http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/439025.aspx I had a pretty good idea what it means if going by the NAE. I'm very surprised by the fact that so many could not even guess what it means. God help us!
Now let's try them with 'bigot' No peeking at the answer... Spoiler bigot –noun. a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion. Same thing then.
I'm so glad we're tolerant of people with different beliefs here. Unlike those scum evangelicals. </extreme sarcasm> I'm guessing the 'shares their faith' defenition means 'talks about their beliefs with other people', not 'believes the same as I do'. It's just bad wording. It's not talking about identifying with people with similar beliefs. It's certainly not talking about 'utter intolerance of any difference'. Gooey_GUI: Yeah, this is why I laugh when polls say that a majority of <insert people group here> consider themselves Christian. They don't even know what the word means, but sneer at those who do (damn fundies!), but still consider themselves to be part of the group. It makes no sense. Call yourself whatever religion you like, but if you can't have an intelligent and mostly accurate discussion of the major beliefs and terms it uses, I'm going to laugh in your face.
I knew it was something to do with religion. but other than that I had no idea. I dont pay attention to religion.
Many Americans also believe the bible literally and think Jesus will quite literally descend from the sky within their life times. Many Americans also voted for George W Bush TWICE and think Evolution is demon-inspired sorcery. The country is frankly filled with far too many idiots, especially for a modern western country. And they will keep on breeding more than the educated Americans. RIP USA.
heh, due to the massive migrane I had earlier I am currently in a codine induced stupor. As such, when I first looked at that link I thought that you were calling me a cigarette smoking lesbian who is an attractive babe with the best fanny and is absolutley mature. But now I see otherwise. Thank god.
Perhaps it's helpful to look at the Wiki definition: (from the entry 'Good news') In Christianity, the gospel or evangelium (also translated as "good news", "glad tidings" and variants) is the message of Jesus, the Christ (the Messiah), specifically his atoning death on the cross and resurrection, the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost as "helper" (paraclete), and the resulting promise and hope of salvation for the faithful. Good News is the English translation of the Koine Greek ευαγγέλιον (euangelion). The Greek term was Latinized as evangelium, and translated into Latin as bona annuntiatio. In Old English, it was translated as gōdspel (gōd "good" + spel "news"). The Old English term was retained as gospel in Middle English Bible translations and hence remains in use also in Modern English. The written accounts of the life and teaching of Jesus are also generally known as "Gospels". Evangelism is the spreading of the evangelium, i.e. Christian proselytization, see also the Great Commission. Evangelicalism is a 20th century branch of Protestantism that emphasizes the reception of the "good news" by the individual, contrasting with the traditional emphasis on the Church as crucial to the salvation of the faithful (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus). The Christian message of good news is described in the Bible. It relates to the saving acts of God, centred upon the person of Jesus and his substitutionary death on the cross and resurrection from the dead. Its context is the storyline of the Christian Bible as a whole, which tells of the creation of humanity, humanity's rebellion against God, and how people from all nations are restored to relationship with God through the person of Jesus. A key theme of the Christian good news is that God offers a new life and forgiveness through Jesus. Jesus' teaching of the good news also relates to the coming of the Kingdom of God (Mark 1:14-15). The above extract from Wiki makes clear the distinction between 'Evangelical' and 'Evangelism'. I add this for the sake of clarity.
Evangelical is also a common trait of the lesser spotted creationist retard. be careful when handling those beasts, they pack an awful amount of stupid, and its infectious.
Fair point, but no atheist has ever burned at the stake, blown up or just generally persecuted or ostracised a religious person for their beliefs. Atheists do all that for more pragmatic reasons. Thanks for that. Regardless of my other beliefs, I believe that it is good to be informed.
I'm not sure it does. The various Evangelical Missions are proselytising their Christian beliefs, Though the justifications are really based on quicksand Darwin blew a bit of a hole in that one, didn't he? Though my main concern is with "just governance" - "just" for who? And not bigoted?
Nope, not inherently. There's a difference between believing that someone will end up in a hot place, and being a jerk to them because of it. The second I'd call bigotry, the first I would not. I know you're trying to make a joke here, at least sort of, but it's irritating me. Look what else is cropping up on Bit just in the last couple of days from just two threads: Sure looks like 'persecution' and 'ostracization' to me. I'm not worried about it - it's teh interwebs, get a thick skin or get out. But saying that only religious people are bigoted or make ignorant statements about beliefs that they oppose is like saying that only white people are racist.
But in a free society, with free speech, what is inherently wrong with seeking, through reasonable means, to present your beliefs to others, that they may have opportunity to consider them? Surely all who hold firmly to a philosophical or religious viewpoint should have the freedom, and use that freedom, to tell others what they believe? It is not only organised religion that does this. Many secularists / humanists / atheists do this too. Richard Pullman has made clear on public television in the UK, that he hopes his books will communicate atheism to the younger generation, in a way similar to C.S. Lewis conveying Christian belief. Then there is Richard Dawkins. I first read him back in the 80's (The Selfish Gene). When I listen to him now, I see him as first and foremost an outspoken pro-ponent and apologist for secularist humanism; Dawkins the geneticist seems to have long since disapperared. I can understand where Prof. Antony Flew is coming from when he describes Dawkins as a 'secularist bigot' In my experience, I have found some secularists to be just as intolerant of other belief systems as many religious 'fundamentalists'
Creationists and Evangelicals ARE Cretins, Retards and mentally demented individuals. We'd describe people the same way if they believed the earth was flat and that Zeus is real, why should Christians be spared? There is nothing "persecution" or "ostracization" about it. We're nothing more than normal people ridiculing foolish idiots. If they were to say that "Creationists are Cretin... AND they need to rounded up and have their beliefs forced out of them".. then that's persecution. But no ones saying that, we're talking about people intelligence, not about how to limit their freedoms or rights.
^ lol, don't be such a haraam zaada I have nothing against Evangelicals or indeed any other religion/ religious sect... But honestly, what's an Evan-jelly-dude? I think we're at the stage where people are beyond caring... and indeed, what more can you expect from the country which voted for Bush?
Does this statement not serve to support the assertion that secularism can have its bigots too? I hold two Honours degrees from British universities: a 2.1 in Applied Microbiology, and a 2.2 in Divinity. I have published in peer-reviewed journals in both the sciences and theology - quite an achievement for one who is in your opinion a Cretin, a retard and a mentally demented individual. But that is clearly what I am, since I would consciously use the term 'evangelical' to describe my Christian beliefs. But, if the truth be told, I'm no genius. I worked hard for those degrees. But then I think of some of my friends, who I would consider a lot more academically able than myself: A consultant surgeon, who also carries training responsibilities for the Royal College related to his specialization (Opthalmology). A university vice-dean (in Engineering) who is also chairman of his professional body. An aircraft designer, other guys with 1st class degrees and doctorates in Physics, Chemistry, etc., Yet since each one would consciously see themself as an evangelical Christian they are cretins, retards, mentally demented? No, we are not. With a surprising number of Christians involved in healthcare, you may one day owe your life to one - so please do not demean those who hold a view different from your own, through the use of such arrogant language.
