Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

It’s Only Fundamentalist Christians They Hate

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Arden Chatfield explains that the Darwinian narrative apologists don’t hate all Christians. That would be wrong says he. They only hate fundamentalist Christians and that’s okay because the fundamentalists, he explains, desire to enslave and dominate others.

Let’s dissect this a bit.

Wikipedia defines a Christian fundmentalist as a Christian who believes in

the inerrancy of the Bible, the virgin birth of Christ, the doctrine of substitutionary atonement, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, and the authenticity of his miracles.

According to this 2002 CNN/Time Poll

CNN/Time Poll conducted by Harris Interactive. June 19-20, 2002. N=1,003 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.1.

“Which of these statements comes closest to describing your feelings about the Bible? The Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally, word for word. The Bible is the word of God, but not everything in it should be taken literally, word for word. The Bible is a book written by men and is not the word of God.”

To be taken literally: 36% of all adults

So roughly 70 million adult Americans are “fundamentalist” Christians.

Boy oh boy, Arden. That’s a lot of people to hate. Are you sure you have that much hate in you?

And what exactly is your definition of “enslave” and “indoctrinate”? Pardon me for asking but it seems that putting a sticker in a biology textbook saying that evolution is a theory, not a fact, falls a bit short of enslaving and indoctrinating doesn’t it?

Indoctrinating, at the least, would be like having your pet story of past evolution be the only one that can be legally discussed in a public school biology class and even going so far as to make it illegal to even criticize that theory.

It also seems a bit of stretch for you to claim this is an attack on science. Attacks would be like burning down PZ Meyers’ laboratory in the dead of night like it was an Alabama fundamentalist Christian church.

What you are doing Arden, is called “projection”. You are assigning your own rotten motives and methods to others. Shame on you.

Comments

Design detection is clearly not enough to prove ID beyond a shadow of a doubt. Designer detection-face to face encounter with the actual presiding engineer-remains the only way to genuinely satisfy us pilgrims hungering for a truly abiding verification of the theory. I really esteem this verse, Doug, because it reassures me that if I inquire persistently, the doors of perception should one day open, and the Designer will conference with me (and hopefully with you,too, someday!) up close and personal.

Conveniently the Darwinists don't demand similar weight of evidence in finding time and chance to be responsible for a past evolution that is unwitnessed and unrepeatable. Quite the double standard. Physicians, heal thyselves! -ds

apollo230
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
10:48 PM
10
10
48
PM
PDT
How about..."Sanctify them with the truth, Thy Word is truth?" I have read the Bible cover-to-cover several times. Usually I simply one book at a time and rarely do the front-to-back thing. Parts of the Bible are historical narrative, parts are prophetic (and in those cases often symbolic) and parts are doctrinal in nature. There is a lot to the book after all! One is able to know when something may be allegory rather than a literal statement by context, writer, audience, setting, style, and intent to mention a few ways Bible students come to the text. The ignorance of posters like jasonng or hamilton would be funny were it not so...well, isn't willful ignorance actually stupidity? It was Jesus, after all, who when confronted with a mob that seeked to exact judgement by stoning of a "woman taken in adultery", waited until they were paying attention and then said simply, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." They all walked away. Christians who believe the Bible is true have a lot of historical evidence on their side. They also have a relationship with their God that is more than mere words. Here is the theme of the teaching of the Bible as much as any, as endorsed by Christ himself: "One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the commandments, which is the most important?" "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.' The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'There is no commandment greater than these."radaractive
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
10:34 PM
10
10
34
PM
PDT
apollo230: Just curious, why is Matthew 7:7,8 one of your fave's? And why do you think it's important to ID?dougmoran
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
09:19 PM
9
09
19
PM
PDT
This thread is anoying. Statements like: [quote]Fundamentalism means taking the Bible literally, word for word. Thus: adulterers are stoned to death. Gays are like dogs and should be killed. In fact, capital punishment is the solution to LOTS of crimes ...[/quote] are comments about a fundimentalism that isn't part of the Christian faith. Christians have some strange idea that the Old Testament law was replaced by a new law of love in the New Testament. Though we Christians have, over the centuries, wresled with the balance of love and justice, and sometimes done a miserable job of it. As a rule, we have followed the Scriptures in recognizing this. However, ll this is beside the point. Please consider the initial quote: [quote]Arden Chatfield explains that the Darwinian narrative apologists don’t hate all Christians. That would be wrong says he. They only hate fundamentalist Christians[/quote] What definition is Arden Chatfield using for "fundimentalist Christians"? Is his view not any Christian that would consider that there is more to life than is offered by Random Mutation + Natural Selection? He seems to be saying, hey, if you want to be Christian, fine, no problem, as long as you don't question by sincerely held belief - the belief in neo-Darwinism. He further suggests, I think, that anyone who questions his sicerely held belief must be some sort of "fundimental Christian".bFast
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
08:57 PM
8
08
57
PM
PDT
One of my favorite biblical quotes is: "Ask, and it shall be given you: seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened." (Matthew 7:7,8) A fine set of guidephrases for all those who would seek to clinch the case for intelligent design. Best regards, apollo230apollo230
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
07:20 PM
7
07
20
PM
PDT
Hamilton: You seem like an intelligent chap, though your logic makes no sense at all. In any case, I suggest you take up the challenge you just put in front of fundamentalist christians who may not have read the bible cover to cover: go study the bible cover to cover yourself. When you're done, come back here quickly to tell us all about what you've learned. We'll be all ears then.dougmoran
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
06:39 PM
6
06
39
PM
PDT
Scott- nicely done. But Hamilton's post wasn't much better than jt636's.dougmoran
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
06:26 PM
6
06
26
PM
PDT
"In fact, capital punishment is the solution to LOTS of crimes, from children disrespecting their parents to women having sex before marriage." We'd send some horrifying fundamentalists over to greet you, but given their sheer number a couple dozen are probably on their way. Maybe you should board up your windows before they start singing hymns outside your door.jasonng
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
06:20 PM
6
06
20
PM
PDT
And by the way, that wasn't apologetics I was just doing there... that's just basic data that any student of philosophy should know.Scott
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
05:30 PM
5
05
30
PM
PDT
Well, okay. Fundamentalism means taking the Bible literally, word for word. Thus: adulterers are stoned to death. Gays are like dogs and should be killed. In fact, capital punishment is the solution to LOTS of crimes, from children disrespecting their parents to women having sex before marriage. The earth was created in 6 days, about 6000 years ago. Dinosaurs and men lived at the same time. Jews? Burn in hell. Yeah, that seems like something I would be comfortable hating. What’s the problem?
I want to thank you, "jt636", for demonstrating for everyone how not to approach Biblical interpretation. I mean, what a laughable display of ignorance. See folks, this is the type of mentality we are up against - so you should feel encouraged. jt636, before you go and make an arse of yourself on another forum, you may want to at least get a basic working knowledge of Hermeneutics and then perhaps a dash of Covenant Theology.Scott
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
05:28 PM
5
05
28
PM
PDT
It's easy to see the antagonism against fundamentalism. Since this is a thread on the topic, I'll say many people set up "literal" interpretation of the Bible as a straw man. I personally know many people who have read the Bible cover-to-cover, and believe it to be true, and they act that way. They also understand figures of speech, and cringe at the term "literal". (Jesus called himself a door; does that mean he has a knob on his chest?) They understand the distinction between specific instructions given to specific people in time and history, and the application of underlying principles, separating the temporal from the timeless and universal. I am not a fundamentalist in the cultural sense of the word, but I am an ethical and philosophical essentialist. That drives some people nuts.Gandalf
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
04:29 PM
4
04
29
PM
PDT

The self-reporting aspect of the poll should be taken into consideration. The bible does prescribe quite a few horrors, and if 36% of the population truly followed the bible as the inerrant word of God, they would obey all these rules. This is obviously not the case.

More realistically, 36% of the population *believe* that the bible is literally true, but really, are guided in their faith by their religious leaders, not the bible. It would be interesting to query how many of the 36% have actually read the bible cover to cover.

I doubt there is more than a handful of people who truly act as if the bible is literal and absolute.

You too are ignorant of Christian theology like the previous butthead I banned in this thread but it doesn't appear to be belligerent so you can stay but I'm funneling your comments into the sandbox for screening until further notice. The New Testament of Jesus Christ describes a change in the relationship between man and God. Many of the draconian laws of the Old Testament were rendered obsolete by the messiah. That was the whole point of his coming - to serve as a loving and forgiving intermediary between a sinful mankind and the hardnosed unforgiving God of Abraham. This is very basic Christian theology that kids learn in Sunday school when they're little. At least that's when I learned it. The way to the Father is through the Son. -ds

Hamilton
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
03:11 PM
3
03
11
PM
PDT
I would like to ammend my previous posting by mentioning that not only does Christian fundamentalism deny the strong exclusion required by apologetes of Darwinian evolution by insisting on a creator, they also deny evolution itself. In fact the fundamentalist position on evolution by intelligent design would also be adversarial, based ultimately on lack of time (6000 years). This is in agreement with the Big Bang Theory which allows only 13.7 billion years, which is also insufficient to permit evolution as proposed by the Darwinian narrative. So, these apologetes must therefore also discredit as heresy the Big Bang. Note that while Christian fundamentalists do not consider the Big Bang to be heresy, how can they reconcile 6000 years with 13.7 billion years? Perhaps time is not a constant ...bigtalktheory
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
02:58 PM
2
02
58
PM
PDT

The Darwinian narrative is based on history by extrapolation ie. observable adaptativity implies unobservable evolution. This is the leap of faith that requires apologetics.

Denial of this extrapolation would be equivalent of heresy. In order to avoid being discredited, one must confess the strongly exclusive "evolution only by adaptation" doctrine.

Any inclusive doctrine that would permit evolution by any other means (eg intelligent design) would lead to a split amongst evolutionists.

The fundamentalist Christian position is the epitome of this kind of doctrine.

bigtalktheory
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
12:53 PM
12
12
53
PM
PDT

Well, okay. Fundamentalism means taking the Bible literally, word for word. Thus: adulterers are stoned to death. Gays are like dogs and should be killed. In fact, capital punishment is the solution to LOTS of crimes, from children disrespecting their parents to women having sex before marriage. The earth was created in 6 days, about 6000 years ago. Dinosaurs and men lived at the same time. Jews? Burn in hell.

Yeah, that seems like something I would be comfortable hating. What's the problem?

You're belligerantly ignorant and that was your last stupid inflammatory comment here. Get lost. -ds jt636
March 28, 2006
March
03
Mar
28
28
2006
12:34 PM
12
12
34
PM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply