Understanding the Mentality and World View of the Christian Fundamentalist

[Derideo_Te]

The same can be said for many: Rush Limbaugh, Kenneth Copeland, Sean Hannity, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Terry O'Neill, Louis Farrakhan, Al Sharpton, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, Ed Shultz...you name it. They are all doing the same things as DuPlantis and Maher.

Interesting fruit salad you made there out of apples and oranges.

Chris Matthews is a devout Catholic, Farrahhan is a devout Muslim, Beck is a devout Mormon, Sharpton is a Baptist Minister, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is a devout Jew.

So I really don't see how lumping them all into the same bowl makes your point. about scolding those who call out "religious extremists" . What am I missing?

The point is that if one is going to wag their dick at fundamentalist Christians, they need to do the same to the people on their own side of the street who do the exact same thing.

I applaud theists who call out the extremists in their own ranks.

I am not posting, therefore, to defend fundamentalism, which I find every bit as annoying as atheists do, but to point out that it goes both ways.

All forms of extremism are wrong IMO. It makes no difference as to the source.

But I am not seeing extremism in the OP of this thread. The linked article was fair and argued both sides.

The benefits of extreme belief systems

Now, this is not all bad. There are pros and cons to extreme belief systems such as this. As mentioned above, the Christian faith does give people a sense of purpose, identity, and meaning. It is true that many people have been helped by Christianity and made happier as well. So there are benefits of this faith, even if the doctrines it’s based on are in error. What it does is take the chaos and uncertainty out of life and the world for people, giving them a solid sense of purpose, a definite future in heaven, and a guaranteed outcome in the end.

Some people have a need for that. That’s understandable. In general, I think that extreme beliefs appeal to insecure people the most, because it helps make up for an extreme need, and compensates for what they lack. It gives them a sense of purpose, drive, motivation, and even fulfillment that can be an emotional security blanket​

Given the above where is the harm in having a legitimate discussion on the basis for fundamentalism in religions?

 

[BluePhantom]

That is true but perhaps I simply have not seen the "evidence" that the OP falls into the "extreme atheist" category. Feel free to provide examples.

The post or the poster? The post, not so much when taken in a vacuum. The poster is without question extreme and surely you would not attempt to argue that. As to the post, one must put things into proper perspective. For example, when I see you posting on a thread I can expect a rational discussion that is tempered and considerate of multiple viewpoints. This is because you have established a history and a reputation for being reflective of those things, at least in my view. Now if one were to have a discussion on the same topic with...oh.....Hangover...ok it's lobotomy time because that is the reputation he/she has established.

We can use an analogy of a literary genre. Take the statement "Killer asteroid set to wipe out mankind in 30 days". If we saw that written on the cover of a book by Michael Crichton we would view it one way. If we saw it on page one of the New York Times we would look at it quite differently, indeed. This is because of the genre each publication reflects. As posters, we have also established genres of a sort. One doesn't even have to read a post by rDean to know it's a bunch of left-wing propaganda. A thread by Delta4Embassy is frequently going to have something to do with his sexual appetites. PoliticalChic is going to come hard from the right. We know and expect these things because it's what the poster has established according to their history. Guno has established himself as a poster who attacks, mocks, hates, and is openly hostile toward religion in general, but he has a particular hard on for Christianity. So when he posts "Understanding the mentality and world view of the Christian fundamentalist" it is going to be interpreted according to the reputation...the genre...he has established for himself.

 

[BluePhantom]

The same can be said for many: Rush Limbaugh, Kenneth Copeland, Sean Hannity, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Terry O'Neill, Louis Farrakhan, Al Sharpton, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, Ed Shultz...you name it. They are all doing the same things as DuPlantis and Maher.

Interesting fruit salad you made there out of apples and oranges.

Chris Matthews is a devout Catholic, Farrahhan is a devout Muslim, Beck is a devout Mormon, Sharpton is a Baptist Minister, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is a devout Jew.

So I really don't see how lumping them all into the same bowl makes your point. about scolding those who call out "religious extremists" . What am I missing?

You are missing that I am attempting to pull the focus back from the influence of fear in Christian fundamentalism specifically to the use of fear as a tool to influence in other categories. All of the people I listed, as well as many others, use fear in order to attempt to impact public opinion. The left attempts to terrify society that if they elect Republicans the rights of women will be stripped and women will go back to being oppressed, for example. The right attempts to terrify people into believing that their next door neighbor is a terrorist if he reads the Quran. Christian fundamentalists use the fear of hell to influence the behaviors of others. Extreme atheists use fear to suggest that if we don't get that Nativity Scene off the lawn of City Hall immediately we will soon be forced into state religion. It's all bullshit. It's ALL bullshit.

So the point is that it is completely futile to attempt to argue that Christian fundamentalists do not use fear as a tool to influence society. There's no point in even arguing that...they do. But so what? So does everyone else. So why simply attack the Christians for doing what everyone does? The focus should be on the illicit use of fear in general. This is what I am getting at when I say we need to look at both sides of the coin when we consider issues of this nature.

All forms of extremism are wrong IMO. It makes no difference as to the source.

And there we are. Agreed completely.

 

[Derideo_Te]

That is true but perhaps I simply have not seen the "evidence" that the OP falls into the "extreme atheist" category. Feel free to provide examples.

The post or the poster? The post, not so much when taken in a vacuum. The poster is without question extreme and surely you would not attempt to argue that. As to the post, one must put things into proper perspective. For example, when I see you posting on a thread I can expect a rational discussion that is tempered and considerate of multiple viewpoints. This is because you have established a history and a reputation for being reflective of those things, at least in my view. Now if one were to have a discussion on the same topic with...oh.....Hangover...ok it's lobotomy time because that is the reputation he/she has established.

We can use an analogy of a literary genre. Take the statement "Killer asteroid set to wipe out mankind in 30 days". If we saw that written on the cover of a book by Michael Crichton we would view it one way. If we saw it on page one of the New York Times we would look at it quite differently, indeed. This is because of the genre each publication reflects. As posters, we have also established genres of a sort. One doesn't even have to read a post by rDean to know it's a bunch of left-wing propaganda. A thread by Delta4Embassy is frequently going to have something to do with his sexual appetites. PoliticalChic is going to come hard from the right. We know and expect these things because it's what the poster has established according to their history. Guno has established himself as a poster who attacks, mocks, hates, and is openly hostile toward religion in general, but he has a particular hard on for Christianity. So when he posts "Understanding the mentality and world view of the Christian fundamentalist" it is going to be interpreted according to the reputation...the genre...he has established for himself.

Thank you for that clarification. Yes, I did miss the point you were trying to make. One of those can't see the wood for the trees moments.

As far as the OP's reputation goes I really haven't encountered that many of his posts to have formed that opinion. Most of the ones I have seen are funny and sarcastic. I appreciate that my posting time is limited which might account for not having the same exposure that you have to have formed that impression.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The focus should be on the illicit use of fear in general. This is what I am getting at when I say we need to look at both sides of the coin when we consider issues of this nature.

Thank you for clarifying your point and yes, I agree that we should most definitely look at all sides of the illicit use of fear.

Perhaps the most egregious use of fear in my lifetime is how it was exploited to start the Iraq war. In essence our own elected leaders were terrorizing We the People through the illicit use of fear. Worst of all there was no actual legitimate basis for that fear.

Which brings up an interesting parallel. The fear mentioned in the OP is just as imaginary since there is even less evidence for it than there was for the fear used to incite the war in Iraq.

Fear that is based on genuine threats is a means to save our lives. If we are out walking and a large dog starts coming towards us growling and foaming at the mouth then our fear is real because the threat is real. But when the threat is highly unlikely to occur then to exploit it for nefarious purposes is illicit.

So where does the illicit use of the threat of hell fall in this spectrum? Is your faith genuine if it is based upon the falsehood of the threat of an eternity in hell?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

More racism from Israelis: Israel admits forcing birth control shots on Ethiopian women

Are you seriously trying to derail this thread? Why? It was a very good discussion, Thunderbird.

No this thread is about ethnic fanaticism. To confine ourselves to condemning Christian fanaticism would of course be discrimination.

This thread is defined by the OP. In this case, that would be Guno. It would be considerate of you to respect him and address the topic he chose to discuss rather than taking it to a place that he didn't intend it go.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jeri is right, and Thunderbird would be wise to follow her advice.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Very simple. Buy a Bible. Everyone who followed Jesus Christ was a Christian fundamentalist. If you're not a fundamentalist? You're not a follower of Jesus Christ.

And if you hate Christian fundamentalists? You are an enemy of Jesus Christ.

That's a load of crap. But then, every religion believes it is the one and only religion.

If a person says they are a Christian yet refuses to take the Word of God literally and do what it says I have every reason to believe they are not a follower of Christ. Again - God is not interested in what denomination you are a member of - your church cannot save you - only His Son can save you and therein lies the redemption plan.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Very simple. Buy a Bible. Everyone who followed Jesus Christ was a Christian fundamentalist. If you're not a fundamentalist? You're not a follower of Jesus Christ.

And if you hate Christian fundamentalists? You are an enemy of Jesus Christ.

That's a load of crap. But then, every religion believes it is the one and only religion.

If a person says they are a Christian yet refuses to take the Word of God literally and do what it says I have every reason to believe they are not a follower of Christ. Again - God is not interested in what denomination you are a member of - your church cannot save you - only His Son can save you and therein lies the redemption plan.

Jeri, that is according to only you, and you don't speak for God or His Son.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Jeri is right, and Thunderbird would be wise to follow her advice.

It's an important discussion, Jake. I hope it stays on track. I'm still reading it and thinking about what many people have said on this thread. I do want to understand the world view of fundamentalist Christians because I am one!

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Very simple. Buy a Bible. Everyone who followed Jesus Christ was a Christian fundamentalist. If you're not a fundamentalist? You're not a follower of Jesus Christ.

And if you hate Christian fundamentalists? You are an enemy of Jesus Christ.

That's a load of crap. But then, every religion believes it is the one and only religion.

If a person says they are a Christian yet refuses to take the Word of God literally and do what it says I have every reason to believe they are not a follower of Christ. Again - God is not interested in what denomination you are a member of - your church cannot save you - only His Son can save you and therein lies the redemption plan.

Jeri, that is according to only you, and you don't speak for God or His Son.

I do not speak for God or Jesus Christ, Jake. God's Word speaks for Himself. I am only telling you that unless we are adhering to Scripture as it is written we're not preaching the Gospel. We're preaching our own. God is not obligated to alter His Word in order to accommodate our own belief system (usually what is comfortable for us). I find more often it is when we are "uncomfortable" that God is most comfortable. Because He isn't moved by the opinions of man and neither should we be.

 

[SUPERMAN1929]

I probably would have hung out with Hitler too if he ever invited me to dinner. Also Ford walking to church 4 miles each way as a kid has nothing to do with his actual beliefs. You're a fucking moron for trying to pass shit like this off as meaning anything at all.

DT has hung you by your balls. So you like Hitler. OK.

It really has nothing to do with liking Hitler. It has to do with the fact that it would be interesting hanging out with a dictator.

 

[BluePhantom]

So where does the illicit use of the threat of hell fall in this spectrum? Is your faith genuine if it is based upon the falsehood of the threat of an eternity in hell?

I think that is a fantastic question. First of all, I do not subscribe to either the concept of hell or Satan so my answer will be filtered through that point of view. In an earlier post I mentioned Jesse DuPlantis. Now I will watch him when my wife has his ministry show on. I don't subscribe to his message very often, but it's interesting to me to see what he is saying to people. He will use hell but he also points out, and I think this is one of his better messages, that 'fear tolerated is faith contaminated'. In other words, the love of God, the belief in Jesus and God, and/or obedience to God that comes from a motivating place of fear is contrary to true faith. Those things should be motivated by love and not a desire to avoid punishment. The former represents faith and the latter represents spiritual self-preservation. I agree with DuPlantis on that point. If you are following Christian dogma just to avoid eternal torture, then you really are not practicing faith and the love of God. You are just covering your own ass. If one does this, they are more worried about themselves than a true love or faith in God and thus it becomes very difficult for faith to blossom within them.

I would say that church leaders are much like every other profession. There are some fantastic doctors in the world and there are some that have no shittin' business putting someone on their operating table. There are some great lawyers, some wonderful chefs, some incredible teachers....and then there is some real shit that mucks it all up and makes the rest of them look bad. The same is true, I think, of pastors. There are some great ones out there who are inspiring, encourage the positive development of faith and the tolerant application of it in society, and contribute greatly to the lives of their followers in a positive and meaningful way. And there are those who are a fucking disaster. I would say that a pastor who has nothing more to offer his community than the fear of hell and 'Satan is out to get you', falls into the latter category.

Much of this, of course, is heavily influenced by how one interprets Revelation and whether one continues to adhere to ancient Judeo-Christian apocalypticism. Those who favor such a perspective view Revelation from a futuristic point of view. That is, Revelation is discussing things that are going to happen in our future. Some entire churches are based strongly on a futuristic interpretation of Revelation. The Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, and the Seventh Day Adventists, to a lesser degree, are based almost entirely upon that very concept stemming from the Great Disappointment of 1844 (link below).

Other churches, such as the Roman Catholics or Anglicans, generally take no position or interpret Revelation from a "preterist" point of view; that being, Revelation is a symbolic description of events that represent a classic "apocalypse" in the first century literary genre and has nothing to do with future events. Rather it is caricaturizing events that were happening at the time it was written in order to make certain political and theological points. This is the perspective I subscribe to myself. You will rarely hear pastors from these churches read from Revelation (and when they do their message usually has nothing to do with the end of times) or use hell and fear as a motivating factor in faith.

So, I would opine that it becomes illicit, from a theological perspective, when the use of fear becomes a hindrance to the development of faith or, from a secular perspective, is based on a logical, measurable, and/or observable fallacy.


Great Disappointment - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[hadit]

One notes that the OP has absolutely no clue about his own subject matter. One also notes a singular obsession from the OP.

 

[BULLDOG]

See if the far left drones can answer this:

So is Jeremiah Wright a "Christian Fundamentalist"?

Still whining about one preacher. What an idiot.

 

[BULLDOG]

In reality Christianity is about charity and forgiveness. guno, however, doesn't care about facts that don't buttress his hate of ethnic groups other than his own.

Hell is the suffering that comes from selfishness and hate both in this world and the next. guno should know all about that.

Of course Christianity is about charity and forgiveness, It's a shame that so called conservative christians have bastardized the name for political purposes and as an excuse to further their very un Christ like goals.

 

[Derideo_Te]

So, I would opine that it becomes illicit, from a theological perspective, when the use of fear becomes a hindrance to the development of faith or is based in a logical, measurable, and/or observable fallacy.

Thank you for your dissertation and I largely agree with your conclusion.

Now if we apply your opinion to the OP we have a considerable number, in the millions, whose faith is hindered by their fear.

Given that you are a theist that essentially means that both atheists and theists can see the fallacy of those that embrace their religion through illicit fear.

And to reference your earlier post expounding that everyone exploits illicit fear we have millions who are at the mercy of those who would take advantage of that fear for their own nefarious ends.

The proof of that exploitation is what has driven this fear motivated demographic to the polls on numerous occasions to cast their ballots essentially for their beliefs but in practice electing those who merely pay lip service to them.

To an atheist like myself that is the height of unethical practices but it is defended on the basis of expediency. Look at what happened when Bush sr refused to embrace the extremist religious right. That is the lesson that drives the current pandering to this demographic IMO.

Would that it were otherwise!

 

[BluePhantom]

So, I would opine that it becomes illicit, from a theological perspective, when the use of fear becomes a hindrance to the development of faith or, from a secular perspective, is based on a logical, measurable, and/or observable fallacy.

Allow me to add one caveat to that. There are those people who truly believe what they are saying is the truth. They believe with 100% of their heart and soul that hell is real and you will burn if you don't follow God's law. I am not sure I am willing to say that they are using fear illicitly because they are not attempting to deceive, they are simply misguided. This is true for any category. There are those on the left that truly believe that the Republicans are waging a "War on Women", for example. They are not "bad" people. They are just idiots who have soaked up the propaganda. The same is true of some one the right so it goes both ways. Leaders like this can be very dangerous especially when they are charismatic, educated, and can speak with eloquence and command. These are the Hitlers, Jim Jones, and David Koreshes of the world. They are extremely disturbed people and not to be taken lightly. But they are, in effect, crazy, for lack of a better word. Misguided at best...crazy at worst.

Worse are those who know the truth and still peach a message of fear. A woman named Byllie Brim is a noted evangelical expert on Revelation who is a frequent contributor on several televangelist programs. Now I have watched this woman and listened to her and let me tell you....this women knows her shit on Revelation. Now as a side note, Revelation is the book in the Bible that I am strongest and most knowledgeable about by far. So when she is breaking down the Greek and discussing historical events that are applicable to Revelation, I know exactly what she is referring to. However, she still advances a futuristic, fear based interpretation of Revelation. This is critical because I know by what she is referring to that she is reporting selectively...in other words she is leaving critical things out in her teaching that there is no way possible she could not know. More importantly, to not disclose it changes the entire context of a given passage. So she is is doing the worst thing imaginable, in my mind. That is she knows good and well what the book is about, but reports it differently in order to scare people. But as I said before, that happens in politics from both sides, economics, race relations....it's not unique to Christianity, but boy it pisses me off when I see it.

 

[BluePhantom]

Thank you for your dissertation and I largely agree with your conclusion.

I do have a tendency to blah, huh? Would that I could learn brevity.

Now if we apply your opinion to the OP we have a considerable number, in the millions, whose faith is hindered by their fear.

Given that you are a theist that essentially means that both atheists and theists can see the fallacy of those that embrace their religion through illicit fear.

And to reference your earlier post expounding that everyone exploits illicit fear we have millions who are at the mercy of those who would take advantage of that fear for their own nefarious ends.

The proof of that exploitation is what has driven this fear motivated demographic to the polls on numerous occasions to cast their ballots essentially for their beliefs but in practice electing those who merely pay lip service to them.

To an atheist like myself that is the height of unethical practices but it is defended on the basis of expediency. Look at what happened when Bush sr refused to embrace the extremist religious right. That is the lesson that drives the current pandering to this demographic IMO.

Would that it were otherwise!

I don't think there is anything in this section I can disagree with. I might merely add that it not only contributes to the current pandering but enhances the polarization of society across a broad spectrum of categories and topics. It's a shame too. Perhaps you and I should embark on a nation-wide tour giving seminars on how people of opposing viewpoints can find common ground.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

This is the bottom line on where I am coming from as a fundamentalist Christian. To address Guno's first question - understanding the mentality of a fundamentalist Christian. My hearts desire to is to walk with God all the days of my life. That is what I want. I want to walk with God. Abraham walked with God. Enoch walked with God and because of Jesus Christ dying on a cross for my sins and being raised on the 3rd day - I too - can now walk with God. I have been grafted into the family of Abraham by faith in Jesus Christ.

With that said, Amos 3:3 states this:

Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

How can a person walk with God if they are not in agreement with what God has said in His Word? We have to be saying what God is saying. We cannot be saying something different from what the Word of God is saying and continue to be in agreement with Him. We cannot come into agreement with man at the expense of falling out of agreement with God!

We need to teach what Jesus taught (Jesus taught about hell repeatedly in the New Testament because hell is real) We need to walk as Jesus walked - this is New Testament teaching, folks. Which is why I stated earlier that the disciples were all fundamentalist Christians! They took Jesus at His Word and they acted on His Word accordingly.

As we have already discussed the definition of the word - fundamental - I believe what I am trying to say here is that as a born again Christian I must take God's Word literally. There simply is no other way to take it! He isn't speaking in code. He is very clear in his Word as to what He wants from me.

Is this going to come into conflict with the world and those who have a world view that does not align itself with God's Word? Of course it will. Because they are not walking with God. If they were walking with God they would already be in agreement with His Word as it is written in the King James Bible! So how does the world know the love of God? By our love for one another. The greatest thing the body of Christ is lacking today is Unity. On the one hand we can no more be in agreement with false teachers than Paul was while he walked the earth. We must defend the faith. On the other hand Christians should not be at odds with one another in front of a dying world. You could liken it to shipmates fighting in a major storm on the high seas while the enemy is drilling a hole in the bottom of the boat! We're in this thing together and while we are not all in the same place or stage in our walk with God we must be compassionate one towards another so the world will see what the love of Christ has done in us! How else will they believe?

On Guno's second question - the world view of a Christian fundamentalist. My world view is biblical. I have a biblical world view. I see beyond the factions, wars, strife, disagreements to the one who is behind it all and his name is Satan. Satan is my enemy. Not Guno, not De, not any human being. Satan is our enemy and while he has blinded some to even believe he exists - those of us who know he does exist must be patient, longsuffering, kind, gentle, compassionate towards those who don't.

In closing, the world loves the world and if Believers were of the world and lived like the world the world would love us too. Because we are not of this world the world is going to hate us. Which is why some television evangelists are loved by the world. They are telling people what they want to hear. They are not preaching what is in the Word of God. They desire the praises of men more than the praises of God. Is there anything new under the sun?

Still if we desire to walk with God there is only one way to do it (not many). We must be in full agreement with Him and with His Word. Which is what the Fundamentalist Christians of the early church were about and what the Fundamentalist Christians of this century are all about. It's also why we can expect to be hated,persecuted, hunted down and killed for our faith just like the early Believers were.

Satan is not disturbed by a person who claims to be a Christian but not a fundamentalist - a person who is willing to alter the Scriptures in exchange for the worlds acceptance. Satan is disturbed by Fundamentalist Christians who stand on the Word of God and refuse to compromise it's truth. And that is where I stand.

Thanks for reading. Thank you for the thread, guno.