find his posts interesting and sometimes thought provoking. He adds to the board. Truthpaste doesn't.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

Truthpaste has taken to presenting himself as one half of a Christian double act with Gofer Blue.

They may indeed both be Christians, both willing to argue their case on a football messageboard, and both say they are anti religion (by which I take it they see organised Christianity plc of whatever type as antithetical to what they take to be 'Christ's teachings') - but there is a world of difference between Gofer and Truthpaste.

Gofer is humble and respectful of others, responds to other posters' actual views, explains himself without hammering others over the head with random biblical quotes, and shares his doubts and faith journey. Truthpaste shares none of those qualities.

I have nothing in common with Gofer's beliefs and faith - but I find his posts interesting and sometimes thought provoking. He adds to the board. Truthpaste doesn't.

I wouldn't wish to bunch Gofer with truthpaste for one second either. They are like chalk and cheese. Gofer behaves on here like a civilised person and is easy and straightforward to communicate with.

[jeepster]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

I wouldn't wish to bunch Gofer with truthpaste for one second either. They are like chalk and cheese. Gofer behaves on here like a civilised person and is easy and straightforward to communicate with.

This how i feel too.

[Gofer Blue]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

As I said, the nature of folklore is that it builds on previous folklore (and it's no coincidence that Christian festivities adopted themes from paganism e.g. Christmas being piggy-backed onto Saturnalia and Easter being named after a pagan godess!)

The concept of human messiahs existed in Zoroastrianism and not in Abrahamism. And there are probably many, many more examples around the world than this simple soul can think of off the top of his head, no doubt!

And considering that Judaism doesn't even recognise your Messiah and that there were many others in the region to make a claim to that concept, your argument doesn't stand up.

You really seem to have no idea about the world outside your indoctrinated bubble and the global cultural context that it sits in.

By the way, do you actually believe in the talking snake, the talking donkey, the virgin birth, Jesus being the Messiah and people being turned to salt? A simple 'yes' or'no' will suffice - and if so, what evidence is there for those things? Something written in a so-called holy book is not evidence as such, by the way. Self-fulfilling prophecies in a book that refer back to a book itself and which contains nonsense, proven fiction, sheer fantasy and laughable tales (and which is wriiten largely by unknown individuals reported hearsay in an era when the vast population were illiterate and parochial) does not constitute evidence to a thinking person, regardless of whether it satisfies you personally.

Where to begin!!

Re: me being in my “indocrinated bubble” – it seems I am not alone, as there are about 2.3 billion other people (roughly 30% of the world's population) in there with me! (Data from Wikipedia). Your fabled Zoroastrian guys represent 0.03% so I suppose that must speak for itself. I wonder how many people have converted to Zoroastrianism down the centuries?

Re: my question about the Messiah – I was interested to know if the Zoroastrians had actually encountered a person amongst them who claimed to be the Messiah rather than just coming up with the concept of a Messiah.

Yes, I believe Jesus is THE Messiah. Yes, I believe in the Virgin Birth.

I know that Jews are still waiting for the Messiah. I have pinched the following quote from Wikipedia because it summarises the Jewish position more succinctly than I could!

Judaism has never accepted any of the claimed fulfilments of prophecy and holds that the coming of the Messiah will be associated with a specific series of events that have not yet occurred, including the return of Jews to their homeland and the rebuilding of the Temple, a Messianic Age of peace and understanding during which "the knowledge of God" fills the earth."And since Jews believe that none of these events occurred during the lifetime of Jesus (nor have they occurred afterwards), he is not the Messiah for them.

This sounds very much like the Second Coming to me so maybe they aren't that far off in their belief?

I have no problem with the dates for Christmas or Easter – as far as I am concerned they could be any dates, as long as there are specific days set aside for us to remember the events. I rather think the secular world would be pretty upset if these two festivals were abolished and along with them the public Christmas and Easter holidays. Alternatively I suppose Christians could be given the time off with paid leave and everyone else should go to work as normal!

Finally, regarding the talking snake and donkey, I will give you a typical politician's answer!

It seems to me there are three possible explanations:

1.The animal actually spoke.
2.The humans heard the voice of God coming from the animal.
3.The stories are complete nonsense because everyone knows animals can't speak.

I think number 3 is unlikely because I'm pretty sure the story would never have made it into the Bible – it would have been discounted as being ridiculous. That leaves me with the other two.

For number 1 I could say, well, if God is the creator of everything, then the sky's the limit as they say, and no further discussion is possible or necessary. So, yes, I could believe that. Just because it's extremely improbable, well, so is life itself!

For number 2 I could say, yes, that's possible too. I'm sure there must have been times in your life, even as an atheist, when you have had, shall we say, a “spiritual experience”. For instance standing on a mountain top and having a breath-taking moment when taking in a stunning view such as looking down into the Grand Canyon. I believe in those moments God can speak, maybe not always in audible terms but when particular thoughts suddenly come into your mind. This can also happen in stressful situations too when you are suddenly challenged and unsure what to do or say. So, yes, I could believe number 2 too.

However once again, in cracked record mode, I have to say all of the above have very little bearing on my faith in Jesus. He looks at the heart of each one of us and something tells me he is not going to reject me or anyone else who claims to be his follower because we don't understand everything that is in the Old Testament.

I know as an atheist you are interested in challenging my faith, that's fine because if you think I haven't already thought about a lot of these issues you are mistaken! Christianity is based on Jesus Christ and the New Testament recording of the events of that time. You reject these writings because they cannot be corroborated by independent sources or are simply hearsay. We must remember the time when all this took place. Yes, most people were illiterate but as a consequence of that, the oral tradition was very strong and accurate, something which is difficult for us to appreciate today in this world of instant written communication. Hence I have no problem with the work of the gospel writers or of Paul the apostle who was highly literate and could speak/write in at least three languages: Greek, Latin and Hebrew.

Finally, sorry for the delay in replying - I do have a life outside the CCMB!

[truthpaste]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

You probably don't want to get into a 'proof' discussion

No less than anything you and others are relying upon re pseudo-science.
If and when you are ready, I'll be here.

[truthpaste]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

I wouldn't wish to bunch Gofer with truthpaste for one second either. They are like chalk and cheese. Gofer behaves on here like a civilised person and is easy and straightforward to communicate with.

I'm happy with that assessment from your perspective, it's probably what I would have said before I was saved.
The only common factor I claimed (re Gofer) is that we have both admitted we are flawed individuals that have seen our need for God's forgiveness and accepted Christ as our Lord & God. Nothing more.

Gofer takes a very different approach to my own, so yes we are chalk & cheese, correct.

I have needed to be more confrontational because of the ministry I am in, Gofer is in another area of ministry to my own.
It's hard to explain, but take the approach of Alex Ferguson and Alf Ramsey; both very respected for getting results, albeit AF over a longer period of time, both equally football managers, but one would bounce teacups off the wall and the other wouldn't dream of it.

In the end you are not my judge TBG, and while I may continue to make mistakes, none of them will be deliberate or malicious; the key factor will be if you end up taking life, death and your soul more seriously; not how much you hated or loved the messenger.

Same goes for you Jon. Nobody who is a Christian thinks it's going to be a popularity contest.
Shalom.

[Gofer Blue]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

I'm happy with that assessment from your perspective, it's probably what I would have said before I was saved.
The only common factor I claimed (re Gofer) is that we have both admitted we are flawed individuals that have seen our need for God's forgiveness and accepted Christ as our Lord & God. Nothing more.

Gofer takes a very different approach to my own, so yes we are chalk & cheese, correct.

I have needed to be more confrontational because of the ministry I am in, Gofer is in another area of ministry to my own.
It's hard to explain, but take the approach of Alex Ferguson and Alf Ramsey; both very respected for getting results, albeit AF over a longer period of time, both equally football managers, but one would bounce teacups off the wall and the other wouldn't dream of it.

In the end you are not my judge TBG, and while I may continue to make mistakes, none of them will be deliberate or malicious; the key factor will be if you end up taking life, death and your soul more seriously; not how much you hated or loved the messenger.

Same goes for you Jon. Nobody who is a Christian thinks it's going to be a popularity contest.
Shalom.

Unusually I have some time on my hands this afternoon!

I concur with you on your latest post. You are correct, I do not enjoy confrontation and I tend to go about my faith quietly, preferring “actions speak louder than words” (which is difficult to convey on an Internet forum of course!). I realise this is a bit of a balancing act as I could be accused of being a social activist rather than an evangelical!

If anyone expects all Christians to be exactly the same in their approach i.e. like clones, then it may come as a bit of a shock to find that that is not the case. As you say, it is not a popularity contest either on here or in life in general. In fact I find it a bit embarrassing that I seem to be classed as the guy in the white hat and you as the guy in the black hat (to quote that well known cowboy film cliché)! I am certainly no saint in the secular, vernacular sense (in the Biblical sense, a bit different of course!). Can you elaborate on this rabbit hole/Hamas thing which seems to have lit TBG's blue touch paper?

It can be tiresome being classified as gullible, non-intellectual, crutch-requiring thicko's as if I have accepted everything in the Bible without question. I would say my faith is evidence-based rather than blind faith, but of course for most people the New Testament does not constitute evidence they argue, as it was written so long after the events (or at least a very handy excuse for not looking any further in case it might just be true!). I only became a Christian in my late 30's when I looked into the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus and found that this could be proven “beyond reasonable doubt” as a defence lawyer would put it.

I think I have already said in a previous post that I tend towards the “shake the dust off my shoes” approach rather than continue the debate in a confrontational manner but it is difficult to resist the temptation to respond when faced with some of the spurious arguments put forward! My Dad used to use the phrase “slowly, slowly, catchee monkey” in this sort of situation. If tempers are lost or verbal abuse is used, then he would say that you have already lost the argument – that has always stayed with me but it's not always easy to put into practice!

[truthpaste]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

Unusually I have some time on my hands this afternoon!

I concur with you on your latest post. You are correct, I do not enjoy confrontation and I tend to go about my faith quietly, preferring “actions speak louder than words” (which is difficult to convey on an Internet forum of course!). I realise this is a bit of a balancing act as I could be accused of being a social activist rather than an evangelical!

If anyone expects all Christians to be exactly the same in their approach i.e. like clones, then it may come as a bit of a shock to find that that is not the case. As you say, it is not a popularity contest either on here or in life in general. In fact I find it a bit embarrassing that I seem to be classed as the guy in the white hat and you as the guy in the black hat (to quote that well known cowboy film cliché)! I am certainly no saint in the secular, vernacular sense (in the Biblical sense, a bit different of course!). Can you elaborate on this rabbit hole/Hamas thing which seems to have lit TBG's blue touch paper

Thanks for your comprehensive reply and considered thoughts.
I've no issue being the guy with the black hat etc - I would rather 50 people broke my nose but all ended up knowing which way was up and us all laughing about it in eternity.
100 years from now, it won't matter who had 2 million followers online, or who drove an X7, or who was lambasted for standing up for their faith and quoting the Bible; all that will matter is what people decided re Jesus Christ while they where here on Earth.
I applaud your approach re your faith and I too have many contacts across many "real-life" face to face social groups where it is a lot easier to demonstrate Christian love, care and practical help. I'm currently urgently trying to help a guy move from Riverside to Cathays within 24 hours.
The Hamas thing was me simply saying that some individuals create rabbit holes (to the standard of those in Gaza) to avoid discussing the key issues; so predictably (as we live in a victim culture) that was taken as me saying that anyone that dug such rabbit holes was as evil as Hamas!
Will reply further later, have to head out now. Take care.

[truthpaste]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

It can be tiresome being classified as gullible, non-intellectual, crutch-requiring thicko's as if I have accepted everything in the Bible without question. I would say my faith is evidence-based rather than blind faith, but of course for most people the New Testament does not constitute evidence they argue, as it was written so long after the events (or at least a very handy excuse for not looking any further in case it might just be true!). I only became a Christian in my late 30's when I looked into the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus and found that this could be proven “beyond reasonable doubt” as a defence lawyer would put it.

I think I have already said in a previous post that I tend towards the “shake the dust off my shoes” approach rather than continue the debate in a confrontational manner but it is difficult to resist the temptation to respond when faced with some of the spurious arguments put forward! My Dad used to use the phrase “slowly, slowly, catchee monkey” in this sort of situation. If tempers are lost or verbal abuse is used, then he would say that you have already lost the argument – that has always stayed with me but it's not always easy to put into practice!

Indeed, the BBC, National Geo, Hollywood and many others love to portray Christians as naive and lacking in all the facts.
The truth is very different as many successful and brave scientists have stated, though the very thought that this is a remote possibility drives the skeptic to run for cover, or into the 'safety' of skeptical anti-biblical websites or half bakes scientific theories that only have a basis in acceptability rather than hard facts.

If they did what you, Lee Stroble or Josh McDowell (and thousands of others) has done, and look at the evidence for the resurrection, they would be left with no doubt whatsoever. But why look if you want to remain in denial?

There are times when shaking the dust off your shoes is the wise approach, yet with social media you never know who is listening or reading outside the sphere of the participants, or even if those taking part are taking things far more seriously than they let on.

Many in the States are counting the hours until this second major total eclipse (8.4.24), which is interestingly crossing a number of places in the States called Nineveh! Either way, the time that people have to consider these things won't last forever, and the state of people in the original Nineveh was far worse than even our society today (and they too had a total eclipse before you know who arrived to warn then via God's Message for the entire region).

So keep going...!

[Gofer Blue]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

Indeed, the BBC, National Geo, Hollywood and many others love to portray Christians as naive and lacking in all the facts.
The truth is very different as many successful and brave scientists have stated, though the very thought that this is a remote possibility drives the skeptic to run for cover, or into the 'safety' of skeptical anti-biblical websites or half bakes scientific theories that only have a basis in acceptability rather than hard facts.

If they did what you, Lee Stroble or Josh McDowell (and thousands of others) has done, and look at the evidence for the resurrection, they would be left with no doubt whatsoever. But why look if you want to remain in denial?

There are times when shaking the dust off your shoes is the wise approach, yet with social media you never know who is listening or reading outside the sphere of the participants, or even if those taking part are taking things far more seriously than they let on.

Many in the States are counting the hours until this second major total eclipse (8.4.24), which is interestingly crossing a number of places in the States called Nineveh! Either way, the time that people have to consider these things won't last forever, and the state of people in the original Nineveh was far worse than even our society today (and they too had a total eclipse before you know who arrived to warn then via God's Message for the entire region).

So keep going...!

Mostly Frank Morrison (of "Who moved the stone?" fame) in my case, although I have read McDowell and Strobel too.

Yes, for a "non-subject" which Christianity is often portrayed as (Dawkins et al), it amazes me that this thread now has in excess of 3700 views!

[Gofer Blue]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

Truthpaste has taken to presenting himself as one half of a Christian double act with Gofer Blue.

They may indeed both be Christians, both willing to argue their case on a football messageboard, and both say they are anti religion (by which I take it they see organised Christianity plc of whatever type as antithetical to what they take to be 'Christ's teachings') - but there is a world of difference between Gofer and Truthpaste.

Gofer is humble and respectful of others, responds to other posters' actual views, explains himself without hammering others over the head with random biblical quotes, and shares his doubts and faith journey. Truthpaste shares none of those qualities.

I have nothing in common with Gofer's beliefs and faith - but I find his posts interesting and sometimes thought provoking. He adds to the board. Truthpaste doesn't.

I have never met Truthpaste but in a way I envy his rock solid Christian faith. I may be wrong here but I get the impression that he has never had any doubts on his faith journey. I wish I could say the same but as a scientist I struggled in the early days and I suppose you could say that I was dragged, metaphorically speaking, kicking and screaming to faith in Jesus. I never had a “Damascus road “ experience during those days and it was researching more about the resurrection that finally convinced me of the truth.

Shortly after I committed myself to faith in Jesus (when I was about 35 or so) I was baptised and sometime after that I did have a very strange experience which I subsequently discovered was very similar to that described by John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist church, back in the early 1700's. He described that he felt his heart being suddenly “strangely warmed” * which is exactly what I felt. I have no rational explanation for this as I was driving along in my car, alone, on a dual carriageway near home, just concentrating on my driving. At the same time suddenly my heart experienced a warming sensation, an overwhelming sense of peace came over me and I felt a kind of reassurance that everything was ok.
I had never experienced anything like it before or since.

*(These are the words Wesley wrote in his diary: I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone for salvation; and an assurance was given me that He had taken away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death). (Ref: Journal 24 May 1738).

P.S. I do try to ensure that I too provide the references to Biblical statements that I quote despite the fact that I am often ridiculed by one particular contributor for doing so!

[truthpaste]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

I have never met Truthpaste but in a way I envy his rock solid Christian faith. I may be wrong here but I get the impression that he has never had any doubts on his faith journey. I wish I could say the same but as a scientist I struggled in the early days and I suppose you could say that I was dragged, metaphorically speaking, kicking and screaming to faith in Jesus. I never had a “Damascus road “ experience during those days and it was researching more about the resurrection that finally convinced me of the truth.

Shortly after I committed myself to faith in Jesus (when I was about 35 or so) I was baptised and sometime after that I did have a very strange experience which I subsequently discovered was very similar to that described by John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist church, back in the early 1700's. He described that he felt his heart being suddenly “strangely warmed” * which is exactly what I felt. I have no rational explanation for this as I was driving along in my car, alone, on a dual carriageway near home, just concentrating on my driving. At the same time suddenly my heart experienced a warming sensation, an overwhelming sense of peace came over me and I felt a kind of reassurance that everything was ok.
I had never experienced anything like it before or since.

*(These are the words Wesley wrote in his diary: I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone for salvation; and an assurance was given me that He had taken away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death). (Ref: Journal 24 May 1738).

P.S. I do try to ensure that I too provide the references to Biblical statements that I quote despite the fact that I am often ridiculed by one particular contributor for doing so!

Great to hear your testimony, and the experience of the Holy Spirit warming your inner being and giving you the assurance that is for time and eternity.

It's true that I've had no serious doubts re who Christ is (Almighty God) and what He has done for me, granting me complete forgiveness and an opportunity to serve Him now, and throughout eternity.

The certainty I have is nothing to do with anything special about me at all, but maybe I have been given it because of the type of ministry God has given me? One day I will know the answer to that. What I do know is this, all good things come from God.

I'm glad to hear that your scientific mind prompted you to keep asking questions, until you came to the rock solid evidence that demanded a verdict, I pray that others in South Wales and beyond will have similar courage on their journey.

"Seek and you will find"

[Gofer Blue]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

Number plate from U.S.A.

[Gofer Blue]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

A little bit of philosophy I came across recently:

What you give your attention to is the person you become. Put another way: the mind is the portal to the soul and what you fill your mind with will shape the trajectory of your character. In the end your life is no more than the sum of what you gave your attention to. That bodes well for those apprentices of Jesus who give the bulk of their attention to him and to all that is good, beautiful and true in his world.

The above resonates with what the apostle Paul says in his letter to the church in Philippi (Philippians 4:8):

Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable - if anything is excellent or praiseworthy - think about such things.

[truthpaste]

Re: What do you understand a FUNDAMENTALIST to be?

Number plate from U.S.A.

Spot on