an atheist viewpoint

thoughts from a non-theist

When is a Fundie Not a Fundie?

Never, it seems.

Despite their attempts to distance themselves from the name, Len, Jon (aka Fortigurn, aka Mr ‘Relevant Scholarly Literature’, and other Christadelphians who’ve recently started posting here are very much fundamentalists. The only difference between them and the ‘every word is literally true’ brigade is the degree that they’re willing to bend the meaning of the texts.

Jon, Len et al, rationalise their faith in nonsense by deluding themselves into believing that the texts don’t say what they say. That they can’t just say ‘no, obviously it’s nonsense’ shows that they are trapped by their need to believe the Bible to be without error or mistake (other than “copyist or translation” errors – though how these are different from plain mistakes, or can even be recognised as such, is beyond me).

They’ll appeal to ‘relevant scholarly literature’, seemingly putting those texts ahead of the Bible they claim to believe, and they distort the beliefs of their chosen sect by claiming that Christadelphians AREN’T Bible literalists, when the vast majority of them very much are.

They may deny it, they may even (in the case of Len) describe other Christadelphians as ‘YEC believing idiots’ (or words to that effect), but they still can’t bring themselves to admit that the Bible is plain wrong about a lot of things…..in other words, they’re as fundie as they come.

Single Post Navigation

17 thoughts on “When is a Fundie Not a Fundie?

  1. The Bible is plain wrong about a lot of things.My objection to you is that you you're equally content to attack straw men or the genuine article, and you're equally content using valid and invalid arguments. Indeed you seem to have a preference for attacking straw men with invalid arguments, especially ad hominem, question begging, and unsupported assertion.The running example so far has been the flood. The Bible presents a myth about a man building a giant boat. It provably does not, however, describe a global flood. Rather than sticking to the facts, that the account is mythical and the boat an impossible feat of engineering, you insist on arguing in addition that the myth is about a global flood, when it provably isn't, and then you refuse to engage the evidence on that question.That's particularly disgraceful when you claim to have left your fundamentalist parents' cult to go join the evidence-based community of rational thinkers. The evidence-based community isn't a denomination, so you can't join it by declaring yourself a member: you have to actually start basing your views in evidence.One trivial example: Fortigurn has already been identified by name on your blog. So who is "Jason," and why are you convinced that Fort is he? This is Fortigurn:http://www.redbubble.com/people/jonburkehttp://tw.linkedin.com/pub/jonathan-burke/1b/307/308http://bibleapologetics.wordpress.com/

  2. Name error corrected

  3. The difference in a local flood and a global flood is in the fact that you can walk to higher ground to escape a local flood – especially if you know about the coming local flood for 120 years before it hits.It's plain and simple denial of the proper textual analysis in favor of a modern attempt to escape ridicule caused by an obvious biblical fable.However, if a person can believe stories of talking snakes, talking donkeys, men living 930 years, sticks turning into snakes, angels and other spirit beings carrying swords and shields, possessions by evil spirits and holy spirits, men speaking in unlearned languages and other such nonsense – they will believe anything as long as it's in the Bible.So, why not believe in a global flood? they might as well, because it's no more ridiculous than a lot of the other ridiculous fables in the same Bible.Fundies, look around, there is no spirit world and no heavenly throne above the blue sky dome – we've been there and it isn't there and no water canopy either and no storehouses for the rain, snow and hail. Unlike the people in the fable of the tower of Babel, we did go up there to that blue sky dome and guess what? No heaven and no storehouses, no canopy and no solid dome of molten glass. The sky is not spread out and fastened at four corners like a tent for men to live in and no windows to pour water out of onto the earth below.

  4. "The difference in a local flood and a global flood is in the fact that you can walk to higher ground to escape a local flood – especially if you know about the coming local flood for 120 years before it hits."Yes, you can walk to higher ground. Or, if it suits the whim of your deity, you can refrain from walking to higher ground and build a boat. This is not a cogent argument that the story was intended to describe a "global" flood, for an audience that neither knew nor cared about the extent or the shape of the earth."So, why not believe in a global flood? they might as well, because it's no more ridiculous than a lot of the other ridiculous fables in the same Bible."Quite so! The only reason not to regard the story as describing a global flood, is that it wasn't describing one.

  5. Right, let's try a story from the ministry of Jesus.Len, Fortigurn, when Jesus drove the evil spirits into the herd of pigs…..why was a Jew farming pigs?

  6. "The Bible is plain wrong about a lot of things."So why are you a member of a sect that believes it isn't?

  7. You should stick to areas where the fundies are weak.Reality.Yeah, they have a book. Yeah, it can be twisted to say almost anything. Make them try and prove YHWH or the supernatural exists.

  8. Alex B said… Right, let's try a story from the ministry of Jesus. Len, Fortigurn, when Jesus drove the evil spirits into the herd of pigs…..why was a Jew farming pigs?Since CDs don't believe in the demons, another question would be; how does one human mental illness change and grow into a herd of animal mental illnesses and infect a herd of pigs?*or two mental illnesses, depending on which gospel you read.

  9. Len said…Quite so! The only reason not to regard the story as describing a global flood, is that it wasn't describing one.It wasn't describing a local flood either or there would have been no need to include the wild birds in the boat.It's another one of those allegory thingies like the Hagar, Isaac and Ishmael allegory of the law covenant….okay, how about this, it was a Babylonian story to frighten their children and the Jews in Babylon thought it was cute and put it in their holy book to frighten their children.Whatever…it's still freaking nonsense.

  10. "when Jesus drove the evil spirits into the herd of pigs…..why was a Jew farming pigs?"Gadara was one of the "ten cities" collectively called "Decapolis." It was founded under the Ptolemies with a Greek autonomous government, a Hellenistic culture, and a population of Greek colonists. Around the time of Christ it had a mixed population of Jews and Gentiles. It's one of the more likely sites in Galilee where pigs would be raised; their owners were most likely Gentiles, but could be secular or non-observant Jews. A similar incident would be unthinkable in Judea, where the Sanhedrin had sufficient power to enforce a prohibition.(As an aside, Israel today has an analogous situation, where Tel Aviv is so notoriously secular that pork can by purchased there, although it's usually sold under the euphemistic name "white steak.")This is another good example of an instance where there are plenty of ways you can attack this story, but you've decided to attack it at its strongest point. A little familiarity with the relevant history, etc., would help you avoid doing that so you could focus your energy on attacking its weak points.

  11. That's a good answer, doesn't alter the rest of the story being balls though.

  12. Anyway, I asked you a question Len – why are you a member of a sect that believes things you disagree with, and that you've dubbed 'idiots'?

  13. Len, Fortigurn, when Jesus drove the evil spirits into the herd of pigs…..why was a Jew farming pigs?Since CDs don't believe in the demons, another question would be; how does one human mental illness change and grow into a herd of animal mental illnesses and infect a herd of pigs?*or two mental illnesses, depending on which gospel you read.Interested in how he'll twist this question!Then make him prove god exists. Stop fiddling around with some old book and get back to looking at reality.

  14.      My interpretation of that story was that jews and gentiles were mixed in the same community and the swineherd was clearly a gentile. The (unintended?) point was that Jesus thought it was fun to ruin the livelihood of an outsider.

  15. The most probable scenario is that Jesus and his 12 pals saw a herd of swine being raised by a Jew and it pissed them off and they got all indignant with self-righteousness and herded the swine over a cliff into the sea.

  16. Len doesn't seem to want to answer my question. I'm lost as to why he remains in a sect that he considers populated by 'idiots'

  17. Come on Len! Why the sudden silence?

Write what you like, but don't cry if you act like a dick and get banned for it

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: