1) New blog on the kid : As Someone Said : You Catch More Flies with Honey than with Vinegar, 2) Creation vs. Evolution : A Pretty Vile Attack on "Christian Fundamentalists" - but a Parodic One, 3) Great Bishop of Geneva! : Apostatic Rejection of "Fundamentalism" in 1994, 4) Dwight Makes a Calmer Attack on Catholic Fundies
Christian fundamentalism is the insanity that believes what Bronze Age herders, Iron Age farmers and people in the Roman Empire wrote thousands of years ago in the Bible and ignores what sensible scientists write today.
OK, Bronze age and Iron Age and Roman Empire are of course taken together a shorter time period than today?
And scientists are of course more numerous than farmers and herders and people (whatever category of people that refers to, perhaps the common people?), not just are today, but were back then?
I sense I start feeling ironic when I try to get the things straight from this quote.
In the late 18th Century and 19th Century scholars applied textual criticism to the Bible and found that not all the bible was written by the supposed authors. Some Christians decided that the Bible wasn’t all literally true and inerrant, those became Liberal Christians while others couldn’t face the idea that the Bible isn’t all literally true and they became the Christian fundamentalists.
Ok, in other words, the Fundamentalists are those agreeing with their fathers, right?
What an admission!
Roman Catholics from Augustine in the 4th Century onwards have accepted that parts of the Bible are allegorical. While at same time accepting that all parts of the Bible are literal.
I think the admission is being qualified. And that the qualification in its turn is being qualified. The latter qualification was in fact done by me. Wikias can be edited by anyone.
Some of the sillier Christian fundamentalists even believe that the version of the Bible that King James authorized in 1611 is the only true version. That type of fundy is mostly in the United States. Sensible people who understand History realize that older versions of the Bible that archaeologists have found are closer to the original texts. It's obvious isn't it? Sensible people also realize that modern translations of the Bible taking account of archaeological finds are likely to be more reliable than the King James version.
As a Catholic I am very far from endorsing precisely King James. I stick by Douay Rheims - also a goody.
But no, it is NOT obvious that a different text found in a very old copy is closer to the original.
When people copy by hand (and that still happens, before any printing which isn't a reprint) one can fiddle with the text.
But if very many different copies (made by different copiers!) are there, the odd one out can be corrected - or if it is too late, laid aside and not read.
As you know, reading books will tear and wear them. With paper backs that have no binding, it happens very quickly, even, with such old books less quickly. BUT it certainly happened quicker with copies that were read than with copies that were laid aside.
Which means that it is the odd one out which will be found more than thousand years later.
The Sinaiticus was found in the Sinai monastery. The researchers asked "what is this?" and the monastics answered "we don't know". The researchers thought it meant they couldn't recognise a Bible as such. I think it meant they weren't sure whether to call it a Bible or not, considering it had been laid aside due to scribal errors.
Some of which favour Watchtower Society and other sects denying the divinity of Christ - by missing one extra clear verse.
They forget to mention that Arians also had Bibles and may have left out that verse on purpose.
When they can Christian fundamentalist Schools teach Creationism instead of Evolution and teach a wide range of Science subjects from a Christian fundamentalist, Biblical viewpoint. The Children at these schools don't get the type of Education that will prepare them properly for life outside.
And I agree this is not preparing us to getting harrassed by Evolutionists, as I was when NOT getting taught in a Christian school. Some Evolutionists obviously think they have to start harrassing us earlier. How about outlawing at least certain levels of harrassment?
Other Fundamentalist Christian families Homeschool their children which also doesn't prepare them for life outside their own community.
At least it doesn't prepare them for a life within an Evolutionist community by harrassing them for Creationism early on.
Know what? I enjoyed being home schooled, the few months I had of it. I did NOT enjoy being harrassed outside homeschooling.
Fundy loon is a contraction of the expression "fundamentalist lunatic." A "fundy loon" is someone who is considered, by rationalists, to be absolutely totally stark raving mad by virtue of their primitive beliefs.
Oh, yes, it is RATIONALISTS who consider them such. Doesn't it strike the reader that the rationalist is, if so, somewhat biassed?
Rationalists used to mean people who thought "anything is up for rational debate". Now it means people who stamp people who don't agree with them as people you can't have rational debates with.
And it is a question of being mad because of PRIMITIVE beliefs - in other words for agreeing with what your ancestors thought normal.
Doesn't that strike you (if any reader is that unbiassed!) as a rather strange criterium to judge about madness from?
These unfortunate people have often been so indoctrinated since childhood that no amount of logic or facts can relieve them of their affliction.
I feel more afflicted by harrassment (including but not limited to an ostracism where I live and roam), than by my beliefs. I'd really prefer to be relieved of harrassers (including now mostly people who behind my back contribute to an exclusion, for my being a Creationist) than of my beliefs.
And for the record, I was NOT indoctrinated into Creationism since childhood, I was if anything indoctrinated into Evolution. But not even that in the way some parents indoctrinate children into evolution by pointing fingers at Creationists.
I was just given Evolution first, and only then Creationism - which I preferred, most of the time since tasting it.
I forgot to give the reference:
This article didn't forget to give the reference. It gave it as, second reference:
Life in a Christian 'fundamentalist' school
By Tim Johns and Emma Hallett BBC News
12 June 2014 From the section England
And BBC is so unbiassed, right? No Marxist or Atheist bias at all?
For 29-year-old Jonny Scaramanga, who attended Victory Christian School in Bath until he was 14, the experience was "horrendous".
Until he was FOURTEEN? That means he left it before school quitting age. And THAT means he left it because he wasn't happy there.
How many NON-Fundy schools come with such saving clauses?
He said that at his school - which closed in 2000 - pupils had to learn and recount sections of Biblical scripture in order to pass any subject.
OK, but perhaps this school is not typical of those which did NOT close in 2000?
Or perhaps Jonny Scaramanga is not the most typical student the school had:
Conversely Ben Medlock, 35, who co-founded the SwiftKey smartphone keyboard app and attended the same school as Mr Scaramanga, said his experience had been "broadly positive".
Now, while BBC article mentions the experience of Ben Medlock, the liberapaedia article referring to the BBC article certainly doesn't.
Hans Georg Lundahl
Monday after III Lord's Day in Lent