Now there's a man who doesn't mince his words.

An interesting question regarding Falwell's belief in his beliefs. Personally, I think Jerry falwell did believe what he was preaching. I could be wrong, but I think the reason these guys are such shmucks for all their evangelical life is because they are non-thinking zealots who swallow the mythologies hook line and sinker.

I know I used to believe the christian claptrap I preached... completely.

Peter mothman - ex-shmuck.

Whether or not Jerry Falwell was sincere regarding his Biblical beliefs is besides the point. I think it safe to say that Jerry's biases and prejudices actually PRECEDED his faith, and he was therefore then able to find Biblical support for them.

That is what is so scary about fundamental religion. You have a man like Martin Luther King who magnified scripture that spoke of peace and then lived what he believed, and then you have the Falwells of the world who magnify scripture that encourages segregation, judgment, hatred and greed. It's all left up to the individual reader, and that is why it is so dangerous to lend any credence to a man calling himself "a man of faith".

God is not great, but that clip was.

Hitchens also said something to the effect that .."if Falwell were to get an enema, he could be buried in a matchbox." too funny.

As an ex-christian, I'd bet that Falwell was sincere and I doubt that Mr Hitchens has ever been a fundamentalist.

When I talk to people that have never been ensnared in dogma, they have a hard time believing me that that I REALLY believed all things I preached. They sound like Mr Hitchens believing that fundamentalists are just frauds.

That's where I think we as ex-christians have a big role to play in the next generation. We can understand and relate to people like Falwell better than people like Mr Hitchens ever could.

Ex drug addicts make better rehabilitation counselors than no ex-addicts because they can relate.

Nvrgoingbk,

I believe you make a very good point. People like Falwell,who spew such hatred and intolerance, have a preexisting mindset or propensity toward this type of behavior. Fundamentalism just provides them a socially acceptable outlet for their bias toward extremism.

It's interesting that we think there's any difference between whether Falwell believed his bullshit or not. It doesn't make it somehow better that he believed it. It doesn't make him more believable, or more respectable. Whether he is a con artist or not, its still a bunch of bullshit and believing him is the problem, not whether or not he believes himself. Respecting him at all is the problem.

I don't understand why people who 'believe' something on no evidence are garnered any respect whatsoever! They should be locked up.

We all should be people who don't mince words. It's time to stop being silent in the face of insanity.

It's interesting that we think there's any difference between whether Falwell believed his bullshit or not. It doesn't make it somehow better that he believed it.

The reason its relavent as to whether or no he believed it or he was a con artist....

Insofar as Mr Falwell right now, no it doesnt matter, he is dead.

But there is still a huge movement in this country. There are also many others "Christian Right" leaders. (Robertson, Dobson, Graham, as well as leaders to come in the future) If we (as non-theists) want to provide a counter balance to their influence, knowing whether or not we are dealing with delusioned people or con artists is very important.

I am a 73 year old male and have never really been subjected to religious beliefs. My father died when I was nine years old and my mother attempted to bring me up as she thought best in those days. All her attempts at getting me exposed to religion went awry. First Sunday school, I was more or less evicted from the class because I asked to many pertinent questions. Then I had to sit in the church itself by her side while the preacher rambled on about the most uninteresting stuff. I guess she could see my discontent and gave up on me, which allowed me to run freely on Sundays.
I guess what I'm trying to tell you is that I have always had a serious concern about what to believe. I have never been able to accept what I was hearing about God, heaven and hell etc.
So, now, with my access to the internet I have found that there are millions more out there that
have the had the same problem with religion that I have. I have found this very encouraging and now I don't feel alone in my thoughts.

Whose more dangerous,..a sincere delusional spiritual leader,or a con artist/opportunist out to make alot of money?

I would say the first one.

*Falwell could have been a little of both,..who knows. freedy

Aspentroll,welcome to this great site of mostly non-believers.You are not alone.Peace,Roger S.

I'm not sure that delusion or con describes the full range of possibilities. I'd like to enter the possibility that this is a matter of culture.

One of Russia's leading linguists in the past century, Yuri Lotman, provides a definition of culture in linguistic terms. To summarize a long argument in a short form, he suggests that the dividing line between cultures may be defined by evaluating whether a given input produces similar response. In other words, were I to say "God is good" would you respond with "amen," "yeah, and fuck you," "huh?" or some other variant? The response to a range of ideas defines the cultures and sub-cultures to which respondents belong.

My theory is that Falwell internalized a culture that included a set of cultural responses that define the core of fundamentalist xian culture. He was used by political cultures that couldn't give a crap about what he believed. He produced votes. He was promoted within his culture because he epitomized the responses that culture expects.

Was he a con man? His culture cons itself. So, I think the question at hand has little to do with exposing and critiquing delusional or unethical individuals within a culture like that. Instead, the more important puzzle may be what makes cultures die off. How might the social, economic, political and psychological environment change so that a given culture goes extinct?

Right now it seems to me that the cultures of fundamentalist religion have lots of low-hanging fruit to eat. They eat up poverty, ignorance, fear and greed. They have also learned to cultivate the things they feed upon. Clever bastards.

Evolution is merciless.

I loved this from one of the book reviews !

Quote:
"Christopher Hitchens, the angry Epicurean
Christopher Hitchens, like Richard Dawkins a few months back, has experienced a remarkably helpful accident in getting his message into the media marketplace. Dawkins had confronted Ted Haggard in a documentary some months before "The God Delusion" came out which had shown Haggard in a bad light. By the time Dawkins had hit the book promotion circuit, coincidentally Haggard's reputation had gone down in flames through his own doing, and by implication added credibility to Dawkins's critique of religion.

Hitchens similarly trashes Jerry Falwell in "God Is Not Great" for the dumb things he said after September 11, 2001. And what do you know? Around the time Hitchens's turn for book promotion arrives, Falwell conveniently dies and provides Hitchens with additional opportunities to go on TV to compare Falwell, who preached the rapture and the end times, to a homeless person on the street shouting about the end of the world while selling pencils from a cup.

You got to love how chance produces the appearance of order in a god-free universe.

nvrgoingbk wrote:
"...Whether or not Jerry Falwell was sincere regarding his Biblical beliefs is besides the point. I think it safe to say that Jerry's biases and prejudices actually PRECEDED his faith,..."

nomeansno sang:
"Cats! Sex! and Nazis!
That's why they call me Mr. Happy.
Are you a believer?
Well I'm a deceiver;
And I lied when I said that Truth is dead.
I really believe all the things I say to you;
It's just that none of them are true." (- nomeansno; "Cats, Sex and Nazis")

Does a mutant like Jerry Falwell really believe the stuff he spouts? Yes. No.

In his case they are the same answer.