Evangelicals feel they're misunderstood (AP)

[wildflower]

This is a good article concerning a recent series of conferences of evangelicals.

It discusses the divisions within the evangelical community; I particularly noted the distinction between 'evangelical' and 'fundamentalist' (see the last snip here). I recommend reading the whole piece; as always, it's so hard to snip. http://www.registerguard.com/news/2005/02/12/f4.rel.evan.0212.html

Evangelicals feel they're misunderstood

By Rachel Zoll
The Associated Press

(snip)

Timothy Tennent, professor of world missions at Gordon-Conwell, said evangelicals have no desire to impose Christianity on unwilling Americans. He insisted that conservative Christians can be respectful of other religions - without abandoning their own core teaching that all faiths are not equal.

(snip)

While people outside the evangelical movement often view it as monolithic, major divisions exist, including disagreement over which policy issues should be paramount. Some speakers said evangelicals too closely align themselves with Republicans and focus too much on abortion and gay marriage, instead of on broad social concerns.

(snip)

David Wells, professor of historical and systematic theology at the seminary, said some of the trouble stems from a tendency to equate evangelicals with fundamentalists. Fundamentalists are cultural separatists, withdrawing from people who hold different beliefs and adopting ``a set of cultural attitudes that evangelicals have abandoned,'' he said. Evangelicals seek to involve themselves in society, engaging members of other religions and influencing the broader culture.

``Race, poverty and the environment are, or should be part of, our biblically based ethic,'' Davis said.

more...

Read the entire article at http://www.registerguard.com/news/2005/02/12/f4.rel.evan.0212.html

[murielm99]

1. I have noted the difference between fundamentalists and

evangelicals in several threads here.

Sometimes it is well received, and other times it is not.

[coloradodem2005]

7. Which ones are preferable?

[w4rma]

59. Evangelicals are. Evangelicals can be of *any* political persuasion.

Fundamentalism describes interpretation while evangelicalism describes a wish to promote a religion.

So *never*, *ever* paint evangelicals with a broad brush. It's the fundamentalists that are the problem.

[VegasWolf]

129. Can someone explain this in finer detail to me. Falwell, et al, claim

that they are evangelicals, and most assuredly they are
trying to spread their faith far and wide. Isn't that
the very nature of evangelical thinking. Seems like some
simply do not wish to be branded by the same brush that
tars and feathers others like the Falwell's and Dobsons of the
world. I see both as christian and attempting to spread
their concepts world-wide.

[knitter4democracy]

187. There are many differences, actually

Fundamentalists believe that every single word in the Bible is to be taken literally, while Evangelicals believe that there is much in the Bible that is metaphorical, allegorical, or simply a symbol. That simple difference accounts for very different behaviors, etc.

While all Christians feel the need to evangelize (as we are called to do by Christ at the end of the Gospel of St. Matthew), Fundamentalists are more likely to say that anyone, even other Christians, who don't believe exactly as they do is going straight to Hell. Evangelicals tend not to go that far, usually, although they do still evangelize whenever possible. I've also seen that Evangelicals tend to be more concerned about acting as Christ-like as possible, that being the best way to spread the faith, in their opinion. Of course, these are generalizations.

Dobson's crazy and crazy with power. He may be an evangelical (Nazarene, actually, last I knew), but he's more concerned with money and power than actual faith, it seems. I wouldn't hold him or even Falwell up as models.

[aikido15]

174. Neither!

They are both right wing conservatives with narrow-minds.

[amazona]

64. it is not well received for this reason

1) Huge overlap between the two communities whether we kid ourselves about it or not

2) The "truth" that needs to be proselytized is not the truth -- it is propaganda.

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

[w4rma]

71. You "proselytize" Democratic policy and the Democratic Party, I hope

Is that "propaganda"? Is that "not the truth"?

As for the overlap. There is also an overlap with progessives and evangelicals. Evangelicalism has *nothing* at all to do with fundamentalism.

[QC]

70. It's impossible to have an intelligent discussion of religion on DU.

It's not even worth trying. It's true that evangelicals and fundamentalists are not the same thing, and it's true that 40% of evangelicals voted for Clinton in 1996, and it's even true that many evangelicals, like Tony Campolo, are progressives, but none of those things matter when you have a small but extremely loud and active faction that insists on turning every thread that is even tangentially related to some religious issue into a rantfest about why all religious people suck.

[w4rma]

72. Not true. You should try to have an intelligent discussion, first. (nt)

[QC]

73. Intelligent discussions on any topic have been hard to come by

since the election. It's all about bomb-throwing and posturing and gloating now.

[w4rma]

81. That's two posts that you could have used to write about this topic with.

But you didn't do that.

I'm 100% sure that it will be hard to have an intelligent discussion about this topic if you aren't going to even post on the topic.

[QC]

83. And that's two posts you have used to quibble with me.

As I said in my first post, I have posted many times about the differences between fundamentalists and evangelicals, how many evangelicals--like Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and Jimmy Carter--are Democrats, and the like, and nothing ever comes of it. Posts like #3 are more typical of religious discussions here.

That's a pity because, of course, most voters do have some religious identity. If we write them all off, including the ones who agree with us, then we have no hope of winning.

[Old Mouse]

113. I'm afraid you are correct

If you take the time to empathize, you can understand neither evangelical nor fundamentalism automatically equate to intolerance.

[Maat]

139. Keep trying, I say.

I'm not Christian (I'm a Religious Scientist and a progressive).

I've learned quite a bit from reading what progressive Christians have to say, including evangelicals.

[gorbal]

170. It is not impossible

It IS impossible to avoid the occasional troll. Just don't engage them and others will ignore them as well.

[TrogL]

184. Can I take a crack at it?

I want to make sure I understand the distinction.

As far as I understand it, it's a matter of relationships, perhaps sets.

We are all members of Christ's church - a big set.
Some people believe in "literalism" - that the Bible is literally, true literally word for word. They are literalists.
Fundamentalists try to reduce religion to some fundamental points. Most fundamentalists are literalists.

Evangelicals believe in propagating Christ's message. There is considerable disagreement as to what Christ's message is. Hence, there are Evangelicans in all the various branches of Christ's church. There are Evanglical Anglicans even though Anglicans aren't particularly noted for banging on people's doors in the middle of their nap.

Unfortunately, many fundametnalists tend to be Evangelicals because it's easier to deliver a simple (perhaps over-simplified) message.

Hence, Evangelicals getted tarred with the fundamentalist brush when it isn't necessarily deserved.

[Spiffarino]

2. If they're concerned with being misunderstood

...then they should do something and speak openly about where they disagree with the Evangelicals who are front and center. Like it or not, Falwell, Robertson, Bush, etc., are the ones who represent them. As long as they sit silent while their "leaders" spew nonsense, they are complicit IMO.

[Freedom_from_Chains]

16. ...then they should do something

"then they should do something and speak openly about where they disagree with the Evangelicals who are front and center."

Here, Here, I couldn't have said it better myself. I've been hearing this talk lately about how evangelicals are different than fundamentalist, and I think there's some truth to it. But at the same time I am not hearing them loudly an openly denouncing them for the social pariahs that they are.

If they want me to see them as being different, they’re going to have to start getting more to the point. The point being that fundamentalist are dangerous and a threat to our rights and freedoms.

[Stepup2]

60. I whole heartedly agree

I have been saying this for a while now. If they want to distinguish themselves from the fundies then perhaps its time they get organized and stand up to the jackbooted thugs who have hijacked their religion.

Unfortunately, many of us who are relegated to second class citizen status have a hard time discerning which of them comes bearing an olive branch or a crown of thorns. I need them to speak slowly and be VERY clear about what it is they are saying, cause I am inclined to brand them different flavors of the same stuff and tune them all out. Not fair, but it is survival as far as I am concerned.

They have thier work cut out for them. You'd think they would be mad as hell by now.

[wildeyed]

77. "You'd think they would be mad as hell by now."

Some of them are. I know a group of young evangelicals who hate Bush. They consider the Iraq War and abomination. They worked hard to convince their older and more entrenched relatives not to vote Bush. Granted, they are in the minority of the religious folks I know, but I still think it is important to recognize that there are many different viewpoints in the religious community.

[Zhade]

154. Those evangelicals should be proud. Good for them.

It's good to hear, believe me!

(PS - I'm atheist. See, we all share more in common than we think.)

[AuntiBush]

84. I couldn't agree more!

they have their work cut out for me, as we do as well! Remembering how so many complained that not enough, if any at all (Muslims) were not speaking-out and reportedly in non-agreement with the fundamentalist.

So, speak out 'cause I can't here them and am all ears, please. The country needs them to be heard, as we're trying to be, too. As American's, we're all in this together.

[Old Mouse]

114. why should they justify or defend their religion to you?

Isn't that between them and their God?

[livinginphotographs]

120. Isn't that exactly what they're attempting to do?

The poster above was simply pointing out that they're doing a pretty shitty job of it.

And it stops being between them and their god when they start imposing their own "values" on the rest of the country through anti-choice, anti-gay legislation.

[Old Mouse]

123. no, they seek UNDERSTANDING

to ask for justification is the opposite of that, it presumes they believe, as people who oppose them do, that their actions appear immoral, and need explanation.

Obviously they do not believe their actions and political positions to be immoral. To demand an explanation is to declare a presumption of guilt, the very opposite of understanding.

[livinginphotographs]

127. It's the same thing.

"to ask for justification is the opposite of that, it presumes they believe, as people who oppose them do, that their actions appear immoral, and need explanation."

They believe that people perceive their actions as needing explanation. I don't think "immoral" is the right word for it.

No one's asking them to justify, or to promote understanding of, their entire religion, just their actions.

[Old Mouse]

152. But you ARE asking

You are asking them to logically defend an action of faith. We all know that faith is the suspension of logic over belief, so asking for an explanation of actions is asking them to open a debate into the validity of their faith. The very idea is prejudicial!

To understand an action born of faith, even one as deplorable as the support of Robinson or Falwell, you must understand the faith. And that is the understanding they seek.

[Zhade]

158. Most of us, hopefully...

...will never fully understand religious views like Falwell's. Their version of the Christian faith is the kind where 9/11 could be attributed to gays and lesbians, the ACLU, et al.

How far away from a group's shared beliefs does a member have to go before he starts tarnishing the reputation of the group and by extension its beliefs?

When it crosses the line in the secular world and threatens the social contract, it is no longer acceptable, and Christians would be well-advised to distance themselves from the likes of Falwell and Eric "I love bombing abortion clinics" Rudolph, lest they be seen as endorsing those views.

Yes, the outsider must understand most Christians don't share those views, but there is a rift in that faith, and Christians owe it to themselves to not allow their faith to be destroyed from within and hated from without.

Even as an atheist, I can appreciate the sentiment of "Jesus wept" when I think about the Falwells of the world squeezing out those who truly follow the words of Christ.

[Zhade]

155. Should Muslims speak out against terrorists and fundamentalist Muslims?

NT!

[Old Mouse]

180. No

We shouldn't be assuming they represent an entire religion.

You just lumped fundamentalist Muslims with terrorists. Although terrorists are often fundamentalist Muslims, that does not mean fundamentalist Muslims are terrorists.

Kinda racist of you, doncha think?

[Zhade]

181. No, because *I* clearly know the difference.

I'm thinking of all those uninformed Americans out there, not people like myself.

Interesting that you chose to reply to this post, yet ignored my reply to you in #158.

[Old Mouse]

183. Sorry, I saw this post first. I did not mean to ignore

I'm not sure of your meaning.

It seems, if I understand correctly, you still hold any member of a sect accountable for the actions of those that share the same greater faith, unless they publicly disavow themselves. Sort of guilt by association until proven Innocent?

So, if you were white, I could demand you publicly denounce the actions of the Klu Klux Klan, despite your lack of involvement with the organization?

[Zhade]

186. No, you don't understand. I am NOT pushing guilt by association.

I am saying that the Christians who believe people like Falwell tarnish their faith should say so.

The klan analogy is a bad one, because 1) I'm not white and 2) no one chooses to be white. Christians choose to follow their faith. Big difference.

[Old Mouse]

188. but that's the same thing

you want them to denounce somebody just to satisfy YOUR suspicions of their opinions on the subject. Falwell doesn't speak for the vast majority of evangelicals, why should it be upon them to prove otherwise? Just because Falwell claims he does? It's backward, you demand they prove they are innocent by denouncing association with a blowhard the majority of them could care less about. Some pentecostal in Tallahassee has to promise YOU they don't support some fat guy they never heard of or they are guilty of prejudice against minorities?

Guilt by association until proven innocent is exactly what you profess.

They want empathy. Everybody does. So what's wrong with that?

[Zhade]

189. What you refuse to see is that I'm making no demands, period.

It's a friendly suggestion, not a demand.

People like Falwell can want empathy all day long, but they will never receive it from me.

[wildflower]

20. The part on Falwell and the "Moral Majority" is interesting...

(snip)

Robert Wenz, of the National Association of Evangelicals, whose member churches say they represent 24 million people, drew a distinction between organizations like his and the Moral Majority, started by the Rev. Jerry Falwell.

While Falwell deserves credit for re-energizing Christians politically, the Moral Majority was ``fatally flawed,'' and its emergence as a representative of conservative Christianity was ``regrettable,'' Wenz said.

``It was all about making America a nice place for Christians to live,'' he said. ``This is not the kind of social involvement that we need or that evangelicals espouse.''

(snip)

http://www.registerguard.com/news/2005/02/12/f4.rel.evan.0212.html

Regarding speaking openly about their differences with the leaders of the movement, it sounds like this conferece is about just that (I hope).

And I think it's good these articles, such as this one and another recent one, "The Greening of Evangelicals" are getting out there. As the article says, they've been pushed to focus too narrowly and align themselves with Republicans, when poverty and other values are very important in their faith.

-wildflower

[Spiffarino]

32. This may be a hopeful sign

The Republicans have for too long sought to co-opt Christianity by using wedge issues like abortions and gay sex. They have, successfully in may cases, managed to steer entire church communities into following their path of environmental and social degradation.

If his house was on fire, any sane Christian would choose to rescue a three-year-old child over a petri dish full of zygotes. Perhaps the crushing weight of reason is finally getting to them.

My hopeful, optimistic side believes that most Christians - Evangelical, Catholic, or otherwise - still remember what Christ taught. Perhaps their spirits are finally beginning to awaken.

[wildflower]

41. Exactly; I think this is a very good sign for the Democratic party.

That's why I posted the article. It's saying that many people think evangelicals are all intolerant voters for Bush, but they're not.

If it's true, as the article says, that up to 126 million people may be evangelicals (I guess it depends on your definition), then there will have to be room in the Democratic party for them.

And if the evangelicals go back to the roots of caring for the poor, caring for the sick, and caring for the earth, then there is room, because that means they are Democrats.

-wildflower

[JDPriestly]

74. Most evangelicals are

working poor and middle class people. The Democratic Party represents their interests. It's that simple.

[oneold1-4u]

93. Giving the Word and growing

Love was strong in the family but few had to go to church because of need for renewing it. Love grows without much intervention from doctrine, which in most cases has gross flaws that actually impede love with rules created from fear. We could easily see and understand that errors were harmful, and also understand that we, as humans could err. To try hard not to err and to forgive them of one another was love growing. I find it much easier today to say, "yes I'm a sinner" than admit being a christian. I have no reason to believe that any church or doctrine could give me more than a lifetime of loving family.
The family has a few republicans but we love them anyway!LOL

[Old and In the Way]

85. Great comments on this subject Spiffarino!

I share you sentiments exactly. I'm religious nuetral....in fact, I see all religions as part of the problem instead of the solution for world peace, social justice, and personal spirituality.

That said, I'm curious about the differentiation between evangelicalsand fundementalists...outwardly, I find the distinction extremely blurred and would like to see a sharper contrast between the two. But the fundies get all the media oxygen these days and if they give the Christian Religion a bad name, it's a battle the sincere ones need confront and take ownership of.

I really liked this observation: "any sane Christian would choose to rescue a three-year-old child over a petri dish full of zygotes." Man, that frames the issue perfectly. I'll probably rip this example for use in future discussions on the subject.

:-)

[Spiffarino]

103. Thanks

I think Christians, Jews, Muslims, and atheists of goodwill have far more in common than we have differences if we would only look. I have friends among all of the above and can't find any rationale for the divisiveness that we see today among Americans.

I can't take credit for the petri dish line. I read something almost identical on another blog a while back and like you I think it clarifies the whole debate. I think any person who would equate a fertilized egg with a live person needs emergency therapy. The argument should be about what constitutes human life which the fundies continue to dodge.

I'll look around and see if I saved the web page. If so, I'll PM the link to you.

Cheers!

[sendero]

76. Exactly..

.. I've been saying this forever. These people refuse to denounce the Falwells, Robertsons, et al - then they whine about being lumped in with them.

People outside the religion have no standing to be heard on this point, they do - but you never hear them.

[realisticphish]

109. i denounce the hell out of them

but you know what? THEY'RE LOUDER THAN US. They have MONEY, and all the tv and radio preachers. We have Jim Wallis, and a few others. It's not much to work with, but goddamnit, we're trying. it doesn't help when people are constantly talking shit about us. it makes me think maybe i shouldnt even bother if this is the response i get from my own side.

:hippie: The Incorrigible Democrat

[sendero]

116. I'm not talking about you...

... I'm talking about the leaders of your branch of the faith who CAN get some media time.

Let me say this - I in no way intended to offend you personally. The vast majority of the folks who are here on DU who are religious are not the targets of my criticism.

I sincerely apologize if I did offend you. I would only ask that you consider the grain of truth in what I am saying, and accept that it isn't you I was saying it to.

[realisticphish]

135. i understand

it just gets to me that ALL i hear on this website is how bad evangelicals are...except for us. you know, i KNOW you dont mean me. but its kind of like saying "all left handed people are fucking morons...present company excepted, of course". the person probably wouldnt be offended...but in a way, they STILL feel like they're being targeted. know what i mean? i just hate generalizations of all kinds.

and i understand what you are talking about. but you also need to realize that there just arent that many who have media access. like i said, jim wallis does a great job getting out there, but in general religious media is totally dominated by fundamentalists. and when the media needs religious "experts" they always seem to turn to fundamentalists. the net problem is that the repukes control the media (that always seems to be the problem :)) and the fundies control the pukes.

the best way for the religious right to fall is for them to keep doin what they're doin...that is, being psychotic freaks about thinkgs like spongebob. the more shit like that they pull, the more people are going to step back and realize their insanity


o, one minor thing. you did state that evangelicals "whine" about being misrepresented. you WERE directly targeting christian DUers.

in any case, all i ask (in general, not you in particular) is that people treat our beliefs with the same respect that they want theirs treated with

:hippie: The Incorrigbile Democrat

[Zhade]

182. See post #158, I'm with you on this one!

Although it's apparently racist of me to ask if Muslims should do the same with regards to terrorists, suicide bombers and the like. :eyes:

[blondeatlast]

115. They are; and pretty assertively, now.

Check out this site for info: http://www.sojo.org

[PaDem]

117. Totally agree

As a liberal Evangelical Christian I've been calling for this for some time. We must separate ourselves from the Falwells of the world. Unfortunately, in the Evangelical community, I am overwhelmingly in the monority. A majority of Evangelical pastors and leaders have an ideology compatable with Dobson, Falwell, LaHaye etc.

[fishwax]

121. It's fairly difficult when they don't have access to the media

which is generally lazy and, when they want to get the "christian"/religious/moral values viewpoint of an issue, they call up the usual suspects. If there is a show on gay marriage, for example, the most likely guests will be an advocate and a religious leader who opposes. There would be several evangelicals who would like to speak in agreement with the gay rights advocate, but it wouldn't fit in with the dichotomy model that the media developed long ago and is now unwilling/unable to abandon.

There are a LOT of evangelicals who speak out against right-wing fundies. I hear them because I know where to look (alternative media, certain organizations, etc.), but I NEVER hear them in the msm. Particularly here in Oklahoma, where the fundies run just about everything.

[tinfoilinfor2005]

143. Sorry, I can't concentrate on your post,

I am too busy reading your fascinating billboard. And soooo jealous. I can just barely get the hang of a smiley face. :)

[pfitz59]

3. There is no difference...

They're all nuts!

[The Zanti Regent]

40. All of them are in it for the money

It's never been the time to get into the ministry as it is now.

Just think of all that TAX-FREE loot you can steal while you ride the Government Faith-Based Gravy Train!

[oneold1-4u]

98. TV evangelists-evangelicals

Not sure how they handle their patrons today but once worked for a lady who never missed Tammy & Jimmy and joined up with their scam and received a payment notice every month and many other pleas for money. Because she gave them an opening, she received pleas from hundreds of faith based ?? "businesses". They had sold her name along with millions of others!

[Gyre]

4. Thanks for that.

I never really distinguished between them before.

Gyre

[cornermouse]

5. Evangelical = evangelize.

It is true, though, that there are some evangelicals who do believe in evolution as it applies to the animal world. Not all of them believe in trying to put a full nelson on anyone they happen to meet in order to proselytize to them either.

Addition: "evangelicals have no desire to impose Christianity on unwilling Americans".

This is true. They think that if they explain it to you, you'll become willing.

[PurityOfEssence]

12. Just a half-nelson; that's not intrusive

The very word "evangelize" means to go out and spread the word; there's intrusiveness in the very concept. Just because some have a concept of politeness, the common understanding is a self-proclaimed right to bring the subject up and prosecute it to whatever conclusion possible.

Boo fucking hoo. This comes down to one of the two most irritating tendencies of faith: a feeling of privilege over others. The same toleration to at least hear the pitch is something most of them would never accord to a proselyte of another belief, yet if not allowed to push their guess, they're somehow being persecuted. (The other irritating tendency is cocksure certainty, especially about things there's no way of knowing.)

Have no sympathy for these people. If they understand that they're being pushy, as many do, that's fine; it's a more or less free country. When they expect to be treated as only benign entities, though, they deserve the heat they get.

[Ladyhawk]

94. Good points.

I'm tired of pushy evangelicals. The fact that every single evangelical who pushed me was also a fundy...well, you get it. There is a huge overlap between the so-called "two groups."

I don't "do" dogmatic religionists anymore. They simply cannot be trusted. They will backstab you every single time.

I'm getting ready to lodge a complaint to the local community college about a fundamentalist professor of theirs who tried to "evangelize" me. I'm not sure I'll be able to go through with it, but I feel that a line was crossed. The professor should be ashamed of himself, but of course feels justified because he was trying to save me from hell.

[Jamastiene]

163. I've had that same experience recently

They have decided to gang up on me at the community college I go to. It's hard to fight a whole gang of them at once. If I could get the ACLU on them for violating my first amendment rights, I would be the happiest person on earth. I have always longed for lawyers to settle this evangelical crap once and for all. They shouldn't me allowed to torture people like this.

[JNelson6563]

164. Here's what you do

show up with a bible. Start reading from the many horrific tales. "Kill all in the town including suckling babes and livestock but keep the virgins for yourselves." There are countless tales of horror liek this, all condoned or ordered by bible-god. Read some of this tripe to them and tell 'em you have no interest in their slaughter prone tyrant.

$10 says they don't try to recruit you again. ;-)

Julie

[Jamastiene]

165. Thanks

Actually, I've been thinking about bookmarking specific horror stories in the Bible and doing just that. I especially like to point out that the Bible says eating rabbits is an abomination. It works on the hunter types that are preaching to me. They don't know what to say to that one.

[AngryWhiteLiberal]

6. It's too late to dress the swine in perfumed clothes...

Hey, fundies! Get ready for the backlash you unleashed with your closet homophobia, racism, fascist-loving tendencies, and other stupid bullshit. It's time to pray to your gOD and take your medicine.

JB

[arwalden]

8. They're All Pretty Much In Favor Of (Or Silently Consent To)

... discrimination against gays and lesbians and in denying the same rights, protections, priveleges and responsiblities.

The biggest difference is that one hates you to your face... openly, defiantly, and proudly... while the other one hates you in the privacy of the voting booth.

[AlinPA]

53. You got it. To me, fundamentalists = evangelicals = narrow minds

[Ladyhawk]

97. Good point, arwalden. They DO hate gay people.

I asked my mother why she hated gay people and her only answer was that the bible said being gay was wrong. Sigh. I reasoned with her, saying that gay people weren't hurting her or anyone else by their actions and she couldn't come up with anything but, "The bible says they're evil."

I'm sorry, but I have a big problem with this. My mother would smile to a gay person's face, then stab them in the back as soon as they turned around...in the voting booth of course. Fundamentalism is a huge reason why I will not have a relationship with her, anymore. She does not respond to arguments, only to her narrow-minded religious philosophy. Fundies and evangelicals are NOT to be trusted.

"Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I consider the capacity for it terrifying." --Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.

[deadparrot]

9. By believing that "all faiths are not equal"

and saying that they have had some sort of divine revelation that reveals to them the ultimate truths of the world, and that everyone who doesn't agree with them is flat-out wrong, the fundies are already uninterested in any sort of intelligent debate. If they don't believe God likes someone, they're not going to treat them with any sort of respect.

[stray cat]

21. Do you really think all philosophies and faiths are equal?

If so I have some koolaid from a Jones in Guyana to sell.

All ideas are certainly not equal and all facts are not subjective and open to interpretation. I will respectively listen to people with and without faith but I don't believe in a world where every idea or belief system is relative. For example, I think Hitlers ideas and most of Bush were and are wrong.

[deadparrot]

25. I don't believe that any one faith

has more of an idea of what's really out there than any other faith, no. Some have long histories and scholars, but at the end of the day, I don't believe any one religion has divine proof that they're "right," so I'd appreciateit if people stopped acting like they did.

[stray cat]

29. I can see why an attitude of "Divine proof" would be annoying.

In my experience people hold to certain truths with one hand and doubts and questions in the other. I call that faith. However, you are right that there are people - atheists as well as people of any faith, who are certain that they are the only ones who have all the facts. Those kind of people annoy me no matter what they are selling.

[deadparrot]

30. Of course.

Believe me, I'm a person of faith, and I don't like anyone who gets arrogant concerning religion, whether they're athiests, Muslims, Jews, Christians, Hindus, etc. I'm just one who thinks it best to let people believe what they will, but keep in mind that no one *really* knows what belief system, if any, is "right," so there's no reason to get arrogant and superior.

[stray cat]

33. I agree. Thanks for the discussion.

[Old and In the Way]

88. Isn't that the nature of life?

We hold our personal beliefs to be "right"....because, well, they are our personal beliefs. And we wouldn't follow a wrong belief, right? ;-)

The problem seems to be when we map our personal "right" beliefs to an exterior world. Unfortunately, they come into conflict with other people's "right" beliefs.

Religion is a macro based version of the individual's personal belief system that is commonly held by a community. When these beliefs are shared and reflected, they reinforce the "rightness" of the beliefs. And it's the nature of religion to grow their system at the expense of other religions. Reminds we a lot of business and product branding, actually. Businesses always want to grow their market share and brand identity. Religions do, too.

[msongs]

10. If yer not a christ-ian you go to hell when you die - end of story.....

that is what christians preach and believe in the church where I was raised. nothing can save you except them......oh and maybe jesus. since you are going to hell when you die, you are not as good as us, so we can do anything we want to you (jewish holocaust, african slave trade, deliberate extermination of native americans, murder homsexuals, invade iraq and kill over 100,000 civilians, steal elections, etc.)

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm




ooops wrong pic link :-)

[coloradodem2005]

13. Hitler wasn't a Christian.

So I don't know if we can blame the holocaust on him.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

19. He was a good Christian boy. Just a little misunderstood.

The man used the Christian religion better than Jim and Tammy at a Jim Jones Appreciation Festival.

[coloradodem2005]

26. He was?

I thought Christians got persecuted in Nazi Germany as well. At least Catholics.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

34. Hitler was a Catholic until the day he died...

You can Google it.

[VegasWolf]

39. Exactly, read The Popes Against the Jews: The Vatican's

Role in the Rise of Modern Anti-Semitism. Catholics
only seem to know the white-washed catechisms that they
are taught. Learn to ask questions, pretty soon it
all falls apart.

[DemBones DemBones]

160. Yeah, we Catholics just don't know how to ask questions.

:eyes:

[VegasWolf]

173. We ex-Catholics do know how to question dogma. n/t

[Megahurtz]

185. Lol!

Now 'aint that the truth!

[Carni]

67. I LOVE your *W the whore* avatar

Now THAT is a bumpersticker I would display...short, true and completely to the point!

[amazona]

65. Jehovah's Witness were persecuted

In those days they were not considered Christian. Heck, many consider them a cult rather than a serious religion to this day.

Where did you get that Catholics were persecuted? Wouldn't they have had to depopulate Bavaria, France, and Italy? Sheesh.

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

[DemBones DemBones]

159. Some Catholics were persecuted. nt

[leesa]

86. He was a Christian like Bush is a Christian.

The very nature of evangelizing is to intrude. The ONLY people who ever come to my door to sell religion are evangelicals. I don't invite them, they just intrude.

[HockeyMom]

28. Rabbi and Fundie Minister

I saw a show on Larry King once where a Fundie Minister was telling a Rabbi that he was going to HELL because he didn't accept Jesus as his savior. THAT is the problem with these people.

[CAG]

49. Thats painting a rather broad brush, there....

A lot of religions say its "our way or the highway", not just christianity.

Also blaming just christians on: the jewish holocaust, african slave trade, deliberate extermination of native americans, murder homsexuals, invade iraq and kill over 100,000 civilians, steal elections, etc, is pretty baseless.

I guess that means people in other groups, such as muslims, hindus, those without any religious faith, etc, have just been perfect people who have NEVER committed atrocities in the false name of their faith or beliefs.

[Old and In the Way]

90. Religion has been the source of a lot of wars and needless deaths.

Because it's always been about power over the individual. People confuse religion with spirituality, IMHO. One can be religious and not spiritual; one can be spirtual and not religious; one can be both; one can be neither. It's the last group that I really worry about.

[VegasWolf]

126. I'm neither religious or spiritual, I'm a scientist and I see little

distinction between man and other animals other than a few
extra cerebral folds. and I'm a nice guy!

[reprobate]

149. Of course there's a difference. Man is the only animal......

...that kills for pleasure.

That sure differentiates us, huh?

[Dr Fate]

11. Those, poor, powerful Fundies...

...all that power they hold over the GOP and therefore the nation- my heart bleeds for them.

[DemBones DemBones]

161. Evangelicals are not necessarily Fundamentalists.

Keep the terms straight.

[Northern Perspective]

14. For example

The Sojourners (Jim Wallis et al.)call themselves 'evangelists'. But they are excellent representatives of wider values espoused by an effective social democracy.

Their motto: "Christians for Justice and Peace"

http://www.sojo.net/

[madrchsod]

15. evangelical`s would be and probably are

appalled by bush and his agenda that strip the fundamental core of what Christ said. fundamentalists reject any teaching that is contrary to their core belief that everyone and everything is corrupt.although they profess, Jesus does not fit into their world.

[stray cat]

17. I know a fair number of evangelical progressives including me.

Fundamentalists are more rigidly dogmatic and tend to have a pack mentality and simplistic arguments if you ask me. They usually have a very literal but selective interpretation of the Bible. They reduce it to black and white morality issues that are often not even addressed in the Bible.

Jim Walis of Sojourners is an evangelical and he is also an outspoken populist progressive.

Didn't habitat for humanity come out of an evangelist start. There was also Martin Luther King who did a thing or to for civil rights before he was murdered for it.

[wildflower]

43. Good points. To me, fundamentalist=rigid and dogmatic.

I wasn't aware about Habitat for Humanity's evangelical origin.

I'm glad to hear you know a number of evangelical progressives, and I'm glad you're here too.

-wildflower

[Redstone]

18. "biblically based ethic"

does that include punishing children who make fun of a bald prophet by having bears kill them?

That "ethic" is right there in the bible.

Redstone

[noamnety]

22. Proof that they just don't get it

"... while evangelicals continue to lose major court battles over abortion and religion in public schools, Davis said. "We acknowledge as evangelicals that we're in a culture war,'' Wenz said, "but the war is against a movement that seeks to impose a totally secular world view."

If they get to impose their religion on my medical decisions, if they get to impose their religion on my child in public school, they ARE imposing their religion on unwilling Americans.

The secular laws aren't "imposing" anything on them, we want them to have the right to make their own medical decisions, we want them to be able to marry whomever they want.

They can frame it as many ways as they like, they ARE trying to impose their religion on others, and when they can't, they cry out that they're being victimized by not being allowed to make life changing decisions for the nonbelievers.

[stray cat]

24. The problem is evangelicals like Americans is a broad designation.

A fringe group have given evangelicals a bad name. Just like a fringe group of Islam has given muslims a bad reputation in some circles. However, I also think a fringe group led by Bush has given Americans a bad name.

[noamnety]

27. Possibly so

But if the people in the article were trying to make that point, they blew it, from beginning to end.

[KittyWampus]

31. Substitute The Word "Secular" For "Materialistic" & You Describe

many, many self professed liberals and Establishment Science.

"but the war is against a movement that seeks to impose a totally MATERIALISTIC world view"

Establishment Science adhers strictly to the Philosophy that the Material World is basically all there is and all that need concern us.

That Consciousness is merely a by-product... and that Emotions are some pesky residual from our animalistic past.

The Subconsious or Superconscious? No need to discuss.

Of course this world view has a lot of flaws but the Established Science Community won't admit it or even consider any alternatives.

Heck, Science as it exists now can't even understand that it has a Philosophy at its core.

But then, when that Philosophy is Materialism... and its Practise is bascially whoring for the Coroporate World... it's no wonder.

[readmoreoften]

106. It's not even materialism it's

some sort of crazy particlism that much science is after.

I agree. Too much faith is science is also unreasonable... particularly when so much of it is pseudoscience. (As in evolutionary psychology)

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

23. The difference between evangelists and fundamentalists

An evangelist will use the word "Jesus" 185 times in a five-minute conversation.

A fundamentalist will use it 415 times.

[Redstone]

35. Another difference...

An evangelist will say "thank the Lord" for helping him find a good parking spot at the grocery store.

A fundamentalist will say "thank the Lord" for helping him find his ass with both hands.

Redstone

[Old and In the Way]

91. LOL......

That's sorta been my operative definition, too....except the fundies are equally adament in the righteousness of their politics, too.

[roguevalley]

36. they have only themselves to blame. its interesting that they are

only NOW thinking about their image. they had YEARS to disagree and review and correct. They didn't. now that things look so rotten, only now do they speak up. there is and always will be blood on their hands. They need to repent and undo. Period.

[VegasWolf]

37. "Christians can be respectful of other religions ." Unuh, what about sane

people that don't belive in santa claus, the easter bunny or god.

[CAG]

51. Another great showing by several people in this thread...

who seem to have NO CLUE that there's a millions and millions of christians out there that will have nothing to do with the christian right.

The same people that are continuously preaching tolerance for people of other beliefs and lifestyles keep lumping all christians together and calling us names, totally disrespecting our beliefs, equating it with the belief in the easter bunny, etc.

Keep spewing this crap on these boards, and one of these days the Democratic party will have a nice little base of about 10% of the country.

When a mainstream, independent person comes onto a right wing board, they immediately get turned off by all of the hatred and division. But I really feel they get pretty turned off by a lot of the crap on this board, too.

[Pastiche423]

58. lol!

"Spewing crap" on an internet board will reduce the members of the Democratic Party.

You need to get out more.

A lot more.

[CAG]

89. While your telling me what I need to do, let me suggest....

that you step back and think about the point I attempted to make. I used the internet board as the frame of reference because thats where we are, but my point was that the general population gets fed constantly from the right, and even that so-called liberal media, that 1) the left are nothing more than godless pagans who want your children to all become homosexuals, drug addicts, or welfare dependents; and 2) any proper christian is on the christian right.

If the democratic party has a significant part of its base demeaning those with a religious faith by claiming that they are inferior in intelligence, morality, etc, then that promotes the stereotype that the right is trying to feed into the minds of mainstream america.

[VegasWolf]

66. Oh many of us have a clue, that is why we don't buy into superstitious

mumbo-jumbo. I am not advocating hatred for anyone who
is religious anymore than I admire their beliefs. What
is it with this christian persecution thing that cannot stand up
to others people's disbelief.

[CAG]

87. Clue..

referred to not realizing that there's more to the christian faith than the christian right. I was perfectly clear about that. My comment did not refer to a person having a "clue" based on whether the person is a christian or not, as you implied.

You used the term persecution, I didn't. No christians think they are "persecuted" in this country except for the christian right, because their leaders are constantly telling them how persecuted they are, which is a total joke. Your comments support my point that some people want to believe they can paint all christians as the christian right.

[Old and In the Way]

92. Where's the christian left?

Those that profess to be moderate/left christians need to fight this battle. The leadership of the christian right has sold out their religious beliefs for political power and wealth, IMHO. Look at Falwell, Robertson, etc. I mean, owning diamond mines in Africa? c'mon. These are the people who are smearing/perverting/corrupting the christian faith. It's not the areligious who are wary about all religions that is your problem. We may not share your faith, but we damn well know hypocrisy when we see it.

[CAG]

99. Couldn't agree with you more...most of us on the christian left....

would like nothing more than to have our versions of falwell, robertson, dobson creating a politically outspoken industry espousing the christian left viewpoints. However, it takes money to create a "Liberty University" and a PTL and a CBN and a focus on the family industry and on and on, but the christian left leaders aren't money-grubbing charletans like those on the right.
The donations that do go into the christian left congregations and institutions coffers tend to be used to actually help those less fortunate, and not into a propaganda political machine.

Therefore, when CNN and MSNBC producers are looking for some christian leader to be a talking head about some religious issue, all they have on their rolodexes are the christian right hypocrites.

[Old and In the Way]

101. I agree.

Your problems mirror the political problems we have between Republicans and Democrats. They get all the media oxygen. It is a real dilemma for you. Somehow, it's the congregations that need to become educated/enlightened and repudiate the pharisees who are corrupting the word of christ in your churches.

[Raskolnik]

136. Not that hard to find.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060558288/qid=1108340163/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/002-6037354-2168052?v=glance&s=books

[VegasWolf]

124. Hey, it is the christian right that gets so much of the news that they

embody the whole concept of christianity for us non
believers. We really have no interest in studying
christians all that closely to discern subtle differences
between right, left, and middle. All we know is what we
see. If this so-called "christian left" really resents
the portrayal of christianity, they should make some waves.

I admire your attempts to do so on the internet boards.

[LinuxInsurgent]

38. no thank you...we understand you enough...

my apologies to the few evangelicals who don't conform to the Christian Taliban movement...but I hope you understand that us concerned Americans have our hands full dealing with your nefarious brethren at this moment...and frankly, I'm not in the mood to differentiate between "good christians" and "bad christians".

It's gotten to the point that hearing the word "Christian" is like hearing someone say KKK or Nazi around me....

Christ would be sad....

[stray cat]

42. How about good muslims and bad muslims?

However, I understand the frustration. I'm sure Christ is sad.

[donheld]

44. I've known Evangelicals all my life

The ones i've know are very much wanting to impose their religious beliefs on everyone. How many years have they let the likes of Falwell, Robertson, Dobson etc., spread their filfth without doing one thing to. They think there is a great revival on in the USA. That Bushie is a saint.

I'm not going to say there are not different sorts of evangelicals, but if these who say they don't want to force there beliefs on others want to be believed they've got a hell of a lot of catching up to do.

[Solly Mack]

45. whatever

I read the article.

[Ranec]

46. The message is that we should fight the ideas not the people.

The bigotry and small mindedness is our enemy, not some population. Give people the option, and they will eschew the meanness that seems to emanate from so many fundamentalists.

I'm sure that the increasing political power of the evangelical churches takes away from what should be their spiritual purpose. If the church is too involved with political issues, focusing on abortion and gays, then it becomes more detached from the lives of its members. I would be greatly upset if a political party was deciding what the Sunday sermon should be. The issues these movements take up seem derived mostly to divide and motivate by appealing to base instincts. How long can they continue to go to that same well?

For progressives, I think this means that preaching social justice and compassion still has greater resonance. Addressing the real issues in the immediate lives of people is so much more powerful. I just hope that these voices get heard too, I know they are there in the churches.

[toddaa]

47. Poor widdle evangicals

I can't muster the energy to feel sorry for any of you. Dobson, Falwell, and Robertson are your problem. Until you deal with them yourselves, quit whining about how I misunderstand you and hurt your feelings.

I know that there are quite a few DUers who are Christians who feel like you are being picked on. You probably feel just like moderate Muslims who feel the same about radical Islamists. Well, guess what? THAT'S NOT MY PROBLEM. I don't go to your churches, I don't believe in your God, and I have no control over which one of you becomes defacto media spokesman for the rest of you. Until you take a stand inside of your churches and put forth better leadership, quit whining to this damned to hell heathen about how you are being misunderstood.

[msanthrope]

50. Thank You!!! That's how I feel exactly!!!

I wish evangelicals would have the moral fortitude to go muzzle Dobson, Falwell, et al...then come complain about how they are misunderstood.

[brentspeak]

56. Maybe we should single you out and say "It's not our problem"

Pardon me if I misunderstood your post, but it appears you are dismissing the perpetual broad-brush slagging of Christians even on these boards due to the "failure" to -- heck, I don't know -- supplant/get rid of/assassinate(???) -- the Pat Robertsons of America.

Am I Pat Robertson's keeper? Or anyone else's for that matter?

[toddaa]

61. I'm not a Christian, it's not my mess.

It's your religion, you clean it up. Now maybe you are currently doing this in your Sunday schools and Bible studies and we heathens aren't privy to the inner workings, but until I see what you claim to be the majority of Christians actually putting forth some media spokesmen that don't advocate hatred towards gays, Arabs, liberals, and pagans, I will continue to assume that the majority of Christians support these buffoons that appear on television.

[brentspeak]

62. Well, as long as you speak for just yourself, I won't gainsay your opinion

[VegasWolf]

130. You speak for this heathen also. n/t

[SomewhereOutThere424]

134. It's all of our mess

Because someone's opinion of god runs the country we live in. I think that the fact they feel misunderstood is good, I don't want them to feel hated, but I want them to give me something to understand besides my own personal experiences of fascist churches. I want them to feel something that makes them feel obligated to change the way the corrupt church owners operate. This country needs change, maybe not in its roots, but in the way it operates. That also involves this country's religions.

If they worked harder to make those who misunderstand them understand, I'd have never left my religion. I just didn't understand why jesus would do nothing about idiots who chastised and hated others besides giving them a verbal slap on the wrist; I wondered why no one else in the churches did anything major to make the voice of love more than a whisper, and the voice of hate an elephant's trumpet. I do want a reason to understand, I've wanted one for over ten years. I think that I won't find one though, many christians are afraid to stand up to the powers at the top (like my mother did, before she was excuminacated from the church for speaking out against supporting child abusers just because they said they believed in god). Now even she is silenced and submissive to anything her church tells her. That means it IS our problem....it's everyone's problem, evil doesn't brand a religion but it occupies one. Members of said religion and members of other religions should do all in their power to overcome those evils for they effect us all.

I sympathize with those who try to make their religion do good and the bad dwarfs it, I believe a lot of good can come from the religion. However, until that good is done, until that fight against these corrupt churches and speakers is won, I have to say that I still give no pity to the image given to the christian faith. EVERY religion is stigmatized...I think that was one of the points of having a religion to begin with, to give personal sacrifice of image in order to continue serving what your heart feels is right. To give up at the wayside and cry because people on the internet badmouth your faith or because a group doesn't understand it defeats the concept of being a part of a religion to begin with.

[readmoreoften]

107. that about sums up how I feel too

I welcome religious people into my life and I know many of you are progressives. But you should take your battles to the people who are giving your religion a bad name, not those of us who are on the receiving end of their baseball bat.

[wildmanj]

48. misunderstood

TO BE A VICTIM IS TO BE A WINNER

[Swamp Rat]

52. Boo fucking hoo!

Evangelicals are not victims, but they often do victimize and oppress.

[Jose Diablo]

54. Yep, I agree 100% swamp rat

OK everybody, on 3.

1

2

3

AHHHH thats to bad. See the tear in my eye.

[Cobalt Violet]

169. Poor, Poor oppressed religious bigoted zealots.

:nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity:

[GOPBasher]

55. "Membership in conservative evangelical churches explodes."

I actually consider myself a Christian, but this scares me to death. Isn't that weird? If I call myself a Christian and I'm scared of the evangelical movement, what about those of us who aren't Christians? I wonder how scared they are.

The view that one's religion is the only correct one, and everyone who believes another faith will be damned for all of eternity is, in my opinion, harmful to society. It creates divisions, even if they don't intend it to. I don't think it's bigotry or anything like that; I know they just think that we all fall short of what's necessary for heaven, and thus we need Christ to save us. I understant and respect that belief, but it still, for some reason, scares me that so many people believe that. If that's what you believe, then won't you want to use government to push Christianity on people? Use government to try to save them? I don't know. The movement frightens me, and I don't know why.

I don't mean to sound "anti-evangelical," and those of you who are, by all mean, respond to my fears. It'll probably make me feel better.

[98geoduck]

57. Everyone should fear Jihadists/Fundamentalists of any religion.

It's the cause of every largescale war on the planet.

[amazona]

63. you know what?

I don't give an eff if they feel misunderstood. I've lived with them, worked with them, studied with them. They are not misunderstood. They are an American Taliban with priority one the crushing of woman's spirit. They support policies designed to keep women trapped in poverty so they have no choice but to "subordinate" themselves to abusive -- often physically, not just emotionally -- husbands.

I'm tired of tolerating hate. Jesus said, "By their fruits you will know them."

Their fruits are hate. The fundy craze started as a claim that woman should subordinate herself to man and now has gotten on the gay-crushing track because gay males don't give the proper time and attention to oppressing women in the home. A far cry from Gospel days when Jesus sat down with, gasp, a prostitute.

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

[sffreeways]

110. Exactly well said !

They hate Gay men because they believe to be a gay man is to be like a woman and what could be worse than that.

[Mountainman]

68. Don't let your guard down. Religious people cause the most suffering and

pain in the world.

And if you don't think their real mission is to establish their belief as the sole belief that everyone else should have, come to Bakersfield, CA and read our editorial page sometime.

Today a pagan complained about all the preaching it the letters to the editor in her letter to the editor. It will be an interesting week of preaching and warnings about the wrath of god in the up coming letters.

[gizmo1979]

69. I think U.S Fundamentalists should fight

the war in Iraq against the Islamic fundamentalists.It's a win win situation.

[Disturbed]

78. Religion is often used for tyrany .

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

80. Hahahaha! Thanks for the gut laugh

[livinginphotographs]

119. I like that idea.

I like it a lot.

[VegasWolf]

75. Aren't Dobson, Falwell, Roberts et al evangelicals? They are getting

pretty damn fat to be too misunderstood. Seen Falwell
lately, he looks like an enormous toad. I guess buying steaks off
tithe money is working well for him.

[intheflow]

82. They call themselves evangelicals but

they are much more fundamentalists. I'm in seminary and am just learning this in my church sociology class. Evangelicals spead their faith through witness of their faith in the world. Fundamentlists believe you're either with them or against them.

At least, that's what we're learning in my liberal seminary. And we have a goodly number of evangelicals who are not fundamentalists. They are good people who work for justice in their communities. Think Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Rev. Jesse Jackson, not Falwell and Co.

I'm not Christian, so I think I'm able to evaluate this fairly: theologically yet as an outider looking in.

[VegasWolf]

125. Out of curiousity, why then are you in a seminary? The distinction

that they are teaching you seems to be a false distionction
to me. Surely, fundamentalists consider themselves evangelicals.
Robertson, et al, actually call them selves evangelicals.
Surely they too "spead their faith through witness of their faith
in the world."

[intheflow]

142. Merriam-Webster definitions and why I'm in seminary.

fun·da·men·tal·ism
Pronunciation: -t&l-"i-z&m
Function: noun
1 a often capitalized : a movement in 20th century Protestantism emphasizing the literally interpreted Bible as fundamental to Christian life and teaching b : the beliefs of this movement c : adherence to such beliefs
2 : a movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principles
- fun·da·men·tal·ist /-t&l-ist/ noun
- fundamentalist or fun·da·men·tal·is·tic /-"men-t&l-'is-tik/ adjective

evan·gel·i·cal
Pronunciation: "E-"van-'je-li-k&l, "e-v&n-
Variant(s): also evan·gel·ic /-ik/
Function: adjective
1 : of, relating to, or being in agreement with the Christian gospel especially as it is presented in the four Gospels
2 : PROTESTANT
3 : emphasizing salvation by faith in the atoning death of Jesus Christ through personal conversion, the authority of Scripture, and the importance of preaching as contrasted with ritual
4 a capitalized : of or relating to the Evangelical Church in Germany b often capitalized : of, adhering to, or marked by fundamentalism : FUNDAMENTALIST c often capitalized : LOW CHURCH
5 : marked by militant or crusading zeal : EVANGELISTIC <the evangelical ardor of the movement's leaders -- Amos Vogel>
- Evan·gel·i·cal·ism /-li-k&-"li-z&m/ noun
- evan·gel·i·cal·ly /-li-k(&-)lE/ adverb

So you see, evangelicalism can be equated with fundamentalism (definition #4) but is not exclusively tied to fundamentalism. Neither is fundamentalism exclusive to evangelicalism--in fact, evangelicalism isn't even mentioned in the definition for fundamentalism.

As to why I'm in seminary, I'm studying to be a Unitarian Universalist minister. My denomination has two seminaries, but I chose to attend a Christian seminary for two reasons. First, I would get a better understanding of the Bible and be able to make sound Biblical arguments against their moronic interpretations of Jesus' message when speaking with fundies. Secondly, I felt like I had to get over my own prejudices against Christianity, to know that there are good Christians doing good things in the world. And there are lots of Christians working for peace and social justice, working for fair housing and labor rights and GLBTQ issues and for pro-choice reproductive rights.

We on the left can't just lump all Christians together. We need the liberal ones to build our allied coalition against the Falwells and Dobsons of the world.

[VegasWolf]

145. Good response! There are atheists that also do good works. I

volunteer in a hospital. The basic
distinction between your two definitions seems to me to
be a more or less rigorous adherence to to bible as literal
truth. I will happily accept all allies to fight the Dobsons
and the Falwells of the world. Good fortune in your studies.

[intheflow]

147. Cheers to the Atheists!

:toast:

And to all those Buddhists, Hindustanis, Taoists, Witches, Jews, Muslims, Agnostics, and other "heathen pagans" working for the common good! :toast:

[Bridget Burke]

167. Some Fundamentalists just want to be left alone.

Amish & Mennonites could both be considered Fundamentalists--but they don't meddle in public affairs. I remember when Southern Baptists avoided politics--but they've been co-opted by the Republicans.

Evangelicals want to spread their faith--which is their right. We're free to ignore them if we wish.

If you're not a Christian--what sort of seminary are you attending?

[American Tragedy]

79. There is an obvious lie in this article.

"but the war is against a movement that seeks to impose a totally secular world view."

This is a lie. I and every other liberal that I know seek only to expand opportunities for all different lifestyles and allow people to live according to their personal religious or moral inclinations without government interference. We have never sought to impose upon anyone. If somebody wants to pray, they can do it virtually whenever they wish. If they don't want to have an abortion, they're under no obligation to do so. If they want to carry a sign stating GOD HATES FAGS, they may do that as well. I don't care.

[Old and In the Way]

95. That's the problem in a nutshell.

You said it perfectly.

[The Blue Knight]

96. Look

Since Joe Lieberman is a Democrat, does that mean all Democrats share the view of Joe Lieberman?

No, obviously not. So not all Christians are like Jerry Falwell, so quit acting like they are. Jerry Falwell represents a minority of Christians in this country, but they're very well organized and outspoken. (Just like Osama bin Laden doesn't represent all of Islam and just like the IRA doesn't represent true Catholocism).

There are many Evangicals out there who are on our side, and yet people on here want to bash them and drive them further away from the Party. Way to push the stereotype that Dems have nothing to do with religion.

The Christian-bashign around here is getting old, and I'm an atheist. If FR had posts like this, only bashing other religions like Islam and Judaism, you guys would be up in fucking arms.

[American Tragedy]

100. Actually, I agree. I merely object to this particular individual

and those who share his mindset, of which there are obviously a considerable number. Specifically, I have no respect for the Religious Right.

[Old and In the Way]

102. Same problem for us.

Who represent's the typical Democrat on the Sunday talk shows? Joe Lieberman....the guy that ran almost last in a 9 man race for the Presidency. Who represnts the christian voice in this country today? Falwell, Robertson, Dobson, etc.

Here's the point. I don't think your religion should be an identity consideration within our secular party. That's what we have churches for. In church, it shouldn't matter whether you are a Republican, Democrat, or a Green. Our Party consists of many, many people of faith and non-faith. I don't want to see the Democratic Party become a religious dominated political party like the Republicans. We'll always fight for every person's right to practice his or her own faith freely and fight for social justice/world peace, etc....we just won't take sides on a preferred religion within our Party.

[readmoreoften]

108. Okay from now on my posts will look like this

Hello,

Today was a bad day. I read an article written by a EVANGELICAL FUNDAMENTALIST WHO BEARS NO RESEMBLANCE TO THE MINORITY OF GOOD PROGRESSIVE FUNDAMENTALISTS IN THE TRADITION OF MARTIN LUTHER KING and it really depressed me because it said that gay people were responsible for the tsunami. I don't know why EVANGELICAL FUNDAMENTALISTS WHO BEAR NO RESEMBLANCE TO THE MINORITY OF GOOD PROGRESSIVE FUNDAMENTALISTS IN THE TRADITION OF MARTIN LUTHER KING hates me so much. I swear I didn't cause the tsunami. At least not on purpose.

[readmoreoften]

104. Fundamentalists are bad but...

Evangelicals are worst. "Evangelicals seek to involve themselves in society, engaging members of other religions and influencing the broader culture." What is the end logic of evangelical christianity? World domination for christ. Dominionism. Whereas at least some fundamentalists want don't want to export their hate across the national border.

Sure many of these people have economic interests in common with progressives. But let's be honest 99% of us have economic interests in common.

[Raskolnik]

144. Did Martin Luther King Jr. want to "export hate"?

Because he was an evangelical Christian. He sought to involve himself in society, engage members of other religions, and influence broader culture. The BASTARD!

[readmoreoften]

162. Oh come on.... we're not talking about MLK here.

"Evangelicals" have changed over the past 40 years. Furthermore, I'd venture to say that 90% of who I'm talking about are white evangelicals. Sure, there's Alan Keyes, but for the most part I'm talking about Jerry Falwell.

These distinctions are ridiculous. What fundamentalist doesn't believe in 'spreading the good news'? All fundamentalists are evangelical. All evangelicals are not fundamentalists. But the vast majority are. Furthermore, radical movements like the pentecostals are often proffered as the evangelical cutting edge these days.

You're talking about semantics and I'm talking about my personal survival against hate-mongers. During civil rights in the sixties, when black men rose up and said whites were treating them like second class citizens, did you say... "well whatta bout John Brown, huh? What about me? Not ALL white people are bad."

What you're doing is reframing the discourse to make the Christian left the ultimate victim here and giving the Christian right the pass while demonizing progressives for not being inclusive every time someone tries to point out that these people (no, THE RIGHT, not YOU or MLK) are-- yet again-- trying to destroy our lives.

[Raskolnik]

178. *You're* not talking about people like MLK because they don't fit...

the profile of you want to believe about a group of people. You are ignoring facts that don't fit your preconceived notions of what being a Christian, (or even a *gasp*, evangelical Christian) actually means. Just because you choose to ignore a significant number of facts just because contradict your presumptions, don't ask everyone else to do the same.

If you're talking about right-wing fundamentalists, then SAY that's who you're talking about. When you paint with such a broad brush, you do nothing but drive people away that would otherwise be working for the same goals as you.

"You're talking about semantics and I'm talking about my personal survival against hate-mongers."

A bit dramatic, aren't we?

[PROGRESSIVE1]

105. .

[Bake]

111. Then they'd BY GOD better do a better job of differentiating themselves.

Because so far they're sucking at it.

Bake, M.Div.

[Kinkistyle]

112. Evangelicals are PRO-teaching "religion" in public schools

In the very same article posted in the original message, it states that Evangelicals are fighting to ban abortion, mixing religion (I am guessing THEIRS) with state and teaching it in school and altho not mentioned, most of them are likely FOR banning gay marriage.

So if Evangelicals are losing the "culture war" (Which I don't believe they are, BTW, in fact I believe they are WINNING), all the better! I hope they end up relegated to the junkpile along with all radical extremist religions.

[Stop_the_War]

118. They control the fucking government, and they think they're misunderstood?

:shrug:

[No Exit]

122. The Puritans felt they were misunderstood, too. n/t

[Sgent]

128. Evangelical

is the correct name for right wing christian fundies.

It is possible that non-evangelicals call themselves evangelicals, but the "evangelical" right wingers outnumber these churches by more than two to one.

Southern Baptist, Church of God, Church of Christ, Penocostal... these religions (and their theological cousins) make up the majority of protestant christianity in the US. If you exclude Episcopal as protestant, it even gets more pronounced.

So yes, I have major problems with the majority of protestant religions. Although there are some good ones (UCC, Methodist, etc), the majority of them are right wingers.

Take a look at www.thearda.com for a very enlightening breakdown of denominations and membership.

[No Exit]

140. Thanks for the info... btw, I admired the recent courage of the

Presbyterians, when some of them said they were divesting from investments connected to Israel.

(American Jews are just fine, and I have many friends among them... it's the current deceptive and imperialist policies of the state of Israel that make me angry.)

[applegrove]

131. By forcing Jesus down the throat of Seiks or Muslims you create

a situation where fundamentalism and forcing your non-secular views onto others is acceptable. Religion is a very, very personal thing. History waited a long time until we could build societies where we could all live together. That is being undone in America.

It will just antagonize the crazies. Jihad vs. McJob is a problem in the Middle East. Soon it will be a problem in the USA (where the two encourage each other).

Idiots!!

[applegrove]

132. New Bumper Sticker: Religion Is A Very, Very, Personal Thing

[SomewhereOutThere424]

133. Gee, I wonder...

How long it will take them to realize how misunderstood they've made pagans feel for the past few decades or so? I read a news article saying that valentine's day should be banned because of pagan origins, yet no one says anything about st patrick's day, celebrating st patrick removing the 'snakes' (killing pagans) to emphasize the christian faith as a dominant and recursive faith on those who don't believe, or especially believe in paganism.

I think that christians as a whole should fight their image, like pagans as a whole have had to. I still wear a pentacle outside despite the fact I'm sometimes afraid it will make people think I worship satan (who was merely taken from the image of a pagan god made centuries before the christian faith to demonize pagans further, ironically a god of peace and tolerance. Go figure.)

"Remove the plank from your own eye before pointing out the splinter in another's". I think they should worry more about how they make other lifestyles and religions feel misunderstood, intentionally or non intentionally, before they want the world to see them without the hate they seem to see everyone else with (in majority. I know many christians try to spread love and to those, I commend your efforts.)

I come from a christian background, before I chose the pagan faith. Even before I had a reason to be hated, I was stared at like I was the spawn of satan. The good little boy wearing a tie and even a suit to church, dressed up, cut my hair despite the fact I liked it longer to look traditional and 'good'. Even when I was IN the christian faith; in the church, giving donations of ten dollars or more at times each WEEK, I was still treated like a sub form of life who was not as elite as those who have read the bible fourty times over.

I think the christian misunderstanding starts not with others' treatment of them, but their treatment of others within their own faith, or in other faiths. I pity the few good christians who struggled to do good in their faith's name and continue to do so, I wish you luck.

[Raskolnik]

137. Evangelism does not equal Fundamentalism

And when liberals lump all people of faith in with the fundamentalists, we squander enormous potential and accomplish nothing but drive people into the arms of Republicans.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060558288/qid=1108340163/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/002-6037354-2168052?v=glance&s=books

[VegasWolf]

138. So, all fundamentalists are evangelicals, but not all evangelicals

are fundamentalists. If so, do the people not in the
intersection, the non-fundamentalist evangelicals, simply
have a looser interpretation of the bible?

[Raskolnik]

141. Not necessarily.

Fundamentalism and evangelism are descriptions of two different things.

When you call someone a "fundamentalist", you're describing where the tenets of their faith come from. When you call someone an "evengelist", you're simply describing how they spread that faith. Apples and oranges.

I really cannot recommend this book enough, by the way.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060558288/qid=1108340163/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/002-6037354-2168052?v=glance&s=books

[VegasWolf]

146. Gotcha! n/t

[davidthegnome]

148. Huh, funny, Kerry is insane?

As I recall, he's a Christian. As much as I dislike the general ignorance and intolerance I've seen in this thread... I have to admit you people have a point. We need to speak up, raise our voices loud and clear and denounce these motherfuckers that are twisting our religion and everything it stands for.

Let's all recall for a moment, what we're fighting against? Let's also recall, how much it pisses us off when the right wing attempts to demonize other religions. Pagans, Muslims... yes, they have faced great persecution (it shames me to say) from the Catholic church, from the Vattican, from Christians in general.

I can understand your anger, but please do not immediately consider any Christian a brainwashed idiot. We are not insane, we are not stupid, we have a right to our own religious and spiritual beliefs, as do the rest of you. And if I want to believe in the Easter Bunny? I'll believe in the fucking Easter Bunny.

When I visit other forums and see people attacking Muslims or pagans, it pisses me off. When I vist this forum and see people attacking Christians, it also pisses me off. Ignorance and intolerance is generally something the neocons are guilty of. It saddens me to see that some of us are as closed-minded as we accuse them of being.

I will fight for your right to believe what you wish. I will fight until the last drop of blood. I don't believe myself asbolutely correct, sure, I'm wrong about a good number of things, on a day to day basis. I do however, believe in Jesus and in what he taught. I do not believe that my way is the "right way", I do not believe that anyone who has different spiritual beliefs (or for that matter, no spiritual beliefs at all) is a "heathen", or in any way lesser than I am myself. We were all created equal, and Jesus knew it.

I was born and raised Catholic, and attend church to this day, though I am far from a conventional christian. I hate Bush, I hate the GOP - as much as the rest of you. But I'm not going to sit by and keep my mouth shut when someone insults what I believe in - insults me personally. Yes, by calling Christians insane and stupid, you are insulting people like me just as much as you are insulting the idiot conservatives who use religion to justify their acts of TRUE EVIL.

Damn... enough of my long-winded tirade, I think you all get the point.

[VegasWolf]

151. I think you have misplaced your post as well as your anger. I

was not implying sarcasm, I was indicating that I understood
the distinction the other poster was making.

As for your tirade, as you most quaintly say "if I want to believe in the Easter Bunny? I'll believe in the fucking Easter Bunny."

Well, you most certainly may! It is your life. I myself do not
believe in sky people floating around controlling the universe.
I do not believe in the Easter bunny. but, hey, its a big world.

I was raised catholic too, but managed to escape its influence
at a tender age by simply asking questions.

[Wapsie B]

150. Here we go again.

There are millions of Evangelical Christians in this country. 70+ million by some accounts. conservative fundamentalists make up a small subset of Evangelical Christianity. I belong to the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. I'm an Evangelical Christian.
Part of the way these numbers are presented in the media is more Rovian smoke and mirrors. There are over 70 million EC's here. There are NOT 70 million conservative fundamentalists.

[Old Mouse]

153. I am sorry for your situation

You and those of your faith are now being blamed for all the sins of our times. I am shocked, saddened, and frankly embarrassed for the blatant bigotry displayed by many of us here on the "enlightened" left. I am so very, very sorry.

[VegasWolf]

157. Actually, I think you a tarred with the brush of bush, ashcroft, falwell,

dobson, swaggert, jim and tammy faye, billy graham, etc.

[Wapsie B]

171. They are but a small group

within Evangelical Christianity. The ways in which these people are presented perpetuates the myth that these people speak for the whole Christian community, when in fact they speak for only a small portion of it.

[rodeodance]

156. poor babies.

[Name removed]

166. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. 
[link:www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html|Click
here] to review the message board rules.

[Tyler Durden]

168. FOR BOG'S SAKE, CAN'T WE GET OVER THIS GARBAGE????

There are some of us out here who are SO SICK of this "who shot John" attitude that makes "Religion" and the practice thereof a political issue.

Does ANYONE remember "Separation of CHURCH AND STATE?"

SHEEESH.

[Sgent]

172. Every fundamental denomination

is a member of the National Association of Evangelicals.

Most of the more moderate congregations (Presbyterian, UCC, Methodist, etc). are not.

This alone tends to lend to the idea that evangelical christians are fundamentalists, since they rejected the much older and more constrained United Council of Churhes to form their own right wing NAE.

ALL of this exculdes Catholicism, which can stand on its own having views of both camps.

[aikido15]

175. They can split hairs all they want...

But they are all the same, basing their reality on the invisible guy in the sky, taking the coward's way out waiting for "God" to take them to heaven and make everything right instead of getting off their lazy prejudice bums and making it happen for themselves.

And furthermore, whoever wrote the Book of Revelations is a raving lunatic who ate one too many mushrooms.

[applegrove]

176. So do most celebrities.

[aikido15]

177. So do most liberals, these days...

:eyes:

[applegrove]

179. Of course we don't know each other - we have all been stereotypes for the

purpose of wedging.