Oh. My. Goodness. Ok, I'm done. I've just given 3 credible sources. You have missed the point of every single post I've written here - not sure if it's deliberate or not. Come back when you've done some real research and I'll play.
Georgiegirl
JoinedPosts by Georgiegirl
-
22
Fundi vs. Fundamentalist - T/J
by Georgiegirl ini started following thread when it was first posted, got busy, and then came back it was 12 pages long...so i'm starting a new one.. last night in my psych of religion class (which is incredibly fascinating, btw), i learned this:.
"fundamentalism" is a 20th century phenomenon.
it means that the believer has boiled down his beliefs to 5 fundamental beliefs:.
-
-
-
22
Fundi vs. Fundamentalist - T/J
by Georgiegirl ini started following thread when it was first posted, got busy, and then came back it was 12 pages long...so i'm starting a new one.. last night in my psych of religion class (which is incredibly fascinating, btw), i learned this:.
"fundamentalism" is a 20th century phenomenon.
it means that the believer has boiled down his beliefs to 5 fundamental beliefs:.
-
-
Georgiegirl
Will you really accept it? I wonder..... I think if it doesn't match what you believe fundamentalism to be, you will disgard it. And secondly, he was teaching the history of fundamentalism and what it originally meant. I can't see how in the world defining it as "something that could be documented" means he was being dishonest.
The FACTS are that "fundamentalism" as an organized movement began in the early 1900's. Again, whether or not that is its meaning in pop culture today, is not what I am saying. Many Muslims are called "fundamentalists" in today's pop culture and they certainly do not believe in that Jesus died for their sins.
Nevertheless, here are some links for you to read (besides the one I already posted). http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=230
http://www.fpcbozeman.org/Adult%20Class/Jan%2016%20Fundamentalism%20Session%201.pdf
http://www.religiousrightwatch.com/2006/10/fundamentalist_.html
If you want to do your own research into the history of fundamentalism, then I would suggest you start with Luther and the Five Solas. Google "five tenets of fundamentalism" for good place to start.
By the way, if you read anything of what I've posted here, you will see that inerrancy didn't mean everything in the bible was taken perfectly literally, but I'll leave you to find that little gem.
I'm not even sure what we are arguing about - I think it is two entirely separate things. I am presenting the history of a movement called Fundamentalism, and it appears to me as if you are arguing what it means now in today's culture and to you personally. And that I'm not going to argue.
-
22
Fundi vs. Fundamentalist - T/J
by Georgiegirl ini started following thread when it was first posted, got busy, and then came back it was 12 pages long...so i'm starting a new one.. last night in my psych of religion class (which is incredibly fascinating, btw), i learned this:.
"fundamentalism" is a 20th century phenomenon.
it means that the believer has boiled down his beliefs to 5 fundamental beliefs:.
-
-
Georgiegirl
Let me help you:
"Your professor would have been more honest to use that sort of description"
implies my professor is dishonest and lying. Surely you can see where that is offensive, rude, and assumptive. He was in no way being deceptive, he was teaching fact. Just because it doesn't jive with someone's opinion, doesn't mean he's being deceptive.
(deep breath) And accepted and moving on. I'm sorry for triggering on you. I know you are on your own journey of discovering as well. :)
-
22
Fundi vs. Fundamentalist - T/J
by Georgiegirl ini started following thread when it was first posted, got busy, and then came back it was 12 pages long...so i'm starting a new one.. last night in my psych of religion class (which is incredibly fascinating, btw), i learned this:.
"fundamentalism" is a 20th century phenomenon.
it means that the believer has boiled down his beliefs to 5 fundamental beliefs:.
-
-
Georgiegirl
Sigh. I guess this is the problem with internet boards instead of actual conversation. I'll try again.
As mindmelda correctly pointed out, and as I thought I indicated by saying it was a 20th century phenomena, the term fundamentalism was rooted in the above five tenets. At BTS - perhaps this link will help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist_Christianity (Let me know if you'd prefer an academic resource.) When you think about what was going on at the time, (Darwin, alot of rethinking of liberal theology where the Bible was not to be taken literally, it makes sense that this movement pushed back against this for a return to the basics.
At brotherdan - sorry, but I will take the intelligence and knowledge of my professor against yours anyday. I find your insinuations about his honesty and deception both offensive and judgmental, although not surprising. What a rude, dismissive, and assumptive attitude. You do not know him, his background, or his experience.
I do agree with you on one thing - I think you ARE a fundamentalist in the original sense of the word. Whether or not you are a "fundie" in the pop culture sense of the word, I do not know. I am merely giving you facts as to the origin of the term, not speculating on what it could mean to someone.
@atman - the two in particular that I remember are: Matthew 5 vs Luke 6 - Sermon on the Mount vs Sermon on the Plain (2 very distinct different geographical locations, wouldn't you say?). In common culture, it's become the Sermon on the Mount. Some people will say - oh, same thing, or parallel texts, etc. etc. For me, as a JW I was raised to believe there were NO contradictions in the Bible whatsoever, and anyone who said any different was lying. It can't be both places. We looked at the 10 commandments as well - you'll notice the order of the commandments changes. Ok, that might be considered a "little thing" but when you put it into context of formerly believing the bible was always in agreement with itself, it's a bit jarring.
-
22
Fundi vs. Fundamentalist - T/J
by Georgiegirl ini started following thread when it was first posted, got busy, and then came back it was 12 pages long...so i'm starting a new one.. last night in my psych of religion class (which is incredibly fascinating, btw), i learned this:.
"fundamentalism" is a 20th century phenomenon.
it means that the believer has boiled down his beliefs to 5 fundamental beliefs:.
-
-
Georgiegirl
I started following thread when it was first posted, got busy, and then came back it was 12 pages long...so I'm starting a new one.
Last night in my psych of religion class (which is incredibly fascinating, btw), I learned this:
"Fundamentalism" is a 20th century phenomenon. It means that the believer has boiled down his beliefs to 5 fundamental beliefs:
1. Inerrancy of the Bible
2. Virgin birth
3. Substitionary atonement of Jesus.
4. Body Resurrection of Jesus.
5. Authenticity of Christ's miralces and a pre-millenial second coming.
Reducing the body of Christianity down to these basics in scientific terms called reductionism. It's an over-simplification that disallows for complex and abstract thinking. So - you get a fundamentalist who is faced with direct contradictions either within the Bible or with something in the Bible and something provable by science (i.e. earth created in 6 days vs scientific fact that it's been around for millenia) and they are not psychology capable of complex abstract thinking and revert back to the fundamental thinking. They simply are incapable of accepting anything else.
For example, last night my professor pointed out some very basic discrepancies in the Bible - there I was, looking at the two verses side by side and I was blown away. How many hundreds of times had I read the same thing and NEVER put it together that there were differences? I believed what I believed and simply did not see anything different.
So, in my opinion, fundamentalism IS inherently dangerous because it doesn't allow for the natural development of abstract reasoning and logical thinking.
Another interesting thing we learned is that religious identity is usually not connected with belief, but rather because of the social connections. Belief/commitment follows (thus the success of love bombing and shunning). It seems to me that faith is rather simplistic - I believe it because I believe it - and I don't care what else you have to show me (stomps imaginary foot). It's thinking that requires complexity and the ability to reason and make good belief-based decisions.
-
28
Hey,Its almost 10 am,on a Sunday!!!
by aquagirl inhow come you all are not on the way to or at a meeting?lol.so what are you all doing instead?im lying in gthe sun on my couch,w/a cup of coffee,surrounded by cats and guitars and plants.the house is empty,and im listening to the icicles melt..bliss......
-
-
Georgiegirl
Drinking a huge cup of coffee, reading the forum, and getting ready for a full day of homework/studying (sigh). And desperately wishing for donuts. I've had such a craving lately. How wrong is it to go out specifically for donuts?
-
3
Shameless begging for help :)
by Georgiegirl inhi all!
i posted in the private discussion area about a school project; if you have time, will you please read my post?
gg.
-
-
Georgiegirl
BTT - and thanks to those of you who have already responded! :)
-
3
Shameless begging for help :)
by Georgiegirl inhi all!
i posted in the private discussion area about a school project; if you have time, will you please read my post?
gg.
-
-
Georgiegirl
Poppers - if you asked me a question, it didn't show up.
Also - I just finished reading the ..um...controversy on honorsthesis' thread. Hopefully the information I posted on the private side of the forum will help anyone with similar concerns.
-
3
Shameless begging for help :)
by Georgiegirl inhi all!
i posted in the private discussion area about a school project; if you have time, will you please read my post?
gg.
-
-
Georgiegirl
Hi all! I posted in the Private Discussion area about a school project; if you have time, will you please read my post? :)
gg
-
10
The name of this forum
by Georgiegirl inwe've all seen jw apologists come on here (or very confused jws'/jw wannabes) bellyaching about how misleading the name of this forum is.
it suddenly occurred to me - shouldn't that actually be a red flag for them?
the very organization that claims to be "his witnesses" and that it is the only religion out there sanctifying the name of jehovah (ergo, they are the "truth") - uses the watchtower as their homepage name.
-
-
Georgiegirl
We've all seen JW apologists come on here (or very confused JWs'/JW wannabes) bellyaching about how misleading the name of this forum is. It suddenly occurred to me - shouldn't that actually be a red flag for them? The very organization that claims to be "his witnesses" and that it is the ONLY religion out there sanctifying the name of Jehovah (ergo, they are the "Truth") - uses the WATCHTOWER as their homepage name. I wondered if maybe they had bought the .com version of this name, but if you go there, that's not them either.
You would think that a "spirit-directed" organization would have had the foresight to name itself after exactly who they claim to be - or at the very least - bought the domain names so no one else could.
They named themselves after exactly who their God really is - a publishing company with a flagship magazine. So much for making God's name known. Maybe I have a bad translation - maybe the Bible really says - and in all the earth you will make the name of my magazine known.
Ok. I'm going back to work. :)