Being a fundamentalist Christian in 2020

Meriweather · 2020-01-17T02:16:53.772Z

AZslim:

I would be a benevolent ruler either way.

No beatings unless absolutely necessary.

Going back to the OP of long ago…

Why do Fundamentalist believe Biblical calculations of the seventeenth century over scientific facts presented today.

Let’s look at this assessment of fact versus truth. One way a fact is described: 1+1=2. There is only one possible result…it is a proven truth. On the other hand 2=1+1 is true, but it is not a fact, because 2 could equal infinite possibilities (think along the lines 2=6-4–and infinite possibilities that also equal 2).

One of the definitions of truth is fidelity to the original standard. Fundamentalists have fidelity to the original standard.

What Fundamentalists cannot (by definition) argue is that their truths are facts, simply because there are other possibilities–just like there are other possibilities that 2=something other than 1+1.

Same with your latest reasoning. You might have fidelity to your own truth and understanding that the Bible teaches men should “rule” over women. But, as been demonstrated, it is not fact because plainly there are other possibilities which have been explained to you.

ImRightYoureWrong · 2020-01-17T04:14:30.421Z

…Huh?

ImRightYoureWrong · 2020-01-17T04:15:25.253Z

Meriweather:

Let’s look at this assessment of fact versus truth. One way a fact is described: 1+1=2. There is only one possible result…it is a proven truth. On the other hand 2=1+1 is true, but it is not a fact, because 2 could equal infinite possibilities (think along the lines 2=6-4–and infinite possibilities that also equal 2).

Therefore…the world is less than 10,000 years old? Because 6 minus 4 is 2?

2 = 1 + 1 is a fact
2 = 6 - 4 is also a fact

Why can’t they both be facts?

What exactly is your point?

ImRightYoureWrong · 2020-01-17T04:19:32.049Z

Meriweather:

One of the definitions of truth is fidelity to the original standard. Fundamentalists have fidelity to the original standard.

What Fundamentalists cannot (by definition) argue is that their truths are facts, simply because there are other possibilities–just like there are other possibilities that 2=something other than 1+1.

Same with your latest reasoning. You might have fidelity to your own truth and understanding that the Bible teaches men should “rule” over women. But, as been demonstrated, it is not fact because plainly there are other possibilities which have been explained to you.

What does having “fidelity to the original standard” in fundamentalist Christian terms even mean? I thought you disagree with fundamentalist interpretations, using the Bible as a science book. Yet, that is the “standard”?

AZslim · 2020-01-17T05:02:44.624Z

Meriweather:

AZslim:

I would be a benevolent ruler either way.

No beatings unless absolutely necessary.

Going back to the OP of long ago…

Why do Fundamentalist believe Biblical calculations of the seventeenth century over scientific facts presented today.

Let’s look at this assessment of fact versus truth. One way a fact is described: 1+1=2. There is only one possible result…it is a proven truth. On the other hand 2=1+1 is true, but it is not a fact, because 2 could equal infinite possibilities (think along the lines 2=6-4–and infinite possibilities that also equal 2).

One of the definitions of truth is fidelity to the original standard. Fundamentalists have fidelity to the original standard.

What Fundamentalists cannot (by definition) argue is that their truths are facts, simply because there are other possibilities–just like there are other possibilities that 2=something other than 1+1.

Same with your latest reasoning. You might have fidelity to your own truth and understanding that the Bible teaches men should “rule” over women. But, as been demonstrated, it is not fact because plainly there are other possibilities which have been explained to you.

1 +1 = 2 is a fact.
2 = 1+1 is a fact as well.
What the heck are you trying to say?

ImRightYoureWrong · 2020-01-17T05:07:18.992Z

Meriweather:

Let’s look at this assessment of fact versus truth. One way a fact is described: 1+1=2. There is only one possible result…it is a proven truth. On the other hand 2=1+1 is true, but it is not a fact, because 2 could equal infinite possibilities (think along the lines 2=6-4–and infinite possibilities that also equal 2).

Sorry to break it to you but…

1 + 1 = 1 + 1
1 + 1 = 6 - 4

Infinite possibilities.

I guess it’s not factual to say 1 + 1 = 2 then.

Therefore, Noah’s ark was real?

Meriweather · 2020-01-17T12:29:17.864Z

AZslim:

2 = 1+1 is a fact as well.

No. 2=1+1 is true, but it is not fact. Fact, in its truest definition has one solution. Two can be the solution to an infinite number of equations–that is a fact.

Consider the differences between truth and fact…and it may help in the understanding the religious beliefs of others.

ImRightYoureWrong · 2020-01-17T12:48:55.168Z

Meriweather:

Fact, in its truest definition has one solution.

Not in mathematics

2 = 1 + 1
1 + 1 = 2
1 + 1 = 6 - 4

All are facts.

But I get it. Nothing about fundamentalism makes sense so the “truth” has to be obscured by some weird analogy of kindergarten arithmetic

ImRightYoureWrong · 2020-01-17T12:54:03.107Z

Since 2 + 2 = 4, it’s true that there was a quid pro quo? Is that what you are saying?

Borgia_dude · 2020-01-17T13:51:01.839Z

I like the semantic mumbo-jumbo.

A fact is just something proven to be true. I just looked up the definition. No mention of uniqueness.

LeroyBrown · 2020-01-17T14:26:10.561Z

ImRightYoureWrong:

…Huh?

good + bad = The Facts of Life.

ImRightYoureWrong · 2020-01-17T14:33:45.873Z

Everything balances eventually. Thats why I get nervous when life starts going really well.

Borgia_dude · 2020-01-17T18:26:30.744Z

LeroyBrown:

ImRightYoureWrong:

…Huh?

good + bad = The Facts of Life.

That’s pretty good. It’s a fact but is it true?

rp5x5 · 2020-01-17T18:46:48.804Z

24/7 trolls minimum wage

waste of life

enki · 2020-01-17T18:59:15.515Z

rp5x5:

24/7 trolls minimum wage

waste of life

Name calling again?

Jezcoe · 2020-01-17T19:00:17.274Z

rp5x5:

24/7 trolls minimum wage

waste of life

Nah… I do this to entertain myself at work.

enki · 2020-01-17T19:03:39.241Z

Jezcoe:

rp5x5:

24/7 trolls minimum wage

waste of life

Nah… I do this to entertain myself at work.

Pfft, libs don’t work.

Borgia_dude · 2020-01-17T19:28:25.980Z

Fact is a noun.
True is an adverb or adjective.

A fact is true by definition.

rp5x5 · 2020-01-17T20:03:55.681Z

From !3th cent Japanese great Bodhisattva Sun Lotus (Nichiren)

“Again, this matter of the head being split into seven pieces—one need not imagine the kind of split made by a sharp sword. On the contrary, the Lotus Sutra says that the split is like that of the “branches of the arjaka tree.”

In a person’s head there are seven drops of liquid, and outside there are seven demons. If the demons drink one drop, the person’s head begins to ache. If they drink three drops, his life will be endangered, and if they drink all seven drops, he will die. People in the world today all have heads that have split apart like the branches of the arjaka tree, but they are so steeped in evil karma that they are not even aware of the fact. They are like persons who have been injured while they were asleep or in a state of drunkenness, and have not yet become conscious of their injury."

rp5x5 · 2020-01-17T20:25:22.858Z

Background Context from above quote from the Lotus Sutra:

At that time heavenly king Upholder of the Nation, who was in the assembly along with a host of thousands, ten thousands, millions of nayutas of gandharvas who surrounded him and paid him reverence, advanced to the place where the Buddha was, pressed his palms together and said to the Buddha, “World-Honored One, I too will employ dharanis, supernatural spells, to shield and guard those who uphold the Lotus Sutra.” Then he pronounced these spells:

agane gane gauri gandhari chandali matangi janguly vrusani
agashti

“World-Honored One, these dharanis, these supernatural spells, are pronounced by forty-two million Buddhas. If anyone should assault or injure these teachers of the Law, then he will have assaulted and injured these Buddhas!”

At that time there were daughters of rakshasa demons, the first named Lamba, the second named Vilamba, the third named Crooked Teeth, the fourth named Flowery Teeth, the fifth named Black Teeth, the sixth named Much Hair, the seventh named Insatiable, the eighth named Necklace Bearer, the ninth named Kunti, and the tenth named Stealer of the Vital Spirit of All Living Beings. These ten rakshasa daughters, along with the Mother of Devil Children, her offspring, and her attendants, all proceeded to the place where the Buddha was and spoke to the Buddha in unison, saying, “World-Honored One, we too wish to shield and guard those who read, recite, accept, and uphold the Lotus Sutra and spare them from decline or harm. If anyone should spy out the shortcomings of these teachers of the Law and try to take advantage of them, we will make it impossible for him to do so.” Then in the presence of the Buddha they pronounce these spells:

itime itime itime atime itime nime nime nime nime nime ruhe
ruhe ruhe ruhe stahe stahe stahe stuhe shuhe

“Though they climb upon our very heads, they will never trouble the teachers of the Law! Whether it be a yaksha, or a pakshasa, or a hungry spirit, or a putana, or a kritya, or a vetada, or a skanda 8, or an umaraka, or an apasmaraka, or a yaksha kritya, or a human kritya, or a fever, a one day, a two day, a three day, or a four day, or up to a seven day or a constant fever, whether it be in a man’s form, in a woman’s form, in young boy’s form, in young girl’s form, though it be only in a dream, it will never trouble them!”

Then in the presence of the Buddha they spoke in verse form, saying:

If there are those who fail to heed our spells
and trouble and disrupt the preachers of the Law,
their heads will split into seven pieces
like the branches of the arjaka tree.
Their crime will be like that of one who kills father and mother,
or one who presses out oil,
or cheats others with measures and scales,
or, like Devadatta, disrupts the Order of monks.
Anyone who commits a crime against these teachers of the Law
will bring on himself guilt such as this!"

After the rakshasa daughters had spoken these verses, they said to the Buddha, “World-Honored One, we will use our own bodies to shield and guard those who accept, uphold, read, recite, and practice this sutra. We will see that they gain peace and tranquility, freeing them from decline and harm and nulling the effect of all poison herbs.”

The Buddha said to the rakshasa daughters, “Excellent, excellent! If you can shield and guard those who accept and uphold the mere name of the Lotus Sutra, your merit will be immeasurable. How much more so if you shield and guard those who accept and uphold it in its entirety, who offer alms to the sutra scrolls, flowers, incense, necklaces, powdered incense, paste incense, incense for burning, banners, canopies, music, who burn various kinds of lamps, lamps of butter oil, oil lamps, lamps of various fragrant oils, lamps of sumana flower oil, and lamps of utpala flower oil, and who in this manner offer hundreds and thousands of varieties of alms? Kunti, you and your attendants should shield and guard the teachers of the Law such as these!”

When [the Buddha] preached this Dharani chapter, sixty-eight thousand persons gained the truth of birthless-ness.