← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Zoroaster
Thread ID: 8935 | Posts: 11 | Started: 2003-08-10
2003-08-10 16:29 | User Profile
[url=http://www.vestedowl.com/richard_coduri2.htm]http://www.vestedowl.com/richard_coduri2.htm[/url]
Clash of Fundamentalisms Richard Coduri, The Federal Examiner www.federalexaminer.com
Since the September 11th attacks, many have claimed that we are experiencing a clash of civilizations. This is not exactly the case. What we are in reality facing is a clash of fundamentalisms. While the American media waxes prolific on the extent and ferocity of militant Islamic fundamentalism and its role in international terrorism, they rarely report on the pervasiveness and extremity of Christian fundamentalism driving much of U.S. foreign (and domestic) policy today.
This is dangerous. Most Americans have little or no idea of the influence of fundamentalist Christian thought in their government, nor do they believe that its influence is confined to issues of morality. But this philosophy goes beyond believing that abortion is murder and homosexuality is a grave sin (and, amazingly, that taxes are somehow inherently unchristian). There is a powerful body of fundamentalist Christian men and women in this countryââ¬â¢s business and governmental leadership who share a common dream of living to see the Second Coming of Christ, and have taken it upon themselves to bring this about. In order for this to happen though, they believe three things must first take place: the Temple must be rebuilt, Jerusalem must be a Jewish city, and the nation of Israel must be restored.
For example, certain American cattle tycoons have for years been working with Israeli counterparts to try and breed a pure red heifer in Israel, which, by their interpretation of chapter 19 of the Book of Numbers, will signal the coming of the building of the Third Temple. If they were to succeed, it could intensify the already strong movement within Israel to rebuild the Temple, the event of which would ignite the Middle East, as any new Temple must be built on the Temple Mount ââ¬â current home of the Dome of The Rock, a Muslim holy site.
Other aspects of this apocalyptic dream have frightening implications for U.S. foreign policy. A powerful group in Congress are dedicated to the cause of Israeli expansion, not because Israel is a democracy or because they want to support a country with strong ties to the United States, but because they believe that the restoration of Israel is incomplete. They believe that the whole of ââ¬Åhistorical Israel,ââ¬Â which would include parts of modern day Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon, must be reclaimed by a Jewish nation in order for Christ to return, and they are working hard to support expansionist policies in Israel that would fulfill this wish. It is their religious belief that also keeps them from supporting any peace plan that calls for the partitioning of Jerusalem. To attain their goals, Jerusalem must be undividedly Israeli. Instead of working to better the lives of their constituents, these elected officials are working to forward their own religious agenda.
Currently, a dangerous pattern is emerging in which Christian fundamentalists in the United States and Muslims zealots in the Middle East are increasingly driving their larger civilizations into conflict with each other. It is time for secularists, both domestically and abroad, to realize the extent to which extremism is driving current global conflict. If they donââ¬â¢t work diligently to get moderate individuals into positions of power, positions which will enable a meaningful dialogue with foes and stem the growing tide of discord between East and West, we may indeed be facing a very man-made end of days.
2003-08-10 16:47 | User Profile
"While the American media waxes prolific on the extent and ferocity of militant Islamic fundamentalism and its role in international terrorism, they rarely report on the pervasiveness and extremity of Christian fundamentalism driving much of U.S. foreign (and domestic) policy today."
What a hoot...
.....The "jewish" communists have owned our foreign policy since McCarthy's day, (he documented over 950 in the state department alone); this is a diversionary tactic by those selfsame "jewish" communists to get the mind-number masses behind the endgame of their assault of Christianity, is all... Do you fall for everything, Zorro? :rolleyes:
2003-08-10 20:32 | User Profile
Some extremists, particularly those like Patrick, or Killer as I call him, who are involved in "cults" or extreme religious movements, such as fundamentalist Christians, militant Zionist extremists, and members of mystical and metaphysical organizations, claim some kind of supernatural rationale for their beliefs and actions, and that their movement or cause is ordained by God. In this case, stark extremism may become reframed in a "religious" context, which can have a legitimizing effect for some people. It's surprising how many people are reluctant to challenge religiously motivated extremism because it represents "religious belief" or because of the sacred-cow status of some religions in our culture.
-Z-
2003-08-11 03:49 | User Profile
"Some extremists, particularly those like Patrick, or Killer as I call him, who are involved in "cults" or extreme religious movements, such as fundamentalist Christians, militant Zionist extremists, and members of mystical and metaphysical organizations, claim some kind of supernatural rationale for their beliefs and actions, and that their movement or cause is ordained by God."
.....Some atheists are so dumbed-down that they're unaware that their "atheism" has become their own religion and that they need to refer to others as "extremist", thereby, playing into the hand of the tyrannical oppression they would, in their right mind, hold in disdain; they claim that they know "what's what", without ever putting their first fact upon the table of discussion, thereby opening themselves to the most naive of challenges...
"In his case, stark extremism may become reframed in a "religious" context, which can have a legitimizing effect for some people. It's surprising how many people are reluctant to challenge religiously motivated extremism because it represents "religious belief" or because of the sacred-cow status of some religions in our culture."
.....In your case, Zorro, your need to refer to one, such as myself, as "religious", inspite of my blatant declamation against all that is "religious", wherein you make yourself look like a complete idiot, without my ever having to point it out; you tend to forget, however intentionally, that those of us that know Our Father, consider you in far worse terms than they could ever muster, in description of us...
2003-08-18 16:51 | User Profile
*Originally posted by Zoroaster@Aug 10 2003, 11:29 * ** [url=http://www.vestedowl.com/richard_coduri2.htm]http://www.vestedowl.com/richard_coduri2.htm[/url]
Clash of Fundamentalisms Richard Coduri, The Federal Examiner www.federalexaminer.com
Since the September 11th attacks, many have claimed that we are experiencing a clash of civilizations. This is not exactly the case. What we are in reality facing is a clash of fundamentalisms. While the American media waxes prolific on the extent and ferocity of militant Islamic fundamentalism and its role in international terrorism, they rarely report on the pervasiveness and extremity of [color=red]Christian[/color] fundamentalism driving much of U.S. foreign (and domestic) policy today.
This is dangerous. Most Americans have little or no idea of the influence of fundamentalist [color=red]Christian[/color] thought in their government, nor do they believe that its influence is confined to issues of morality. But this philosophy goes beyond believing that abortion is murder and homosexuality is a grave sin (and, amazingly, that taxes are somehow inherently unchristian). There is a powerful body of fundamentalist [color=red]Christian[/color] men and women in this countryââ¬â¢s business and governmental leadership who share a common dream of living to see the Second Coming of Christ, and have taken it upon themselves to bring this about. In order for this to happen though, they believe three things must first take place: the Temple must be rebuilt, Jerusalem must be a Jewish city, and the nation of Israel must be restored.
For example, certain American cattle tycoons have for years been working with Israeli counterparts to try and breed a pure red heifer in Israel, which, by their interpretation of chapter 19 of the Book of Numbers, will signal the coming of the building of the Third Temple. If they were to succeed, it could intensify the already strong movement within Israel to rebuild the Temple, the event of which would ignite the Middle East, as any new Temple must be built on the Temple Mount ââ¬â current home of the Dome of The Rock, a Muslim holy site.
Other aspects of this apocalyptic dream have frightening implications for U.S. foreign policy. A powerful group in Congress are dedicated to the cause of Israeli expansion, not because Israel is a democracy or because they want to support a country with strong ties to the United States, but because they believe that the restoration of Israel is incomplete. They believe that the whole of ââ¬Åhistorical Israel,ââ¬Â which would include parts of modern day Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon, must be reclaimed by a Jewish nation in order for Christ to return, and they are working hard to support expansionist policies in Israel that would fulfill this wish. It is their religious belief that also keeps them from supporting any peace plan that calls for the partitioning of Jerusalem. To attain their goals, Jerusalem must be undividedly Israeli. Instead of working to better the lives of their constituents, these elected officials are working to forward their own religious agenda.
Currently, a dangerous pattern is emerging in which [color=red]Christian[/color] fundamentalists in the United States and Muslims zealots in the Middle East are increasingly driving their larger civilizations into conflict with each other. It is time for secularists, both domestically and abroad, to realize the extent to which extremism is driving current global conflict. If they donââ¬â¢t work diligently to get moderate individuals into positions of power, positions which will enable a meaningful dialogue with foes and stem the growing tide of discord between East and West, we may indeed be facing a very man-made end of days. **
Zoroaster, I wanted others to be given a chance to point some flaws out about this article, but they did not catch it.
This article is a prime example of misleading readers through lying and distorting and blatant misrepresentation of facts.
Every word highlighted in red should be preceeded by the word, Judeo-
Due to the misrepresentation of facts Christians such as myself are lumped in with those queer lovin' sexual deviant bunch.
Real Christians do not ascribe to Judiased Christianity. You are not the author of that published article and are not responsible for it's content, however, facts needed to be clarified concerning the omission of Judeo- in front of the [color=red]Christian[/color] reference alluded to in said article.
2003-08-18 17:10 | User Profile
Golfball,
You'll get no argument from me. According to my dictionary the term "Judeo-Christian" was not part of the English vocabulary untill 1899. This coincides with the rise of Zionism, which, together with the Darby nonsense, has corrupted Christainity.
Christ fought against the establishment of His day, personified best by the Pharisees. Folks who confound the message of Christ with Zionism and modern-day Israel are lunatics.
-Z-
2003-08-18 17:22 | User Profile
Originally posted by golfball@Aug 18 2003, 11:51 * *Due to the misrepresentation of facts Christians such as myself are lumped in with those queer lovin' sexual deviant bunch. **
Granted fundamentalists like Bob Jones, Falwell, Robertson and even Hagee himself are eschatologically misguided, but to label such men as 'queer lovin' sexual deviants' is woefully inaccurate and bordering on slander. As preposterous as your statement is, it would be humorous if it wasn't so sad.
2003-08-19 02:07 | User Profile
What makes some Christians so stupid as to think God wants them to help rebuild the Temple, even if stipulated that their stupid eschatology is correct. Sorry, just had to vent.
2003-08-19 02:42 | User Profile
*Originally posted by Happy Hacker@Aug 18 2003, 21:07 * ** What makes some Christians so stupid as to think God wants them to help rebuild the Temple, even if stipulated that their stupid eschatology is correct. Sorry, just had to vent. **
That's okay, HH. I agree and that is a point I've made on numerous occasions. My comment above was really directed at the prior 'queer lovin'' comment, all eschatology aside. I'm getting tired of the Identity-type cultists spewing their unorthodox, Talmudic-inspired false doctrine.
2003-08-20 21:03 | User Profile
*Originally posted by Zoroaster@Aug 18 2003, 12:10 * ** ............ According to my dictionary the term "Judeo-Christian" was not part of the English vocabulary untill 1899.
............. **
You know, I have not found any printed or written references to "Judeo-Christians" or "Judeo-Christian" before the year of 1946. I have asked several etymologists and all have not given me an answer that is definative or concise.
2003-08-20 21:28 | User Profile
I decided to look at a reference to an article from the J.S. Mack Library site: [url=http://www2.bju.edu/resources/library/catalogs/biblical_vpoint/revview.html]http://www2.bju.edu/resources/library/cata...nt/revview.html[/url] Scroll down from the top... The Traditional View
The traditional view of fundamentalist history began to develop during the fundamentalist-modernist controversy of the 1920s. Outlined by the secular media and filled in by liberal historians, the traditional approach viewed fundamentalism as a cultural reaction to the modernization of American life, often southern and rural in its outlook. Modernism, on the other hand, emerged as the upholder of progressive, urban society. H. Richard Niebuhr, for example, wrote in his influential Social Sources of Denominationalism (1929),
In recent times the conflict between urban and rural religion took on dramatic form in the theological battles of Modernism and Fundamentalism. The agrarian leader of the West, [William Jennings] Bryan, became not only the champion of its economic interests but of its religion also. In the religious position he and his followers represented were reflected not only the memories and habit of frontier faith but also the experiences of rural life. Modernism, however, grew out of the social experience of the city bourgeoisie as well as out of the impact of the new science on religion.
Stewart Cole in The History of Fundamentalism (1931), the earliest history of the movement, underlined this point more subtly but no less certainly. What Cole sees as the reactionary character of fundamentalism comes out clearly in his chapter ââ¬ÅThe Rise of Fundamentalismââ¬Â:
[color=blue]Fundamentalism was the organized determination of conservative churchmen to continue the imperialistic culture of historic Protestantism within an inhospitable civilization dominated by secular interests and a progressive idealism. The fundamentalist was opposed to social change, particularly such change as threatened the standards of his faith and his status in ecclesiastical circles. As a Christian, he insisted upon the preservation of such evangelical values as at one time had been accepted universally, but in recent years were widely abandoned for more meaningful ideals.[/color]
As this quotation demonstrates, Cole believed that that fundamentalism was a religious movement but denied that it was shaped primarily by distinctly religious beliefs.
So far did this social and psychological approach proceed that by the 1950s Norman Furniss felt comfortable in listing the characteristics of fundamentalism as, among other things, ââ¬Åviolent language and vituperative personal invective,ââ¬Â ignorance, anti-intellectualism, and egotism. He lumped fundamentalism with the Ku Klux Klan as ââ¬Åmovements stressing hatred and bigotry.ââ¬Â
Richard Hofstadter made fundamentalism one his subjects in Anti-intellectualism in American Life, describing it as ââ¬Åa religious style shaped by a desire to strike back at everything modernââ¬âthe higher criticism, evolutionism, the social gospel, rational criticism of any kind.ââ¬Â
........
Bob Jones was not a Judeo-Christian and never ascribed to that ideology as far as I know.