Question about "attacks" on Christians

[taiko]

Thanks for proving my point, Moose. I suppose it never occured to you to think that maybe the religious bigots should leave instead. I either have to tolerate their hatemongering or I have to run away, I can't stand up for what I believe?

It is hate to say out of love that faith allows you to be close to God?

What you fail to recognise (or refuse to), is that I'm not out to change anybody's mind or tell them how to live. I'm not interfering in the personal business of everybody outside my own beliefs. I'm railing against those that do, those who can't mind their own business. Those who want to convert, marginalise or criminalise everybody who see the world differently.

Nobody dragged you into a Spirtuality and Religious belief forum. If you do not wish to change anybody's mind, convert them to atheism if you lie why then do you engage?

So I'm in no way whatsoever as guilty as an evangelist. I just want to be left alone, and if I was I wouldn't be complaining.

Interesting do you want to be left alone, or do you want to fight Christians and presumably those of other faiths if they appear because of a weakened Christian Church?

 

You may be more guilty then an evangelist. The evangelist thinks he is serving God. Who do you serve besides yourself? What makes you so sure your goals serve the greater good.

 

Crusades, Islamic terror,the Human sacrifice of older faiths, add all the bad stuff of all faiths put together, is the lack of faith better for mankind?

[disgracian]

It is hate to say out of love that faith allows you to be close to God?

That's not what I'm complaining about. I'm talking about those who break up families because not all of them follow the same religion, and about the hateful demagogues who famously claimed that gay people and single mothers were responsible for the WTC attacks on September 11, about those who call atheists, Wiccans, et al evil and try to pressure politicians into punishing them, those who say we should invade Middle-Eastern countries, kill all their leaders and convert them to Christianity. Note that not one example of the above is hypothetical, all are quite famous actually. That is the kind of hate I'm talking about, but you already knew this didn't you? You just want to distort the issue.

Nobody dragged you into a Spirtuality and Religious belief forum. If you do not wish to change anybody's mind, convert them to atheism if you lie why then do you engage?

Do you see me campaigning to have Christianity banned, or infringing upon your ability or your right to pray or go to church? I'm not talking about something so trivial as a relationship advice forum on the internet, I'm talking about people who are actively trying to attack my way of life simply because I'm not a Christian. I'm also not an atheist either, by the way.

Interesting do you want to be left alone, or do you want to fight Christians and presumably those of other faiths if they appear because of a weakened Christian Church?

I want to be left alone. If people left me alone then they wouldn't hear a peep from me. I don't "fight" religions such as Buddhism because they have the decency not to push their beliefs in my face or try to legislate themselves special privileges.

You may be more guilty then an evangelist. The evangelist thinks he is serving God. Who do you serve besides yourself? What makes you so sure your goals serve the greater good.

The evangelist knows he is serving his own bank account. My goals are that everybody should be free to believe or not believe what they want and not be discriminated against for it. My goal is for interfaith dialogue and not just tolerance, but open acceptance of different beliefs. I think those goals are demonstratably superior to close-minded, hostile bigotry. And I think my goals do more to serve humanity than religious intolerance.

 

Cheers,

D.

[shadowofman]

We are in a debate forum. We are here to "convert" and help people think critically.

There is nothing wrong with us calling each other blind and irrational, hence, there is nothing wrong with atheists "betting up" on christians.

There are plenty of other threads that can be for "beating up" on atheists.

 

Moose... which of these founding fathers was a christian?

I'm really interested, because most of my founding fathers were deist. and in their many letters, have expressed a deep distrust and disgust for Christianity. Secular seperation is what the founders put in the constitution, to keep America from the grips of people that think like you. We failed to prevent the slow takeover over the past 200 years, now that you get some resistance, you don't have to cry about it. I think it is you that should move to a country that does accept Christianity as it's moral foundation, like England or Germany. Let's leave America the way they intended it.

 

Morality is far deeper than any ancient text could sum up. America today is far more moral than BC Palestine. Far more moral than the bible or supposed gods could ever be. And yes, very annoying.

I am glad that I am not an atheist living in Saudi Arabia, because Muslims are violent. Jews are racist. Christians are annoying and all are mostly ignorant.

Is that even handed enough?

[disgracian]

...but I do have the right to praise God privately and publicly even if it pisses someone off. You don't have to follow suit, just leave me be.

Pardon me, but when have I infringed upon your right to praise your god?

 

Cheers,

D.

[lonelybird]

Jews are racist. ?

believe me, I've seen racist exist in all kinds of forms, they aren't excluded in any group of, human

 

but I cannot say if a wolf enter into a group of sheep, then all sheep turn into wolf. but definitely all sheeps are flawed, they are capable of hurting others, if without carefully self check, they can be self-righteousness from time to time, speaking from own case. so we have to surrender ourselves to God on a daily basis, leave room for God to correct us, we are all on a journey, only one perfect person on earth won't hurt others is Jesus

 

seeking high moral doesn't equal to 'discriminate people who don't hold same standards'; doesn't equal to 'get prider and prider'. the good fruit should be humble and loving and understanding and compassion....by checking a person's fruits you can judge if he/she bind in Jesus or not, but still this person need time to give up all bad friuts, and begin to grow good fruits, in a word, in a process of changing.

 

most high moral is able to love others as love self

[shadowofman]

most high moral is able to love others as love self

I agree!

But God sure didn't feel that way about the enemies of the Jews or adulterers.

Allah tells us in the Koran to kill infidels.

The Jews entire doctorine is based on "they are the chosen people".

There is no such thing as "chosen" people.

God must love everyone equally, even those that don't believe in him or his Christ. That is the high moral position.

[lonelybird]

God must love everyone equally, even those that don't believe in him or his Christ. That is the high moral position.

yes, so that's why you see so many christians are at your face to tell you about God God reaches out to people. believing in God and faith in God also bring genuine changes, change to be more like his son. image if whole earth are full of people who are like Jesus, what beautiful place would it be?

 

anyway people are drawn to God's love, seldom to pure fear of hell. Love of God keeps us to be obedient; opposite of love cause rebellion

[shadowofman]

But God must love even those that reject God or he is not moral.

Tell me if this is the case. Will I go to hell if I don't believe in God? Is that a moral rule?

[lonelybird]

But God must love even those that reject God or he is not moral.

Tell me if this is the case. Will I go to hell if I don't believe in God? Is that a moral rule?

tell me if you reject love?

[shadowofman]

I don't reject love, but I reject the notion that Christ or a god is the source of love. So, if I reject christ, am I to be loved?

[lonelybird]

I don't reject love, but I reject the notion that Christ or a god is the source of love. So, if I reject christ, am I to be loved?

God is love, light and justice, then you really don't reject God. many things I still don't understand, but I know that I surrender to God because of his goodness and love. if I assume that he is cruel, even knowing that I go to hell, I will not obey him. but holy spirit reveals his love. I make mistakes, he doesn't

[shadowofman]

God is love, light and justice, then you really don't reject God.

Yes I do!

I reject gods (all of them), dragons, fairies, ghosts, souls, flying horses or raindeer, heavens, hells, little green men, demons, devils, sins, "energies", auras, chi, karma.

Love is an emotion that is created by chemicals that are reacting in my brain. I can enhance, or inhibit these chemicals with other chemicals.

Justice is determined by humans, and is therefore a flawed concept. Tons of guilty people walk free, and innocent punished. Don't expect any sort of final judgement. Life isn't always fair. It's wishful thinking to ignore this fact.

[WitchyLady]

I have absolutely no problem with any Christian child sitting at lunch reading a Bible, saying grace, or using that "moment of silence" to pray silently. I do have a problem with said child "witnessing" to other children, to schools making children of different faiths sit and endure Christian-oriented prayer sessions at the beginning of school et all.

 

The first is completely unoffensive, the second severely tries my patience when done in a non-religious school.

 

I don't have kids, but if I did, I wouldn't want my kids to be evangelized in a public school.

 

Fact is I am a Pagan, and while I'd want my children to learn about all religions and to have all the information that they'd have to choose the one that's best for them, I simply don't feel the need to indoctrinate kids into any one way of thinking. If they have the info, they will choose for themselves at some point, shrug, and hey, ultimately they will anyhow, so it might as well be an open subject till they are ready to make up their minds about it.

 

I admittedly don't like it when Christians claim to have the TRUTH all zipped up. I think it's rather rude, and narrow, but that's my thing, seeing some variant of truth in ALL religions. I don't like being evangelized myself. I don't want tracts pushed at me, or the religious book of ONE religion on the planet quoted to me as if it was supposed to be all that mattered to ME.

 

It simply doesn't.

 

I view it in a totally different way than Christians do, and I refuse to live my life and make my choices according to the rules of a faith that's just not mine. I definitely don't want the faith rules of others influencing legal matters or government either.

 

I get people all the time telling me that because I support a CHOICE when it comes to abortion that I am wrong, damned et all. But fact is said people never stop to think that it's not the abortion that I favor but the CHOICE.

 

My personal choice?

 

Heck no, and I would not choose one.

 

BUT, that's my call to make and I will not have the Bible quoted at me as a reason not to be able to have the recourse to make that choice for myself. It's a matter for the individual and just because "I" see it as a horrible thing, doesn't mean I can't live with the fact that others still have to be able to make a different choice. Even if I hate it.

 

Christians can believe whatever they want.

 

But when what they believe stops me from living my life the way my own beliefs lead me to live it then we do have a problem.

 

Bottom line, I can live in peace with the Christians so long as the Christians can live in peace with me. But let's face it most Christians, they don't get the "live and let live" thing very well. They want to convert the whole planet, and yes, that is a bit annoying to me...

 

Monotheism simply isn't my thing....

 

I just wish more Christians could understand that and let me and my kind be.

 

 

I don't want to see them persecuted anymore than I want to BE persecuted.

 

But that's gotta be a two way street that non-interference thing.

 

Unfortunately it seldom is...

[Moose]

I suppose it never occured to you to think that maybe the religious bigots should leave instead.

Bigots maybe. But not religious people. Personally, bigots don't bother me at all except when they tarnish our beliefs and give people like yourself just cause to dismiss the faith completely.

 

But I know they'll pay for what they've done in the long run.....so why waste my energy trying to stop them?

I can't stand up for what I believe?

Sure you can. And so can I. Anything I've said against atheists ring true for the lot of them. You, (and many others here), take the actions from one or two, "Christians", but then put ALL Christians on the same submarine in hopes of sinking it in one strike. That ain't gonna happen...

What you fail to recognise (or refuse to), is that I'm not out to change anybody's mind or tell them how to live.

I call BS on that one. You can not say that it wouldn't be your hopes that I, (and all Christians), abandon my/our faith, become atheists, and join your fight and cause? That's the ONLY way to remove Christianity from your Schools, Government and so on. That is your wish, and you've said so yourself. So your statement is totally FALSE.

I just want to be left alone, I want to be left alone. If people left me alone then they wouldn't hear a peep from me.

Then why do you engage here? I'll leave you alone......just don't respond to my posts....or....stop generalizing at least......

[Enema]

He's here because christians are forcing their beliefs on him.

 

You might not be. Great! He's not talking about you.

 

It's easy enough to ignore a nutjob preaching on a forum. What he's talking about are those politicians actively creating real legislation based on christian beliefs.

 

This is how christians are forcing their beliefs on us. Trying to make their beliefs, law.

[Moose]

He's here because christians are forcing their beliefs on him.

 

You might not be. Great! He's not talking about you.

 

It's easy enough to ignore a nutjob preaching on a forum. What he's talking about are those politicians actively creating real legislation based on christian beliefs.

 

This is how christians are forcing their beliefs on us. Trying to make their beliefs, law.

This thread was started specifically addressing the fact that Christians in GENERAL.....not some....all are having to prove their faith......over and over and over again.

 

Are you saying that it's because we're forcing it on you?

 

Hogwash. The very fundamental premise of Christianity is that you're offered a FREE gift. It's your choice whether to accept it or not. Who cares if a percentage of shool kids pray during school? They should have that right, just as you have the right NOT to pray.....

 

Why you might be able to admit that I personally haven't put into law things that supposedly force my religion on people, others can't distinguish the difference and attack all of Christianity......

[taiko]

He's here because christians are forcing their beliefs on him.

 

You might not be. Great! He's not talking about you.

 

It's easy enough to ignore a nutjob preaching on a forum. What he's talking about are those politicians actively creating real legislation based on christian beliefs.

 

This is how christians are forcing their beliefs on us. Trying to make their beliefs, law.

 

But are they Christian beliefs? Or the beliefs of those who believe in anything higher then themselves? Already on your side of the debate it has been posted that all Christian mythology and moral codes comes from Egypt, India, China...... and all the other faith systems which predate Judism(thus Chrisitianity is false a childrens tale in his view)

 

Are not all laws an attempt of the majority, or the most powerful, forcing their beliefs on others?

[NoIDidn't]

I haven't been here for a few days. Thanks for keeping the thread going. This is interesting.

 

I have to say "disgracian", why engage when it is easier to ignore? I ignore most Christians that approach me, and I am one. Like Bent, I would take my kids out of any school or other program where others' views of Christianity were forced on them.

 

But I don't verbally attack those Christians. I disagree with most of the ways of modern evangelism - but there are some really sincere evangelists out there that are not out to deepen their own pockets.

 

I guess I just don't get the whole idea of throwing out an entire religion based on a couple of whackjobs.

 

And on the subject of intelligence: Why the insistence that Christians or anyone that believes in a religion is not intelligent? That's insulting. Is it meant to be insulting? I don't understand the need to be that way.

[JamesM]

He's here because christians are forcing their beliefs on him.

 

 

I am sorry, but this struck me as quite funny. He is HERE because Christians are forcing their beliefs on him? Perhaps he is here because he simply wants to debate these Christians? (And let's not forget disgracian, you are married to a Christian...that still puzzles me when you feel "forced" to accept Christianity. But that is your personal business...although it does not mesh with your concerns.) I highly doubt that anyone gets dragged to the Spirituality forum and forced to believe anything.

 

So THAT is why he/you joined. That straightens it out.

 

Fact is...most of us have a choice: read these threads and ignore, read these threads and respond, or simply ignore the Spirituality forum all together. I have done all three depending on my interest/time/mood.

 

All types of people post here. We can choose to respond or ignore. No one can force a belief down your throat here. If you feel this is being done in your country, then it is definitely going to help if you voice your opinion in your country. Posting on an anonymous message board won't help.

 

And if Christians feel "attacked," then ignore the attacks and they will disappear. Atheists may enjoy slamming theists, but it does get old after awhile, I would think, if no one jumps in to keep the fire burning with an opposing viewpoint.

 

So, we can debate or ignore. We can discuss or ignore. We can attack or ignore. No where are we forced.

[NoIDidn't]

I keep seeing the argument about Christianity's claims being arrogant.

 

Its not arrogant if a person is basing their beliefs on what their *holy* book says.

 

Would it not be more fair to state that the claims made by the Bible and the God of Christianity to be arrogant (and not the followers - even though some are, no doubt about that)? Doesn't that place the onus where it belongs?

 

Its just pointless to ask a human to explain/prove the existence of God. Its like asking someone to prove a dog is a dog. We can't. We just know that its called a dog. Its been called a dog since someone called it a dog. Can a dog even prove that its a dog? Its tangible, yes, but does that prove that the dog is a dog? Am I making any sense?

[blind_otter]

I'll tell you right now that the character Jesus never existed

 

Actually most historians agree that Jesus as a historical figure existed. Check out "From Jesus to Christ" a frontline special in either 3 or 4 parts, by PBS.

[Enema]

Its not arrogant if a person is basing their beliefs on what their *holy* book says.

 

Would it not be more fair to state that the claims made by the Bible and the God of Christianity to be arrogant (and not the followers - even though some are, no doubt about that)? Doesn't that place the onus where it belongs?

 

I disagree. When you claim something (ie. the bible) as truth, you are tarred with the same brush as the writer.

 

eg. If I was reading a book on nazi beliefs and I made no secret of the fact that I thought it was all wise and true, I can't then say, "It's not me that's racist, it's just the book!"

 

Its just pointless to ask a human to explain/prove the existence of God. Its like asking someone to prove a dog is a dog. We can't. We just know that its called a dog. Its been called a dog since someone called it a dog. Can a dog even prove that its a dog? Its tangible, yes, but does that prove that the dog is a dog? Am I making any sense?

 

We can tell a dog is a member of the Genus Canis and therefore a dog/jackal by analyzing the evidence we have. From obvious physical characteristics, down to the makeup of its blood, bone structure and hundreds more testable bits of evidence.

 

We can 100% without doubt "prove" a dog.

 

This cannot be done with any god as there is no evidence that suggests they even exist.

[NoIDidn't]

I disagree. When you claim something (ie. the bible) as truth, you are tarred with the same brush as the writer.

 

eg. If I was reading a book on nazi beliefs and I made no secret of the fact that I thought it was all wise and true, I can't then say, "It's not me that's racist, it's just the book!"

 

I understand what you are saying, but I disagree. Using your own example, I think that the Nazi Book thing is similar. I don't agree with their beliefs, but I am not going to read their books in order to discredit them - unless I am some sort of scholar.

 

I don't claim the Bible as truth, it does. I choose to believe it. Maybe I am just misunderstanding what you are saying. I see a difference. I am not an arrogant person, so I figure if the Bible's claims cause some to act arrogantly - they were already arrogant.

 

We can tell a dog is a member of the Genus Canis and therefore a dog/jackal by analyzing the evidence we have. From obvious physical characteristics, down to the makeup of its blood, bone structure and hundreds more testable bits of evidence.

 

We can 100% without doubt "prove" a dog.

 

This cannot be done with any god as there is no evidence that suggests they even exist.

 

I think you missed my point here. The point being made wasn't that you can't prove that a dog exists, its can you prove that its a dog? You immediately went to a book or some other passed on knowledge for your answer. IOW, you can't prove without those things that its a dog, or not.

 

Its not a fair argument to go to a book about a dog, when their are several books about the many gods out there. If a religion can't use its holy books' as a resource for their proof, then an intellectual can't use a science book as proof either.

 

As for the existence of God, a person has to take it or leave it. I could never prove the existence of God. I wouldn't even begin to try. I am well aware that there are those who will refuse to take the Bible or the Koran or any other book as proof that God exists. I believe that its pointless to ask someone to prove the existence of God.

 

I do believe that metaphysics and paranormal phenomena are the closest things we will ever has as secular proof of the spiritual. But I don't think that proves the existence of "God". You are looking for something you can see and feel in the search for the existence of God, and you are not likely to find it asking me or anyone else. You would have to ask the source that you don't believe exists whether or not S/He does or not. Somehow, I doubt that will happen anytime soon. LOL.

[disgracian]

Bigots maybe. But not religious people.

Religious people I can live with. In fact I do on a daily basis.

But I know they'll pay for what they've done in the long run.....so why waste my energy trying to stop them?

Because they cause great damage, and they hold the human race back. Why wait for ultimate divine justice which won't come? I know you think it will, but I don't so I'd like to actually improve the situation here and now for everybody instead of "giving it all to God" as Christians seem to enjoy doing.

Anything I've said against atheists ring true for the lot of them. You, (and many others here), take the actions from one or two, "Christians", but then put ALL Christians on the same submarine in hopes of sinking it in one strike.

That's two piles of BS for the price of one. You have made the most ridiculous, cliched and false generalisations about atheists out of all the Christians on this forum. They apply to almost nobody except the imaginary atheist that exists only in your prejudices.

 

I, on the other hand, am at least intelligent enough to recognise that if you judge any group of people by its worst members then everybody is guilty, so I don't. Christians, atheists, Buddhists, Muslims, Scientologists, Pagans, Democrats, Republicans, Eskimos, they all have jerks in their ranks.

I call BS on that one. You can not say that it wouldn't be your hopes that I, (and all Christians), abandon my/our faith, become atheists, and join your fight and cause?

There's no expectation or desire for that to happen. There are a lot of people for whom their religious faith inspires them to do wonderful things and become better people. I recognise that. Atheism is not my fight or cause either, and I'm starting to get sick of the implied assumption that just because I criticise your religion means I must therefore be an atheist. This is what black-and-white thinking like yours does: makes you leap to silly and premature conclusions.

 

What I do want is for people to have their faith but keep it to themselves unless otherwise asked. I would like people to respect other beliefs by recognising the similarities and the positive elements of those beliefs, rather than screaming "infidel!" or "heathen!" all the time and trying to legislate their rights away and impose one's own beliefs upon them.

 

This goal means that I will inevitably get into fights with extremists and intolerant bigots along the way, who revile such a goal, and who only want to see everybody on the planet either convert or out of sight and out of mind.

That's the ONLY way to remove Christianity from your Schools, Government and so on. That is your wish, and you've said so yourself. So your statement is totally FALSE.

You don't see Buddhist sutras recited in schools, yet that hasn't destroyed Buddhism, has it? Your point is borderline retarded. I want government mandated religion out of schools, yes, because it is the student's right to observe his or her own religious practices in their own way on their own time (recess, lunch, before/after school, any other quiet time). I'm not opposed at all to a moment's silence where everybody can do their own thing, I just don't want Christian-specific prayer time because that in my opinion violates the whole idea of separation of church and state, and undermines the secularity of the government.

 

Do you get it yet?

Then why do you engage here? I'll leave you alone......just don't respond to my posts....or....stop generalizing at least......

When religions stop imposing on me in real life, then I will feel left alone and I'll having nothing to complain about. Until then...

 

Cheers,

D.

[disgracian]

I have to say "disgracian"' date=' why engage when it is easier to ignore?[/quote']

I've only explained this about three times already.

I guess I just don't get the whole idea of throwing out an entire religion based on a couple of whackjobs.

I threw out Christianity based purely on its tenents and doctrines. The whackjobs who try to make these into law are a different kettle of fish.

And on the subject of intelligence: Why the insistence that Christians or anyone that believes in a religion is not intelligent? That's insulting.

It is insulting, and I don't do it so I hope you're not referring to me. There are, of course, individual Christians out there who are very unintelligent and I usually try to refer to them specifically. I mean no generalisation.

 

Cheers,

D.