NationStates Jolt Archive

This is a fascinating article. I was especially chilled by these passages.

"The danger of this theology of despair is that it says that nothing in the world is worth saving. It rejoices in cataclysmic destruction. It welcomes the frightening advance of global warming, the spiraling wars and violence in the Middle East and the poverty and neglect that have blighted American urban and rural landscapes as encouraging signs that the end of the world is close at hand.

Believers, of course, clinging to this magical belief, which is a bizarre form of spiritual Darwinism, will be raptured upwards while the rest of us will be tormented with horrors by a warrior Christ and finally extinguished. This obsession with apocalyptic violence is an obsession with revenge. It is what the world, and we who still believe it is worth saving, deserve.

Those who lead the movement give their followers a moral license to direct this rage and yearning for violence against all those who refuse to submit to the movement, from liberals, to "secular humanists," to "nominal Christians," to intellectuals, to gays and lesbians, to Muslims. These radicals, from James Dobson to Pat Robertson, call for a theocratic state that will, if it comes to pass, bear within it many of the traits of classical fascism."

link (http://www.alternet.org/story/46908/)

My mom thinks like this. It creeps me out.

uuuhhhkkkhhhrrgggglll..... fascists......

Margaret Atwood saw this coming way back.

Argh, the apocalypto Christians, they remind me of Heaven's Gate...

Argh, the apocalypto Christians, they remind me of Heaven's Gate...
At least those fucks were kind enough to just off themselves instead of trying to take everyone else down with them.

Argh, the apocalypto Christians, they remind me of Heaven's Gate...

And these would happen to be the same kind of nutcase evangelicals who support Israel primarily on the fact that they're hoping a shitstorm in Tel Aviv means Jeebus is coming.

Heil Jesus!

And these would happen to be the same kind of nutcase evangelicals who support Israel primarily on the fact that they're hoping a shitstorm in Tel Aviv means Jeebus is coming.

http://www.trephination.net/gallery/macros/hijacklive.jpg

Eh, I like suburbs...plenty of land and stores around, plus they usually have cheaper utilities and better internet access. Community isn't really something I need or want; all I need is contact with my immediate friends or family and I'm set.

i just wish they would set a date so that when it passes these people can go back to their regular lives.

Margaret Atwood saw this coming way back.

Bit of an alarmist there, don't you think?

This is a fascinating article. I was especially chilled by these passages.

"The danger of this theology of despair is that it says that nothing in the world is worth saving. It rejoices in cataclysmic destruction. It welcomes the frightening advance of global warming, the spiraling wars and violence in the Middle East and the poverty and neglect that have blighted American urban and rural landscapes as encouraging signs that the end of the world is close at hand.

Believers, of course, clinging to this magical belief, which is a bizarre form of spiritual Darwinism, will be raptured upwards while the rest of us will be tormented with horrors by a warrior Christ and finally extinguished. This obsession with apocalyptic violence is an obsession with revenge. It is what the world, and we who still believe it is worth saving, deserve.

Those who lead the movement give their followers a moral license to direct this rage and yearning for violence against all those who refuse to submit to the movement, from liberals, to "secular humanists," to "nominal Christians," to intellectuals, to gays and lesbians, to Muslims. These radicals, from James Dobson to Pat Robertson, call for a theocratic state that will, if it comes to pass, bear within it many of the traits of classical fascism."

link (http://www.alternet.org/story/46908/)

Wow, shit. It's happening already. I blame Karl Rove.

Bit of an alarmist there, don't you think?
It's true. As I've already said, there are a frightening number of Christians that think like this, and my own mother is one fo them. They think that Jesus could come back at any moment, and that God is directly overseeing this world. As a result, they believe that all the world's problems are just a prelude to the End Times, and that everything will be fixed at the Second Coming.

I'm not exagerrating. I'll be telling my mom about global warming or the latest bout of political corruption, and she'll just shake her head and say, "Jesus better hurry home soon..."

It's true. As I've already said, there are a frightening number of Christians that think like this, and my own mother is one fo them. They think that Jesus could come back at any moment, and that God is directly overseeing this world. As a result, they believe that all the world's problems are just a prelude to the End Times, and that everything will be fixed at the Second Coming.

I'm not exagerrating. I'll be telling my mom about global warming or the latest bout of political corruption, and she'll just shake her head and say, "Jesus better hurry home soon..."

It's a minority viewpoint, not even a plurality.

I'm not exagerrating. I'll be telling my mom about global warming or the latest bout of political corruption, and she'll just shake her head and say, "Jesus better hurry home soon..."
This is just laziness. The Bible does say that Jesus will return, but it also says - in many ways, and repeatedly - that we should work to improve the lot of our fellow humans, and that we should love God and His creation.

Terrific article. I’ve never read something that approached the whole crazy evangelical thing from that angle.
Community isn't really something I need or want; all I need is contact with my immediate friends or family and I'm set.You aren't most people.

Wow, shit. It's happening already. I blame Karl Rove.

Karl Rove is no fundamentalist Christian or any other kind of Christian. He's just playing upon their fears in an effort to hold on to more power.

It's like the fatalistic death cults that sprung up during the Middle Ages.

It's a minority viewpoint, not even a plurality.

Problem is, because of the outsized amounts of power these groups currently wield (though not as much as a year ago, thank goodness), it doesn't really matter if they're a minority or a plurality. It's influence that's the problem, and because it's a religious viewpoint these people hold, it's difficult to attack it openly, because of the undeserved respect religious viewpoints get in society.

Problem is, because of the outsized amounts of power these groups currently wield (though not as much as a year ago, thank goodness), it doesn't really matter if they're a minority or a plurality. It's influence that's the problem, and because it's a religious viewpoint these people hold, it's difficult to attack it openly, because of the undeserved respect religious viewpoints get in society.

QFT

Other problem is, I think this particular faction is growing. Fast. That frightens me.

What evangelical megachurches and their equivalents in other religions really are are "religion lite": they provide a prepackaged faith that allows the intellectually lazy, excessively busy, or close-minded to feel good about themselves without having to actually commit to the challenges (and resulting rewards) of a genuine dedication to a religious belief. There is no impetus to self-improvement, no engagement in the mysteries and complexities of spirituality and morality; no endeavors into self-examination and the search for meaning. Instead, you get stroking of fragile egos, judgmental and rigid dogma (a far cry from "let he without sin..."), and an entirely unearned sense of self-importance. Evangelical Christianity (like Islamic fundamentalism, Zionism, and dogmatic fundamentalism of all stripes) is an insult to the very idea of what religion is supposed to be. It is a way for the stupid and lazy to feel like the most important people in the world rather than the losers they are, without the inconvenience of actually having to think or work, which, being stupid and lazy, they aren't exactly prone to. Just like processed packaged junk foods are bad for your physical health, so is this processed packaged junk religion bad for your mental health.

I saw a very interesting documentary a while ago which showed that this mindset is a very serious problem in, I think, Uganda, but also in the wider African region. And that there were people who simply didn't bother to get involved in the fragile democracy, or bother to wear a condom during sex, or get a job, or support their AIDS-ridden bastardised families... all because they firmly believed the End Times were coming. While its all well and good to have a good laugh at the silly, and ultimately inconsequencial, opinions of some Americans, in countries like Uganda, this is literally destroying civilisation.

The documentary went on to say that this philosophy in Uganda was directly related to an influx of missionaries coming from the USA...

Suburban despair can lead to even worse things than apocolypto-christian fanaticism.... it can lead to Emo-ism.

I saw a very interesting documentary a while ago which showed that this mindset is a very serious problem in, I think, Uganda, but also in the wider African region. And that there were people who simply didn't bother to get involved in the fragile democracy, or bother to wear a condom during sex, or get a job, or support their AIDS-ridden bastardised families... all because they firmly believed the End Times were coming. While its all well and good to have a good laugh at the silly, and ultimately inconsequencial, opinions of some Americans, in countries like Uganda, this is literally destroying civilisation.

The documentary went on to say that this philosophy in Uganda was directly related to an influx of missionaries coming from the USA...

Funny story, all those evangelicals and missionaries? Yeah, they're the ones who tell people in AIDS-ridden countries not to wear condoms because its a sin. Luckily, not wearing a condom isn't associated with getting AIDS or having unwanted pregnancies you can't do anything about resulting in children you can't support because those same religious folk in their infinite wisdom also frown upon abortion. I mean, just imagine the outcry if that were true! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I frequently worry about the future survival of humanity with these idiots in positions of power and influence.

IIRC, the bible says that no man will know when the End Times will arrive. Anyone who sits back and waits for them might well be waiting 50 years! Or more!

I saw a very interesting documentary a while ago which showed that this mindset is a very serious problem in, I think, Uganda, but also in the wider African region. And that there were people who simply didn't bother to get involved in the fragile democracy, or bother to wear a condom during sex, or get a job, or support their AIDS-ridden bastardised families... all because they firmly believed the End Times were coming. While its all well and good to have a good laugh at the silly, and ultimately inconsequencial, opinions of some Americans, in countries like Uganda, this is literally destroying civilisation.

The documentary went on to say that this philosophy in Uganda was directly related to an influx of missionaries coming from the USA...

These wouldn't be the same missionaries who are probably contributing to the problems of both AIDS and a high birth rate (causing people to be unable to support their families) by discouraging the use of condoms and birth control, would they? Nah, couldn't be. :rolleyes:

Fundamentalism is bad for everything. Poison for the mind, an excuse for violence and oppression...just shitty all around. We should find a way to get rid of it and start immediately.

lol It's kind of funny. For the most part the extreme right is made up of a bunch of fatalists, and the left is filled with a bunch of self loathers. If only we could get both sides to come together, boy what a treat that would be... :)

Problem is, because of the outsized amounts of power these groups currently wield (though not as much as a year ago, thank goodness), it doesn't really matter if they're a minority or a plurality. It's influence that's the problem, and because it's a religious viewpoint these people hold, it's difficult to attack it openly, because of the undeserved respect religious viewpoints get in society.
Then support or put forth Christians with viewpoints that contradict their words. These nihilists don't speak for Christians in general. I don't see how they should be so difficult to refute.

You aren't most people.
Does that make Vetalia's preferences less valid?

This is a fascinating article. I was especially chilled by these passages.

"This obsession with apocalyptic violence is an obsession with revenge. It is what the world, and we who still believe it is worth saving, deserve.
"

As one who still possesses faith in humanity, I am sorry to say that this is not a condition that plagues religion alone. :( I have talked to many who want to see earth destroyed for the human races' "stupidity", "arrogance", or what have you. Some want the earth destroyed just because of the existence of religion!

I'm not exagerrating. I'll be telling my mom about global warming or the latest bout of political corruption, and she'll just shake her head and say, "Jesus better hurry home soon..."

Ask her what would happen if Jesus acted like the average mom and said "I'm not talking you anywhere until you clean this mess up"

To believe that some magical figure will suddenly come down from Heaven and take all Christians up is most dangerous indeed, it is an anti-progressivist anti-social self-destructive theory that promotes doing nothing to help the downtrodden of society, a kind of stagnation in society, just because a totally unprovable and unvalidated event may happen in the next ∞.

Wow, that sounds logical;)

Then support or put forth Christians with viewpoints that contradict their words. These nihilists don't speak for Christians in general. I don't see how they should be so difficult to refute.
Trust me, it's not me voting for them. I try to vote for as polar an opposite to them as exists. But there's this situation where you can't publicly challenge someone's beliefs because it's considered impolite and impolitic, a situation exacerbated by those more moderate Christians who, intentionally or not, give the extremists spiritual cover.

Evangelical Christianity (like Islamic fundamentalism, Zionism

You know, when I read those words, it gave me this image:

One one side of a person, the three symbols of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism float, representing true believers of those faiths. On the other side of a person, inverted, evil-looking versions of those symbols float, representing these dogmatic, false faiths. Beams of both white and black dart between the opposing symbols, while the person is caught in the middle, constantly scarred with various little injuries.

And the person? The person represents society. Scary, huh?

I recommend reading Hannah Arendt's "Ideology and Terror: A Novel Form of Government", which essentially defines a Totalitarian state as a society dominated by an all pervasive Ideology and perpetual Terror.

The article the OP links to provides a chilling instantiation of Arendt's theory- the Ideology is Christian Fundamentalism. The nation is the United States. All that is needed is Terror, true, all consuming terror, to complete the transformation.

Will such a totalitarian America come to pass? I doubt it.
But this is a cautionary tale, well worth listening to.
The fundamentalist Christians in America have created a fictional world for themselves, just like the fundamentalist Muslims. These fictional worlds have the potential to come into violent, explosive conflict with reality.

It's a minority viewpoint, not even a plurality.

As may be, but it has the influence of a group of political elites. Elites don't have to be pluralities to be dangerous.

In my world, all life is without sorrow,
life is everlasting,
the grass is always green,
there is only bliis,
I rule there,
and none of you are invited.

You know, when I read those words, it gave me this image:

One one side of a person, the three symbols of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism float, representing true believers of those faiths. On the other side of a person, inverted, evil-looking versions of those symbols float, representing these dogmatic, false faiths. Beams of both white and black dart between the opposing symbols, while the person is caught in the middle, constantly scarred with various little injuries.

And the person? The person represents society. Scary, huh?What?! :rolleyes:

Funny story, all those evangelicals and missionaries? Yeah, they're the ones who tell people in AIDS-ridden countries not to wear condoms because its a sin. Luckily, not wearing a condom isn't associated with getting AIDS or having unwanted pregnancies you can't do anything about resulting in children you can't support because those same religious folk in their infinite wisdom also frown upon abortion. I mean, just imagine the outcry if that were true!
I frequently worry about the future survival of humanity with these idiots in positions of power and influence.Well, for the defense of those same religious folk in their infinite wisdom must be said that those same religious folk in their infinite wisdom also say that one should not fuck around. No-one gets HIV or a pregnancy accidentally, you know, both are results of individual behavior.

This is a fascinating article. I was especially chilled by these passages.

"The danger of this theology of despair is that it says that nothing in the world is worth saving. It rejoices in cataclysmic destruction. It welcomes the frightening advance of global warming, the spiraling wars and violence in the Middle East and the poverty and neglect that have blighted American urban and rural landscapes as encouraging signs that the end of the world is close at hand.

Believers, of course, clinging to this magical belief, which is a bizarre form of spiritual Darwinism, will be raptured upwards while the rest of us will be tormented with horrors by a warrior Christ and finally extinguished. This obsession with apocalyptic violence is an obsession with revenge. It is what the world, and we who still believe it is worth saving, deserve.

Those who lead the movement give their followers a moral license to direct this rage and yearning for violence against all those who refuse to submit to the movement, from liberals, to "secular humanists," to "nominal Christians," to intellectuals, to gays and lesbians, to Muslims. These radicals, from James Dobson to Pat Robertson, call for a theocratic state that will, if it comes to pass, bear within it many of the traits of classical fascism."

link (http://www.alternet.org/story/46908/)

Yes, the Christan right has many fascist qualities...So does the Jewish faith...and Jehovah's witnesses....And the Islamic faith.... In the end its ridiculous too label the Christian right as fascist, because every religious doctrine (nearly) has strict adherent guidelines which constitute a form of fascism in some cases. Nice smear attempt though, I love this fellows vocabulary. As for the fear of Armageddon, and taking glee in climate shift, well as stated in Christan doctrine, Armageddon will come eventually. One thing I disagree on with many Christan's, is the belief that our world today marks the beginning of the end. No man knows the hour, so their is no point too obsess over it.

You know, as I think about this more and more. The hyperbolish, down right pseudo fear-mongerish nature of this type of anti-Christian hysteria becomes inescapable. I can't help but get the feeling that the essence, the point of all this is really just diversionary, or even self-deluding.


EDIT...

An answer is suggested by Lawrence Auster’s First Law of Majority-Minority Relations in Liberal Society.

"The First Law states that because of the modern liberal belief in the moral and substantive equality of all peoples and cultures, the worse any minority or non-Western group really is, the worse the West must be made to appear, as the guilty cause of the non-Western group’s bad or dysfunctional behavior, or as simply bad in itself. If the worse is made to look better, and the better made to look worse, an apparent rough equality is maintained between them, and the liberal view survives. In the case of Islam, if it is true that Islam seeks to impose an Islamic theocracy over the world, liberals cannot acknowledge this fact, because Islam would then cease being the morally equal and culturally rich Other whom we must tolerate and embrace, and become a morally inferior and hostile destructive adversary whom we must resist and exclude. Therefore, in a massive act of denial, liberals displace the danger Islam poses to the West onto the West itself, especially onto American conservative Christians. Instead of the threat being the historically and actually existing Islamic agenda to establish an Islamic world theocracy, the threat becomes a non-existent American Christian agenda to establish an American or even a world Christian theocracy, a threat that must be met by radically weakening Christianity or even eliminating it altogether.

Thus, having discovered that a non-Western religion is waging war on the West, the left responds by waging war against the West’s own religion."

^^^ That's not to say that one or either side is always in the right, or wrong. (at least I'm not) Just that some of us *cough* like to reinterpret, selectively ignore and yes, sometimes even rewrite the context of such types of issues. In a distinctly self/western- loathing and disdain sort of way.

Trust me, it's not me voting for them. I try to vote for as polar an opposite to them as exists. But there's this situation where you can't publicly challenge someone's beliefs because it's considered impolite and impolitic, a situation exacerbated by those more moderate Christians who, intentionally or not, give the extremists spiritual cover.
I thought we were well over the idea that moderates share blame for extremist actions, or does that only apply to Muslims?

You know, as I think about this more and more. The hyperbolish, down right pseudo fear-mongerish nature of this type of anti-Christian hysteria becomes inescapable. I can't help but get the feeling that the essence, the point of all this is really just diversionary, or even self-deluding.
The power of terrorists is overstated, and the rhetoric of the extreme Christian right is similar to the extreme Islamic right.

I thought we were well over the idea that moderates share blame for extremist actions, or does that only apply to Muslims?
I didn't say that moderates share blame, only that they provide cover when it comes to criticism of beliefs that lead to extreme behavior. Moderate religious people tell the world at large that to criticize elements of faith is wrong--they're speaking primarily of their own, which to them seem eminently reasonable, and may well be by some standard. But by doing that, by arguing that issues of belief are outside the realm of critical discourse, they provide cover for the more extreme members of any religious group. If we can't criticize the moderates, then we can't criticize the extremists. That's what I mean when I say the moderates give the extremists cover.

I didn't say that moderates share blame, only that they provide cover when it comes to criticism of beliefs that lead to extreme behavior. Moderate religious people tell the world at large that to criticize elements of faith is wrong--they're speaking primarily of their own, which to them seem eminently reasonable, and may well be by some standard. But by doing that, by arguing that issues of belief are outside the realm of critical discourse, they provide cover for the more extreme members of any religious group. If we can't criticize the moderates, then we can't criticize the extremists. That's what I mean when I say the moderates give the extremists cover.

A point very well made. Look at all the people who call themselves christian on this very forum. They, for the most part (I say that for those of you who get tetchy), don't actually decry the actions of said minority, but get offended at people who do, and try to excuse the religion as a whole by saying something akin to "that's not what I do."

Wasn't it actually written that "the hottest places in hell are reserved for those who remain neutral when atrocities are committed in their name"?

I didn't say that moderates share blame, only that they provide cover when it comes to criticism of beliefs that lead to extreme behavior. Moderate religious people tell the world at large that to criticize elements of faith is wrong--they're speaking primarily of their own, which to them seem eminently reasonable, and may well be by some standard. But by doing that, by arguing that issues of belief are outside the realm of critical discourse, they provide cover for the more extreme members of any religious group.
Who has ever said that their religious beliefs are beyond critical discourse? Contemplation and debate are a pretty important part of theology.

A point very well made. Look at all the people who call themselves christian on this very forum. They, for the most part (I say that for those of you who get tetchy), don't actually decry the actions of said minority, but get offended at people who do, and try to excuse the religion as a whole by saying something akin to "that's not what I do."
1. I and a number of other moderate Christians can be spotted arguing against radical Christians on this forum (mind you, such people don't appear very often).

2. I don't get offended when people criticise the American Christian Right; it's really none of my concern anyway.

3. I get offended when people, in their ignorance, forget that WASPs make up about 3% of Christians worldwide, and yet continue to use them as their basis for stereotyping about Christians.

This is a fascinating article. I was especially chilled by these passages.

First, I didn't read the article in its entirety. I read the first paragraph and saw that it was only sociological propoganda which supports the idea that everything is a power struggle between the possessed and the dispossessed. A view which I totally and utterly reject.

"The danger of this theology of despair is that it says that nothing in the world is worth saving. It rejoices in cataclysmic destruction. It welcomes the frightening advance of global warming, the spiraling wars and violence in the Middle East and the poverty and neglect that have blighted American urban and rural landscapes as encouraging signs that the end of the world is close at hand."

Well, that's basic Christianity: everything's tainted with sin and therefore valuable only for destruction. Without this, there is no need for Jesus' death, the most important idea in Christianity. But God is merciful.

Jesus gave said that we would here of wars and rumors of wars as the end times approached and all through Revelation there are catastophes upon catastrophes. We should rejoice that through these, God is carrying out His plan, that He is being glorified, and that the day in which we will be with Him is approaching. We should not rejoice that others are suffering. If we do anything than aid and love the sufferers, we are in great sin.

"Believers, of course, clinging to this magical belief, which is a bizarre form of spiritual Darwinism, will be raptured upwards while the rest of us will be tormented with horrors by a warrior Christ and finally extinguished. This obsession with apocalyptic violence is an obsession with revenge. It is what the world, and we who still believe it is worth saving, deserve."

Social Darwinism? That's the sociology coming out. The world does not revolve around gender, race and economic conflicts. It revolves around moral conflicts which are made manifest in these.

The view it is talking about is the Premillennialist-Dispensationalism (http://www.theopedia.com/Premillennialism), a heretical view which should be rejected. It is totally inconsistent with Scripture. Premillenialism, Postmillennialism (http://www.theopedia.com/Postmillennialism), and Amillennialism (http://www.theopedia.com/Amillennialism) all have Scriptural bases and all reject that the "Christian will be spared the horrors of the heathen." I am a Postmillennialist.

"Those who lead the movement give their followers a moral license to direct this rage and yearning for violence against all those who refuse to submit to the movement, from liberals, to "secular humanists," to "nominal Christians," to intellectuals, to gays and lesbians, to Muslims. These radicals, from James Dobson to Pat Robertson, call for a theocratic state that will, if it comes to pass, bear within it many of the traits of classical fascism."

Fascism? Oh, well.

Christian Reconstructionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Reconstructionism)