God is bad for you

[Ironside]

Well, the Scopes trial itself was in Tennessee. I don't believe in this sinister political plot to enslave our minds that Adrian is hinting at, so I couldn't begin to guess where it's headquarters might be.

Well I was only curious about it, as the time seemed about right.

Honestly, I think more people believe in ghosts and haunted houses (which are impossible, according to Christian doctrine) or astrology then do the 6 day creation story as scientific fact.

It seems to fit my understanding quite well, but it's still interesting why they are flexing thier muscles on creationism and intelligent design as the first have never been taken too serious and the second isn't contradicting with science (but it doesn't belong in science, but in philosophy or religious class).

And to thier help they are lumping in things that isn't the same (Big Bang, the formation of the solar system, the beginning of life has nothing to do with evolution), spreading pseudo-science, classifying that a scientiffic theory is the same as a regular theory, calling evolution darwinism and then attack darwinism (that would be about the same as to call the idea that the earth goes around the sun copernikaism or gallilism and then because they didn't think that the planets had eliptic paths, you say that they had wrong and because of that, does the sun go around the earth), attacking weak spots in those theories (ok that part is actually good) and then uses the logic that "you're wrong because you cannot explain everything, thus I'm right", without needing any proof that they are right.

As they are only a minor fragment of the US society, why are they fighting with thier tooth and nails for this? And they are certainly using (and getting... from somewere) heavy firepower for this crusade too.

[Don Corleone]

I mean Adrian, how am I supposed to interpret a statement like this:

The article confirms something else I have been thinking for quite some time, i.e. that the movement to replace the teaching of evolution by that of creationism or intelligent design is in fact a political movement. It is not about religion or science, it is about power.

This is a heck of an indictment against Christian fundamentalists. While I think they're wrong, that's a long way from attributing sinister motives to what they preach as you do here...

[Don Corleone]

Ironside, your question seems to mirror Adrian's musings somewhat, so let me offer to you an alternate explanation as to why creationists are so hard over on their beliefs.

There is a fundamental problem (no pun intended) with fundamentalist doctrine.The Bible contains revealed truths and it contains metaphorical truths. Which are which? If you believe God has preserved the Bible through the centuries to say what He wants it to say (and I actually do), it can be a little scary to think that different people have interpreted the same passages different ways over time. It challenges your notion of the universality of God's mesage and the constancy of it. One way around that is to make a 'leap of faith' if you will that "no, I'm not going to play this game of interpretation. Every last word means exactly what it says, there are no metaphors in there". This approach has the advantage of simplicity, but it also runs smack into scientific evidence controverting many biblical tales when taken literally.

So I would say that fundamentalism has less to do with mind control than it does to do with one approach of trying to reconcile the universality of God's message with the fact that it can be interpreted many different ways. I happen to believe that God tells me exactly what He wants me to in it's passages, and it doesn't scare me at all that other people will read the same passages and reach different conclusions. In my mind, God has already solved this problem, as anyone who honestly stives to know Him will not be disappointed. I think fundamentalists are afraid that I am wrong, and seek to come up with a constant, eternal message to make certain that God is constant. I don't think such steps are necessary. After all, our intelligence mirrors his (in a lesser way). Surely, He is more capable of allegory than we are.

[Azi Tohak]

Here is the full 'article' (if you can call this disgrace an article):

http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html

Beyond that, I don't know what else to say.

Azi

[Ironside]

So in essence, what yo're saying is that they are "only" trying to keep any ideas that can threaten thier viewpoints away from thier children (and that by imposing thier views on the rest of us). And that thier power compared to thier size is because they scream the loudest?

Possibly, but I still feel that there's some bigger issue behind it. Of course will not the average Joe naturallly know about it, for him it's on a personal level.

The "comprimise" to attemt to have intelligent design in science class for example. The Bible never mention evolution and it can certainly have enough space in other classes. What's fundamentallistic about it? What words in the Bible is defended by it?

And the very heavy artillery used, comes from either heavy devotion or some kind of support.

[Adrian II]

After all, our intelligence mirrors his (in a lesser way). Surely, He is more capable of allegory than we are.

Aha! That is the attitude of the great Christian philosophers: humility, attention to every little detail of the holy texts, the courage to doubt one's own interpretation, and the courage to take every word personally, as you so eloquently explained, because that is the essence of any message from man to man or from God to man. I may not believe in God, but Bible stories never stop to fascinate me for that reason. There is always more to them than meets the eye. But there is nothing in them if we don't take those stories personally, if we don't acknowledge that they speak of us, not of some distant past.

[Don Corleone]

Ironside, I think it goes beyond their children. I think they are seeking to protect themselves from that which does not fit into their worldview. The problem I have with fundamentalism is that despite the fact that its adherents claim to believe in the omnipotence of God, they have limited Him to the depth of their own imaginations. How can God say the same exact words to every soul that has ever read His text and have it mean what He wants it to mean? I have no idea, as I am not Him. What I do know is that at no time did Christ claim that believing in Genesis in a literal fashion (and there were competing cosmological theories available at the time) was vital for salvation. If He did say it, His followers didn't consider it important enough to write down (and they wrote down a fair amount).

Adrian, I am deeply heartened to see that you have not indeed disappeared into thin air. ~ I agree with much of what you are saying. And if it turns out you are right and I am wrong and that in fact there is no divine inspiration contained within the Bible, I agree that I will be none the poorer for familiarizing myself with its contents.

[Don Corleone]

I'm with SOS... BP I don't think I have ever agreed with you more than I do with what you just said. Believe it or not, the faithful can be as opposed to mindless dogma as anyone, and it is here that most great evils of religion reside.

And you're absolutely right about everyone needing to put their spin on Christ's message, which is why when the two conflict, I have to chose Jesus over St. Paul, every time, and this is why I will never be a good Protestant, no matter how many years of my life I attend Methodist services. At the end of the day, I will never believe in salvation though belief in Christ alone. I do not believe anyone can earn their way into heaven, but I certainly believe you can earn your way back out again.

[Byzantine Prince]

Thank you for the kind words guys.

I will never be a good Protestant, no matter how many years of my life I attend Methodist services.

You shouldn't feel concerned with that. The organizations of Christian dogma came 300 years after Christ himself, how can they possibly represent anything close to Christ, or God? How could they possibly control who goes to heaven or what is a sin? Those things were pre-determined from Jewish law... they have little to nothing to do with Jesus. If everyone was more like Jesus, there wouldn't be a need to even define 'sin' in my opinion.

[Adrian II]

I think Christ was the only true Christian, because every dogmatic leader and martyr after him have changed his message. It's quite obvious if you read the Bible actually, there are many contradictions between what Christ says and what Paul later added.

So you have actually read the Bible with an eye to what Christ truly meant, Byzantine Prince? It is hardly surprising that you come up with contradictions; there are too many contradictions in the Bible to mention in a single post. What I find hard to believe is that people try to find a consistent message in it. There is none, there are only grounds for reflection. If I were a Christian I would (like Don Corleone) seek an answer to questions such as: is salvation reached by good works (as per the synoptic gospels) of by faith (as John would have it)? The answer would be my own, based upon my own choice - not 'God's word' or 'Christ's message'.

Being a non-Christian, who regards Christ as a legendary figure at best and the Bible as the intellectual inheritance of an historic age, I tend to look for the wisdom contained in the many stories and allegories. I apply them to myself and try to gauge the 'hidden' meanings in them -- obviously I don't mean secret codes or alien messages to the human race or that sort of nonsense, but alternative interpretations that may not be obvious at first sight. I seek answers to all sorts of questions, too.

Even us non-believers are in the belly of the whale, to use a Biblical allegory.