Why not be a fundamentalist of any religion?

[IlluSionS667]

yep.  i made a living out of being funny, for quite a while.  well spotted.

You sure have the talent for it

i don't "support" it as such, but i've seen it in action, which isn't quite the same thing.

So then what is your opinion on labeling dissidents as extremists and censoring or defaming them by default?

answer the question.  or are you avoiding it because you can't?

Just look at your behavior in the Holocaust thread. You're completely unwilling to question your views on that topic, just because your uncle happens to some experiences...... without wondering whether or not his experiences can be explained in a context that doesn't imply genocide.

word-twisting.  again, i challenge you to examne your definition of the term "dogma".

Like I said, a dogma is something that cannot be questioned... something that must be accepted as fact without any argument whatsoever.

Have you at any time question whether 6 million people died during WW2? Have you at any time questioned whether all races are equal? Have you at any time questioned whether homosexuality is a deviant mental condition? If the answer is yes to all three, have you ever attempted to research these topics without judging a book by its cover?

yep, yep, yep and yep.

Can you give me some of the sources you consulted on those topics? For example, have you ever read anything by Kevin MacDonald, Richarch Lynn, Benjamin Friedman, Norman Finkelstein, David Hoggan or Tomislav Sunic?

next?

Didn't you just say in that other thread you no longer wanted to discuss with me?

[Lucifer]

Didn't you just say in that other thread you no longer wanted to discuss with me?

indeed i did, as we wereN'T discussing the holocaust.  i thought this thread was about religion, but as you've turned it into your pet soapbox, i won't be discussing anything with you here, either.

or can you wrest your brain away from your only topic of (and i use the term completely erroneously) "discussion"?

[Peter]

I have to say, in my experience, its the people around me, the literal conservative fundamentalists, who seem more informed.  My whole family and their friends are all theology experts. They've studied it, they're read it in its original languages, they discuss the history of which books were accepted into canon and why ,etc.  Some of my liberal Christian friends who accept gays, etc, they don't seem to have a clue why, other than "it's modern, I'm not old fashioned".  They don't read their bible, they don't read books - they're the ones who are sheep and taking what society tells them as gospel, imo.

I personally believe that if Jesus existed then he wanted believers to be fundamentalist and bigoted - thats why I have had such a difficult time keeping my own faith, because I'm not.  And I couldn't be a liberal Christian, I just don't personally believe thats an option.
 
When I hear Rowan Williams on the news causing controversy by throwing out another part of the bible "its ok to be gay, its ok to be another faith, its ok not to take stories literally"  I think damn, why are you even in this religion, let alone the Arch-bishop of it.

I spent a few months having regular meetings with Jehova's Witnesses, during which time I got a good look at their beliefs, did a fair bit of bible study with them and pointed out problems with their theology to them.  I found that they were very well versed in the bible, but that they were mind-numbingly scientifically illiterate, and were oblivious to the mountains of scientific evidence that were stacked against their young-earth creationist beliefs.  They had tentative explanations for various things, for instance they believed that a 'vapour canopy' could have provided the water for the flood, but it was obvious that it was something they'd read or been told and that they had no personal understanding of it, so they couldn't grasp the physical implications of it, even when I told them that the pressure at the Earth's surface would be equal to the entire column of water above it, giving a surface pressure greater than the current pressure at the bottom of the oceans, or when I pointed out that the gravitational energy released by such a quantity of water falling from space over a period of 40 days would be enough to boil the oceans and autoclave the entire planet.  It didn't matter what I tried; tree-ring studies, radioisotope dating, transitional fossils, human civilisations that pre-date the supposed creation of the Earth... it was like talking to a brick wall.

I can respect that they're being true to their beliefs in taking the bible literally, and realise that the moderates of many religions don't even seem to want to be a part of the religion the claim to follow, but I find the blind faith of fundamentalists to be every bit as bad as the SPAG (self-projection as God) of moderates.

[IlluSionS667]

Didn't you just say in that other thread you no longer wanted to discuss with me?

indeed i did, as we wereN'T discussing the holocaust.  i thought this thread was about religion

The thread I'm referring to is called "Truth behind the gates of Auschwitz" and explicitly deals with the Holocaust myth from the first post onward. It is that thread in which you said you didn't want to discuss anymore and where you illustrated a total lack of ability to question the views you hold dear. You calling me unable to question things is quite absurd, since I once used to believe in the Holocaust myth and many other 20th century myths myself... and only changed my mind due to years of research.

or can you wrest your brain away from your only topic of (and i use the term completely erroneously) "discussion"?

Not quite. I enjoy debate on any topic from philosophy and history to biology and physics. I only mentioned that other thread in this thread because you said you question everything, while your attitude in that particular thread suggests otherwise.

[Lucifer]

here we go again.  mind you, i do so enjoy doing this  :

[IlluSionS667]

here we go again.  mind you, i do so enjoy doing this  :

I guess all trolls enjoy their trolling, but that doesn't make it proper behavior. What's the point of spamming a thread with contentless posts when you're all out of arguments? You illustrate how inept you are?

[Lucifer]

here we go again.  mind you, i do so enjoy doing this  :

I guess all trolls enjoy their trolling, but that doesn't make it proper behavior. What's the point of spamming a thread with contentless posts when you're all out of arguments? You illustrate how inept you are?

that's funny - there must be an echo in here.  i could've sworn you've just posted that on the auschwitz thread.

pot?  kettle? 

do keep this up - i haven't had such a great laugh in... oh, minutes. 

[IlluSionS667]

I guess all trolls enjoy their trolling, but that doesn't make it proper behavior. What's the point of spamming a thread with contentless posts when you're all out of arguments? You illustrate how inept you are?

that's funny - there must be an echo in here.  i could've sworn you've just posted that on the auschwitz thread.

pot?  kettle?

If you post the same thing twice, I see no reason not to post the same reply twice.

[Lucifer]

well, sweetle, if it were only twice, i'd probably be content.  but doing pete burns impressions really doesn't cut the mustard, you know.

[ApotheosisIV]

Most of the religions are isomorphic stories to what was made up by the Mesopatanian people from Bablyon in around 6000BC.
The purpose was to control the mass of populace and the success of these stories was noted by people from all over the world and they made up their own versions with different names like Jesus and Mohammed. This controlled the populace into accepting a life of shit and grime with promise of reward in the afterlife if they take it up the arse on a daily basis. Methods and media transfer of data have changed in the last 8000 years, but the concept are the same and are applied daily.