Abra,

Nothing against the general premise of 'Intelligent Design' either.

It is with the fact that it only seems to exist as a WMD of evolution that I have a problem.

Darwin didn't wake-up one day thinking: "... let's see, what could I come-up with that would mess-up 'Genesis'?!?!?"

Take out the ulterior 'fundamentalist' motive, and 'ID' as an hypothesis has merit on its own two feet. Need not compete in anyway with evolution.

Bottom line is, intelligent design deserves and intelligent deliberating and expirementing context, free of the fundamentalist 'marketing' jinx!!!

:)

voileazur. This is an intricate topic. Let's just to say that the concept of evolution fueled many evils in the world, politics, socialism, communism, and even the elitism of the Nazis. You can't tell me it's harmless. Darkness without hope of seeing the light. It keeps people blind. I really just so wish for everyone to know God. No argument, no fighting "people". I fight Principals. You have assumed to much of me and clumped me in to a crowd that I myself do not belong to I believe.

I 'know' I am free, and I want others to experience it. That is my only goal. As it was for Jesus to heal and 'set' people free. One day you will understand and know, Gods very word holds the particles and the fabric of your being together.

The word "marketing" itself never appears in the Bible, the Bible is filled with examples of successful marketers: Solomon, Joshua, Nehemiah and Paul....and they had the ability to identify people's needs and then find the best ways to meet them. Jesus told his followers to do the same — bring His message to people in a way they could understand and relate to.

That's the heart of marketing so.... yeah there is Faith in Marketing.

nuenjins,

You wrote:
"... Let's just to say that the concept of evolution fueled many evils in the world, politics, socialism, communism, and even the elitism of the Nazis. You can't tell me it's harmless. Darkness without hope of seeing the light. It keeps people blind..."

It is the first time you and I have the pleasure of exchanging words, and trust me when I say to you that I have not assumed or posed any judgement on you.

That being said, your words on evolution above have hit a blackhole in my brain. I would appreciate if you could explain your understanding of evolution a bit more, and I promise this is not a set-up. Just an invitation to clarify your comment, and see where the exchange goes from there.

Thanks.

yokoke,

You're absolutely right!!!

Marketing is the oldest religion, and it's definitely all based on faith!!!

:)

2 things, look into whwere both stalin and Hitler got their belief systems from. They may sound oddly familiar to you. Well gents, I have a good woman to tend to. God bless. Drink a glass of your favorite alcohlic beverage and enjoy a smooth cigar.

Oh, and yes, what we call church in america today does suck to put it ever so bluntly. You were thinking it weren't you, yes you were.

I know, you don't see buddists slapping a sticker on cheesy toys that say "buddah rocks" and doubling the price. Pop Christianity is shameless and embarrassing, I readily admit. I know it wasn't the point, but waht I said cuts to the chase of what I think.

and V, You admittedly are more educated than I obviously. You are definitely a sincere man, a gentleman. I just wanted to say I respect you. I just wanted to make sure you knew that my relationship with Christ is a remnant of the what's left of 'real' lovers of Christ ( not being conmceited, but i love the freedom i have, i have the stars in my soul), and that I in no way promote the ideals of the mass marketed 'church', as it were.Gotta go. G'night.

So curious why you said this voileazur?

>Faith is not MARKETING!!!
Neither is faith a football game!!!
We're not going to the Super Bowl with this one!!!
We're not out to 'crush' the opponents!!!

>yokoke,
You're absolutely right!!!
Marketing is the oldest religion, and it's definitely all based on faith!!!

One thing that has truly evolved is the marketing of churches and going after the $$..... (long sigh).... sad but true....

In the beginning there was dust bunnies...

Who made the dust bunnies???

I did, I dislike sweeping the floors.

yokoke,

Faith is not religion, nor is it marketing.

But religion exploits people's faith in most intances, and does it through something that approximates business and marketing very much.

Does that clarify?

:)

Ahhhh dust bunnies..... we need a thread Jess for them.... hang on LOL

Yes voileazur, you clarified it well and Thank You

Excuse me while I market dustbunnies now....

And a good night to you 'nuenjins' !


:)

Yokoke-

Jess has a thread for dust bunnies... and it's full of them because no ones been there for over a month... so I pulled it back up again...

It's the Disorganized Philosphers... or something like that.... I forget exactly....

You'll see it.

~~~~~~~~

((Voil)) Long time no see...

Abra wrote;

"I can understand you feelings Eljay, truly I can. And I don’t see you as being a fundamentalists like some of the others. I think you get caught up in the middle sometimes."

Perhaps that is true. I only wish we had another "label" for the "fundamentalists" that are often refered to - to separate those of us who believe in the scriptures because we've reasoned it out - and apply our lives to it, and those who interpret the scriptures in order to apply it to the lives of others. Both tend to fall into the catagory of "fundamental" because the agreement on infallibility, inspiration, and accuracy is consistant, while interpretation is not always so. While I can see people having a hard time with the flood and Noah - this in turn is used to negate Proverbs. A leap in logic that pains my thought process, and leaves me at a loss of where to begin to respond. I think we all get carried away at times and tend to "lump" everything into one. I just thought it was time to back it off a bit.

Eljay,

Your preoccupation about the term 'fundamentalism/fundamentalists' is actually dead on topic, in that fundamentalists are the only party responsible for this ongoing 'lumping' of the 'evolution' 'non-debate', confused with religious beliefs, and unending discussions. It has all to do with the 'attack' mode of the rigid and intransigent fundamentalist approach.

About fundamentalists, you wrote:

'... I only wish we had another "label" for the "fundamentalists" that are often refered to - to separate those of us who believe in the scriptures because we've reasoned it out - and apply our lives to it, and those who interpret the scriptures in order to apply it to the lives of others. Both tend to fall into the catagory of "fundamental" because the agreement on infallibility, inspiration, and accuracy is consistant, while interpretation is not always so.

Fundamentalism and fundamentalists whom practice fundamentalism is far more than a mere 'label'. It is a very clear and distinct doctrine, which was first coined in the US Protestant movement in the early part of the 20th century.

Since its inception, around 1905-10, 'fundamentalism' has gone through several separational mutations, such that smeone whom might have been a fundamentalist in the 40's or 50's, might very well have become 'evangelical', or 'neo-evangelical' as a gesture of rejection of the backwards ways of the 'rigid' fundamentalists. Evangelicals and many other 'independents', broke away from the early 'fundamentalism' movement, and founded distinct groups or churches, stricly as a 'protest' of the ways of fundamentalists.

You also wrote:

'... I think we all get carried away at times and tend to "lump" everything into one. I just thought it was time to back it off a bit...'

I don't know about the 'we' ... all get carried away...' you refer to, but, I for one do not lump anyone into the 'fundamentalist' camp. You had mentionned Feral et all quite on your own. I never did.

I have, on the other hand, been referring to 'spider' as a fundamentalist, among other things because he defines himself as one. He clearly wrote so through a few posts in the past couple of months.

There are critical nuances to be made among protestants, Christians, believers of other faiths, as well as atheists and agnostics.
If there is 'lumping' going on, the masters of the field are fundamentalists.

They indiscriminately 'lump' anything together that serves their fundamentalism credo.

Their most shameless 'lumping' trick is without question the manner in which they happily mischaracterize their propaganda as though they were speaking in the name of all 2,1 billion Christians.

THEY SO MUCH ARE NOT!!!

They start most every inteventions with '...We Christians...' !!!

They're not speaking for the 53% of Catholics, 11% of Orthodox 4% of Anglicans, and 17% of Protestants. Neither are they speaking for the 19% of independents: LDS, Jeo. Wit., Evangelicals, etc.

'fundamentalists', are mostly a part of the category 'other' Christians, where all 'others' make up 1,9% of the total 'US' Christian population. A fair guess would peg roughly 50% of 'others' as 'fundamentlists', so about 0,95% or 2,8 million people in the US. And that's about it. Won't find much outside the US.

So the 'loud speakers' claiming to represent Christians, are actually, in the best of circumstances, representing 0,14% of Christians worldwide.

Instead of '... We Christians...' as an opener, they would be closer to the truth by opening with ...

'... We, 'Fundamentalists', separatists from the Catholics, Othodox, 'modernist', 'liberal', 'Orthodox', 'evengelical' and organized Protestant movement, and representing a marginal and insignificant (if loud) trace of the world Christian community...' !!!

Just like you Eljay, all other 2,097 billion Christians are also irritated to have 'fundamentalists' ABUSE' the Christian namesake!

While I wouldn't want to 'label' you 'Eljay', but strictly as a guess, I sense you are much closer to 'evangelical' or 'neo-evangelical' than 'fundamentalist'. It's the openness I guess!

Billy Graham, a most prominent 'evangelical' ambassador, came from a fundamentalist background, but many Christian fundamentalists repudiate him today because of his choice, early in his ministry (1950s), to open himself and his teachings to issues of solidarity and compassion, as well as his willingness to cooperate with other Christians.

Can you fathom that !!!

Christian Fundamentalists repudiate a member for cooperating with other Christians!!!

Graham represents a movement that arose within fundamentalism, and still stands on teh same foundations, but has increasingly become distinct from it, known as Neo-evangelicalism or New Evangelicalism (a term coined by Harold J. Ockenga, the "Father of New Evangelicalism").

Just my opinion, but that is more of the sense I'm left with around your nature and spirit 'Eljay'.

Anyhow, much more could be said on this subject, ... so much more!!! Better let you register first though !!!

Great to see you 'anoasis' !!!


:)

...and are these your reasons for not believing evolution, or intelligent design as it is sometimes called? The Scientific method not in action.

Dear 'rambill',

First an oxymoron:

You wrote: '... believing evolution...'

Evolution requires no belief, much less faith.

And then,

'... evolution, or intelligent design as it is sometimes called?...'

... I don't know what?!?!? Senseless 'lumping' or we've entered the 'twilight' zone.

I respect you 'rambill', and you can be quite a 'hoot' !!!

Anyway, glad you're not a fundamentalist!!!

Evolution was always funny (duckbill platypus etc.) but this thread takes it to new heights....

primordial soup? set off by a lightning bolt? its a religion. sorryaboutit. Takes a lot of faith to believe that one.odds against it are 1/10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000. (thats 123 zeros)
Ill gladly book some bets against that longshot.