From: MANDTBACKA@finabo.abo.fi (Mats Andtbacka Ktf92)
Subject: Re: NEW SUBSPECIES OF FUNDIES DISCOVERED!!!
Organization: Unorganized Usenet Postings UnInc.
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 09:44:11 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.23

GLORIOUS! BRILLIANT! This went up on my wall... 

In <1992Nov16.024343.10103@nmsu.edu> epowers@spock.NMSU.Edu writes:
> 	*Funda fundamentalis extremis*  These Christians are characterized by  
> seeing abortion in the U.S. as the fundamental issue the church should deal  
> with.  Historical biologists will notice the similarities with the early  
> prohibitionists and abolitionists in the U.S.  This subspecies is most often  
> seen on news broadcasts. 

      Possibly because they won't have to deal with ANSWERS from people
on the other side of the TV screen...

> 	*Funda fundamentalis C+E*  These Christians are so named because they  
> are only known to be fundamentalists only at Christmas and Easter, the only  
> times they show up at church.  

      Umh... Kinda like me then...

> 	*Funda fundamentalis frijoles*  These Christians, commonly called "bean  
> Christians" in Mexico and "rice Christians" in Asia, are called so because they  
> have taken on fundamentalism in order to take advantage of the generosity and  
> naivity of certain missionaries.

      Any classification for said missionaries? "F.f. naivicus"?

> 	*Funda fundamentalis apatheticus*  These Christians do nothing in  
> particular.

      That fits in with a lot of Buddhists also. Too wide definition,
otherwise good...

> 	*Funda fundamentalis culticus*  CORRECTION!  This group, commonly  
> involved in such churches as Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Science,  
> and many others, should no longer be placed in with *Funda fundamentalis*.   
> Nei's genetic distance between individuals involved in these groups and other  
> fundamentalist subspecies to range from 6.8 to 14.76, revealing divergence so  
> long ago it isn't even funny.

      HILARIOUS! Hausmann, you'll have to *work* to beat that one!
 
> 	*Funda fundamentalis intellectualis*  These Christians claim an  
> intellectual basis for their faith.  They can be found in many universities.
> It is strongly suspected that GK Chesterton and CS Lewis belonged to this  
> group.  These often start poorly, making fools of themselves in intellectual  
> debate, but they learn the rules soon enough.  Another group,  
> *pseudo-intellectualis*, never get the hang of it.  FAQs are written for these  
> people, to no effect.
> 	
> 	*Funda fundamentalis culturalis*  These are people who claim to be  
> Christians because their parents were Christians or because they live in the
> US or because they think Jesus was a great moral teacher or because they are  
> pretty sure they are moral people.  None of these claim anything but the  
> weakest form of "personal relationship" with Jesus Christ.

      So should they really be a "Funda fundamentalis" subgroup? Never
mind, keep it up...

> 	The importance of the study is this:  Up to this point, many observers  
> of *Funda fundamentalis* have noted seemingly contradictory behaviors and  
> attitudes.  They have often mistakenly characterized one group as another.   
> From now on, it will be important to accurately characterize the beliefs of an  
> individual before making predictions in argumentation behavior.

      Someone give this guy a prize...

 - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - 
           Opinions? What's that, mom - some new kind of dessert?
     "Every day for us, something new / Open mind for a different view /
                       And nothing else matters..."     ---     Metallica
Newsgroups: alt.atheism