Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (216281)	8/20/2007 3:35:55 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793866

Fundamentalism does not let individuals choose their own path. Yes, Christianity teaches there's one way to God. You don't like Christian teaching. So what?

To: Lane3 who wrote (216281)	8/20/2007 6:06:01 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 793866

I have not and do not dispute that different fundamentalists are committed to different things, some constructive, some downright dangerous. What downright dangerous things are Christian fundies committed to? There each Christian is directed to seek salvation via a individual relationship with Christ instead of the Church. I think that's a good and healthy thing. But that's not Christian fundamentalism.* Fundamentalism does not let individuals choose their own path. It dictates the path and declares that everyone on a different one is doomed to hell. *I'm sorry but that is (part of) fundamentalist Christianity. So is telling people they will go to hell if they reject Christ. Choosing your own path isn't Christianity at all. Its new age mumbo jumbo. Course none of this should bother anyone who thinks Christians are all wet anyway. --------------------------------------- In an earlier post, you alluded to an idea that we should try to understand how Christianity or the Christian West changed so that Islam might be encouraged to do the same. The idea that islam can get to the same place by the same route is flawed, I think. And I'll explain why I think so. But to understand you have to understand that fundamentalist Christianity and fundamentalist Islam are - excuse me - fundamentally different. You may be assuming that Christianity changed from what it was in the middle ages because it became, except for the mean old fundies who you may assume are still living in the middle ages, flexible and liberal and non-doctrinaire and wishy-washy in its beliefs. If thats what had happened, Christianity would have simply died. Thats what happens to churches which become flexible and non-doctrinaire and liberal. Christianity changed because it went back to its fundamentals in the NT. This was what the Reformation was about. Ditto the subsequent Great Awakening and the current fundamentalist/evangelicals. Perhaps the Counter-Reformation within Catholicism was about this too, though I don't know so much about Catholicism. People sometimes assume Islam needs to go through its own reformation like Christianity did. Then the Islamic world would be more like the West ie. modern Christendom. Well, that idea is wrong. Islam has gone through its own reform/renewal movements which also involved in Muslims going back to Islam's fundamentals in the Koran and Hadiths. Thats what Wahhabi Islam, the Moslem Brotherhood, and Al Qaida essentially are - reform/renewal movements beckoning Muslims to go back to the original fundamental concepts of Islam taught by Mohammed. Reforming Islam or returning Islam to its roots produces a radically different result than reforming Christianity or going back to the roots of Christianity does. The fundamentals of Christianity are about things like the five solas (if you don't know what those are, don't assume you know what fundamentalist Christianity is about), the virgin birth and divinity of Christ, the bodily resurrection and substitutionary atonement of Christ. The fundamentals of Islam are about things like sharia law, jihad, the caliphate, etc. Very very different. I would add that its folly to think one can apply logic to something one is uninformed, or worse, misinformed about.