Post Reply
Page 3 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3
Switch to Forum Live View Christian fundamentalists: the national threat
3 years ago  ::  Oct 13, 2011 - 3:16PM #21
Do_unto_others
Posts: 7,827

Oct 12, 2011 -- 11:48PM, Roodog wrote:


Oct 8, 2011 -- 1:16PM, amcolph wrote:


Oct 8, 2011 -- 10:34AM, TPaine wrote:


Oct 8, 2011 -- 2:48AM, Roodog wrote:


Oct 1, 2011 -- 8:26PM, Sacrificialgoddess wrote:

People are people. Some Christian Fundamentalists out there likely have no problem with murdering those who disagree with them. When talking about people, the No True Scotsman defense is doomed to fail.




No Christian Fundamentalist I know is that murderous. They leave the punishment of unbelievers up to God, and rightfully so. No Baptist will strap a harness of Simtex to himself and most definitely will not booby trap their own kids.



However, the "Reverend" Donald Spitz and his Army of God considers murderers such as Scott Roeder, Paul Hill, James Charles Kopp, John Salvi III, Michael F. Griffin, and Eric Robert Rudolph (the Atlanta Centennial Olympic Park bomber) to be American heroes.




And it was Pat Robertson--well known leader of the Christian Right--who called for the assasination of the President of Venezuala and other foreign leaders of whom Fundamentalists disapprove





Yet that has no religious connection to whatsoever



Yes, Roodog, it does. Pat Robertson is the "REVEREND" Pat Robertson. And, T Paine gave you a list of murdered people hailed as "American heroes" by the "REVEREND" Donald Spitz. We gave you the Ugandan "Kill the gays Bill" example that was sponosred by American 'religious' groups.


I also remember when the "REVEREND" Jimmy Swaggart told his world-wide TV audience that, "If a man so much as LOOKED at me 'funny', I'd KILL him and tell God he died."


You saying there are no "religious connections" to murder is preposterous and, in the face of much evidence, disingenuous.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Oct 14, 2011 - 1:16AM #22
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

Let's face it guys, Pat Robertson is an addleheaded jackass and has been for a couple of decades. This guy lost credibility with me when he ran for president.


He really stepped on his tallywhacker when he suggested that Hugo Chavez be assassinated. That is a decision to be made by a politician, not a clergyman. Given his position he had no right to call for such a thing.


I as one who has served the people in Government do see the value of an assassination in preference to a war. How many millions of people would have been spared if Hitler was assassinated before 1939? What if we were able to take out Osama Bin Laden in 1999? Would we be in Afghanistan if we had gotten rid of Bin Laden before 2001?


Whayou people are talking about sounds like a dark Hollywood fantasy. My main arguement is that the Church no longer has the power to do what you are suggesting. The Church lost such power when one could change church membership with impugnity. The days of any denomination having such a monopoly over the people are long gone. There are too many liberal churches in the Deep South for that sort of tyranny to ensue.

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Oct 14, 2011 - 9:02AM #23
amcolph
Posts: 16,331

Oct 14, 2011 -- 1:16AM, Roodog wrote:


 


What you people are talking about sounds like a dark Hollywood fantasy.



Based on personal experience and observation.  As far as I am concerned "Dispensational Fundamentalist" is a synonym for "ignorant fascist bigot."  If I had any evidence to the contrary I would gladly consider it, but I don't.


There are too many liberal churches in the Deep South for that sort of tyranny to ensue.




That was my point--that's what keeps these people in check.  But they still want this to be a "Christian Nation" where only their kind of Christianity is allowed.  The rest of us are "Christ-hating Bible-deniers" who belong to "Godless cults" and consequently would not be entitled to civil rights.


Consider, for example, the Christian group behind Gov. Perry's candidacy--the New Apostolic Reformation--look at what their beliefs and goals are.  They are avowedly Dominionist.  Perry is the Dominionist canditate and we can say farewell to the Constitution if he is elected.

This post contains no advertisements or solicitations.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Oct 14, 2011 - 9:31AM #24
davelaw40
Posts: 19,669

Oct 14, 2011 -- 9:02AM, amcolph wrote:


 


Based on personal experience and observation.  As far as I am concerned "Dispensational Fundamentalist" is a synonym for "ignorant fascist bigot."  If I had any evidence to the contrary I would gladly consider it, but I don't.\





You do and you have-yet you ignore it-namely myself.

Non Quis, Sed Quid
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Oct 14, 2011 - 12:19PM #25
amcolph
Posts: 16,331

Oct 14, 2011 -- 9:31AM, davelaw40 wrote:


Oct 14, 2011 -- 9:02AM, amcolph wrote:


 


Based on personal experience and observation.  As far as I am concerned "Dispensational Fundamentalist" is a synonym for "ignorant fascist bigot."  If I had any evidence to the contrary I would gladly consider it, but I don't.\





You do and you have-yet you ignore it-namely myself.




Then I may well be wrong.   I never took you for the kind of person who would set dogs on Jehovah's Witnesses canvassers or denounce mainline Christians as "Godless cults."

This post contains no advertisements or solicitations.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Oct 14, 2011 - 12:25PM #26
davelaw40
Posts: 19,669

and I never would-but my beliefs line up clearly as a dispensational fundamentalist

Non Quis, Sed Quid
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Oct 14, 2011 - 12:58PM #27
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

Oct 14, 2011 -- 9:02AM, amcolph wrote:


Oct 14, 2011 -- 1:16AM, Roodog wrote:


 


What you people are talking about sounds like a dark Hollywood fantasy.



Based on personal experience and observation.  As far as I am concerned "Dispensational Fundamentalist" is a synonym for "ignorant fascist bigot."  If I had any evidence to the contrary I would gladly consider it, but I don't.


There are too many liberal churches in the Deep South for that sort of tyranny to ensue.




That was my point--that's what keeps these people in check.  But they still want this to be a "Christian Nation" where only their kind of Christianity is allowed.  The rest of us are "Christ-hating Bible-deniers" who belong to "Godless cults" and consequently would not be entitled to civil rights.


Consider, for example, the Christian group behind Gov. Perry's candidacy--the New Apostolic Reformation--look at what their beliefs and goals are.  They are avowedly Dominionist.  Perry is the Dominionist canditate and we can say farewell to the Constitution if he is elected.





I am a theological Fundamentalist/Dispensationalist, in my exchanges with you on this and other threads do, I come across as a fascist?


I am aware of a sociological Fundamentalism which I am quite wary of, The Church should treat Christians like adults.

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Oct 16, 2011 - 12:28PM #28
Do_unto_others
Posts: 7,827

Oct 14, 2011 -- 1:16AM, Roodog wrote:


Let's face it guys, Pat Robertson is an addleheaded jackass and has been for a couple of decades. This guy lost credibility with me when he ran for president.


He really stepped on his tallywhacker when he suggested that Hugo Chavez be assassinated. That is a decision to be made by a politician, not a clergyman. Given his position he had no right to call for such a thing.



I agree with your "addleheaded jackass" appelation, but this flies directly counter to your previous statement that: "Yet that has no religious connection to whatsoever". Robertson is an addleheaded jackass CLERGYPERSON, which was my point.


Oct 14, 2011 -- 1:16AM, Roodog wrote:

My main arguement is that the Church no longer has the power to do what you are suggesting.



Your assertion is unfounded, considering the many, many world-wide bully pulpits "the Church" commands on the airwaves and the internets.

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 3 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook