What gives Christianity a bad name...

[Emilia]

Other nations, including European nations touched with Rome's influence, became "Christian" nations, and practiced violence against people who did not believe the same way they did, violence which Jesus did not teach. In all the historical events such as the Inquisition, the Crusades, the witchhunts, the killing of Native Americans, the confiscations of nonbelievers' property... where was the love that Jesus taught???

 

I think this is where Christianity got a bad name, as well as "Christians" abusing children, stealing, and hating people, all of which are not taught by Jesus.

 

So basically, what gives Christianity a bad name is that many "Christians" have not obeyed Jesus' teachings.

 

What are your thoughts? Please be courteous? Thanks.

 

Organised religion is essentially about control. Both Christianity and Islam are conquering religions, major conflicts occur when they clash (such as at present time in Iraq/Afghanistan/9-11 in New York or during the Crusades) but there have also been infights since day one (the Inquisition is a later example, there is also the sunni-shia conflicts in Islam as a current example). This is all about control, not about religious texts or interpretation - or at least not for most people except scholars. Most don't care about religious texts. A lot of Christians in the Middle Ages couldn't even read, same currently in the middle east/far east. Priests and the imam often keep control of education because it is much easier to keep a population under control if it is uneducated and cannot think for itself.

 

People don't usually join a religion at a particular point in their lives, they are born into whichever is prevelant and ruling in their culture. Therefore they are not 'good' just because they are Christian in your example, they had no choice but to be Christian since it was main ways of controlling people before secularism and civic law became the norm. Christianity used to be the main structure that society was based around in Europe before the Enlightment movement.

[madjac74]

 

So basically, what gives Christianity a bad name is that many "Christians" have not obeyed Jesus' teachings.

 

What are your thoughts? Please be courteous? Thanks.

 

I think you have it right here. Whether anyone believes in Jesus or God or not, the core of his teachings are at least worthy of following. The problem is that churches are ruled by mortal men who will bend these teachings for their own prosperous needs economically and in power. There are also fanatics who believe these men of power so strongly that they will do anything in the name of "Christianity". This leads to conflicts which lead to pain which makes Jesus cry. You wonder if Jesus would even want organized religion

[M30USA]

There is some truth to the fact that Christians have failed to follow Christ's teachings, but I want to bring up a few points:

 

1) The disciples, themselves, failed to follow many of Jesus' teachings. Even more than that, many of them doubted his very identity and didn't believe he was the Son of God until they physically saw or touched him after the resurrection.

 

2) I believe society, in general, has issues with Christ's teachings. He is considered by many to be arrogant and hateful. So is it really true that Christians get a "bad wrap" primarily because they are hypocrites? Or was the reason explained by Christ:

 

"If the world hates you, keep in mind that it first hated me." (John 15:18)

[TheFinalWord]

There is some truth to the fact that Christians have failed to follow Christ's teachings, but I want to bring up a few points:

 

1) The disciples, themselves, failed to follow many of Jesus' teachings. Even more than that, many of them doubted his very identity and didn't believe he was the Son of God until they physically saw or touched him after the resurrection.

 

2) I believe society, in general, has issues with Christ's teachings. He is considered by many to be arrogant and hateful. So is it really true that Christians get a "bad wrap" primarily because they are hypocrites? Or was the reason explained by Christ:

 

"If the world hates you, keep in mind that it first hated me." (John 15:18)

 

I think that is true to a large extent. From a biblical framework, we know that man has a proclivity towards sin and a mind that can easily conceive sin. You can see that on the dating forums where people will scheme all day long to find ways to use other people for their sexual and ego gratification, irregardless of the damage it does to people emotionally. Many can't even see the damage they're doing. There's a thread right now about "does romantic love exist". Some poster are talking about how marriage is taboo. Yet none of them will associate the large shift the modern society has made from biblical doctrines on dating, marriage, sexual purity, etc. Why? They can't see past the carnal.

 

As humans, we don't like to be told we're wrong. You can see that from all sides in this particular spiritual forum. Even is someone is dead wrong and they can't escape it, they still would rather gnaw their arm off than admit it. No one wants to admit they're wrong, b/c as humans we have massive egos/pride. So when you have someone say "you're sinning", you're telling them their entire life orientation is adverse. It really irritates people. The bible says people will pick darkness over light because their deeds are evil. Have you ever been in a dark room dead asleep and someone turns a bright light on? All you want them to do is turn it off. Same thing when the gospel sheds light on man's true nature. The natural reaction is repulsion. It's why the bible says God's Word cuts right into the soul.

 

It's interesting that concept is talked about right after John 3:16, the most famous bible verse:

 

 

But instead of dealing with the issues, they're largely side stepped. That's why we see constant examples of the genetic fallacy in these threads, i.e. because I can demonstrate how a belief originates that therefore proves it's wrong. So you'll see "you only believe as hell insurance" "you only believe b/c you were born in such and such a country". Even if you give people such premises, none of those actually negate the philosophy, especially if you consider the historical origins of Christianity. That's why I recommend people actually self-educate on a religion before attempting to shrug it off with one-liners.

 

I do think though that a lot of Christians do not keep the carnal mind in perspective when evangelizing. They forget people outside of the faith do not have the revelation of sin. It's kind of like the matrix. You can't just go up to people in the matrix and expect them to see reality from your perspective. Same way with spiritual truths. I mean, the bible states repeatedly that the carnal mind is directly against God and cannot understand spiritual things. Christians don't always see things that way and will lay into them instead of sharing Christ in a loving and gentle way. Also, by demonstrating it through lifestyle. I mean as a Christian, I can easily revert back to the "old man" as Paul calls it. I will be convicted for sinning, but I still have a fallen mind and can easily conceive cussing out the driver that cuts me off. If that's us who are saved, imagine those who don't have that revelation. Christians should be sympathetic to that frame of mind.

Edited August 2, 2012 by TheFinalWord

[KathyM]

I think what damages some people's perception of Christianity is that, in some cases, there is hypocrisy practiced, and so some people judge the faith based on the actions of a few of its pseudo-members or fallen members, rather than on the teaching of the faith itself. For example, they'll take the example of the few Catholic priests that abused young boys as a measure of all Catholic priests and the entire Christian faith, and then judge the whole faith and all its people as hypocrites because of the acts of a few. Unfortunately, it is the negative things that crop up in the news that some people use to apply to an entire faith, and they ignore all the good things, or are not aware of the good things that Christians do that are in keeping with Christlike principles. There are many Christian groups worldwide that devote their time, effort and money to feeding the poor, providing care, housing, education, and living supplies to the poor, and for some reason, people don't tend to use those examples as a reflection on the Christian faith, but tend to use the few negative examples, or examples of hypocrisy, to judge the entire faith.

[M30USA]

I think what damages some people's perception of Christianity is that, in some cases, there is hypocrisy practiced, and so some people judge the faith based on the actions of a few of its pseudo-members or fallen members, rather than on the teaching of the faith itself. For example, they'll take the example of the few Catholic priests that abused young boys as a measure of all Catholic priests and the entire Christian faith, and then judge the whole faith and all its people as hypocrites because of the acts of a few. Unfortunately, it is the negative things that crop up in the news that some people use to apply to an entire faith, and they ignore all the good things, or are not aware of the good things that Christians do that are in keeping with Christlike principles. There are many Christian groups worldwide that devote their time, effort and money to feeding the poor, providing care, housing, education, and living supplies to the poor, and for some reason, people don't tend to use those examples as a reflection on the Christian faith, but tend to use the few negative examples, or examples of hypocrisy, to judge the entire faith.

 

The truth is that nobody is good. The only reason we might think anyone is good is because we are using other humans as the standard. If you do this, then it's logical why you'd group people (including Christians) into good and bad categories. But when you use God's standard (which is the life of Christ), you realize that we are all a joke and even the best of us are selfish. This is why the Bibld says that our righteousness is but filthy rags to God. We are completely inadequate and unable to be good--even if we want to! This is why salvation by faith is the only logical explanation if you indeed are using God's standard of morality and not man's.

[KathyM]

The truth is that nobody is good. The only reason we might think anyone is good is because we are using other humans as the standard. If you do this, then it's logical why you'd group people (including Christians) into good and bad categories. But when you use God's standard (which is the life of Christ), you realize that we are all a joke and even the best of us are selfish. This is why the Bibld says that our righteousness is but filthy rags to God. We are completely inadequate and unable to be good--even if we want to! This is why salvation by faith is the only logical explanation if you indeed are using God's standard of morality and not man's.

Christians are inately sinful. No argument there, for sure. We have all sinned and fallen short. That doesn't mean that no one ever does something good or in keeping with Christ's example. I see examples of many Christians who are doing wonderful work for others that is in keeping with Christlike principles. Just look at Mother Theresa, for one. She was not perfect--no human is, but was living a life that is honoring to God. In the example of Christ. There are no all good or all bad Christians, and I did not intend to imply that there was. But there is good and Christlike behavior in some to be appreciated and used as an example of Christlike behavior. And I prefer to look at that and respect that, rather than focus on only when man has failed. The subject of this thread deals with why Christians are viewed negatively, and the OP gave some examples of events in history that were negative, so I wanted to point out the positives and that Christianity should be viewed according to Christ's example and teachings, which IS often displayed by His followers, but unfortunately, our sinful nature is with us as well. That is why Christianity should be judged by Christ's nature, which was pure and sinless, and the example that He showed to the world, which was of kindness towards others, and serving others.

[M30USA]

The other main issue I have is the undercurrent of self-denigration: the idea that we are all horrible and depraved and, worst of all, deserve our eternity in hell simply for being what we cannot help but be. And we're told this by a being that supposedly loves us. Would you treat your own children in this way? Would you undermine their self esteem every single day and convince them beyond doubt that they are worthless and hopeless and can't do anything good on their own, and that anything they might have done good was really because of you and not them?

 

The reason people think it's cruel that God would "send" people to Hell is because we don't even understand what Hell is. The primary trait of Hell is complete, eternal separation from God--and everything he is, does, and represents. Therefore, if someone spends their whole life trying to push God away and rip him out of the world, why would he/she even complain if they wind up there? There is a phrase which goes: Heaven would be Hell for those who don't want to be there.

[TheFinalWord]

I can't speak for the other person, but I guess it depends on what your definition of karma is. My friend is Hindu and for them karma is a method for ascending various levels via reincarnation. So for them it is not just limited to cause and effect in this present world. If your friend thought you meant the full karma cycle and it's roots in reincarnation, I can't see what it would be reasonable for that person to accept that position when it goes against their belief, whether they're Christian or atheist. If it's just cause and effect in the here and now, well the bible talks a lot about reaping and sowing so that same principle is there. Maybe your friend wasn't aware of that though.

 

The other main issue I have is the undercurrent of self-denigration: the idea that we are all horrible and depraved and, worst of all, deserve our eternity in hell simply for being what we cannot help but be. And we're told this by a being that supposedly loves us. Would you treat your own children in this way? Would you undermine their self esteem every single day and convince them beyond doubt that they are worthless and hopeless and can't do anything good on their own, and that anything they might have done good was really because of you and not them?

 

Well that's one way to look at it. And I can fully understand why you see it that way. It's what made me not believe for a long time. The notion that God would condemn someone to hell for unbelief. The problem with that concept is that it isn't accurate from a biblical perspective.

 

What a lot of unbelievers don't appreciate is that God's wrath is equal to His love. So while He does love us, He also is perfectly just and holy and will not tolerate sin. If you think of it as a court of law there is no basis for expecting a judge to let someone off for committing a crime. God is a judge and will hold everyone accountable for every evil act. We've all, willingly, broken every one of the 10 commandments.

 

Regarding not being able to help it, yes we have a sin nature, but it is also our conscience choice to sin. God isn't making anyone sin. We willingly sin.

 

"When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed. "

 

However, while He will hold us accountable for our individual decisions to sin, He has literally done all the work for us not to have to be held accountable. At the end of the day what does it require? Humbleness. That is literally it. Just to tell God "I admit I messed up. I accept Christ into my heart and ask Him to take the place of my sin". That is literally it. No one has to clean up and then come to God. Christianity is the only religion in the world in which salvation is not works-based; it's pure grace. You just come as you are, straight up. When I came I was heavily into drugs. If God can save me, He can save anyone.

 

Yet, people will reject that small step of faith daily. We can all blame other people and point to other humans that fail. But when we stand before God, he isn't going to ask us about Joe Blow. We'll have to man up and take charge for our own decisions. And if we reject Christ, we'll have to face the consequences of our pride.

 

Regardless of the sin nature, we each make an individual choice to sin and reject Christ; some people reject Christ on a daily basis. One interesting thing, people on this board often say they can't stand Christians for shoving their beliefs down their throats. What is interesting is that since being saved I have never had even one Christian approach me with the gospel; however, I had several invite me to church and witness to me before I was saved. If that's happened to anyone on this board, I would just encourage you to think that maybe that isn't a coincidence.

 

Someday God will hold each of us accountable for our individual choices. Not Jane Doe, not the priest that annoyed us when we were in grade school, not what a knight did 1000 years ago. Us and us alone.

 

If we accept Christ, we are forgiven for all of those crimes. It's like you're in court, guilty as charged. Christ comes in and says "Judge I'll pay his fine". You are free to reject that, but it is 100% our choice.

 

Now about a parent and how they treat their children, the difference is God isn't limited to human parenting skills. Parents make mistakes and also sin themselves. If parents who sin and are evil know how to treat their children right, how much more better will God treat them who is perfect?

 

"Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets."

 

God doesn't destroy anyone's self-confidence, He is just a straight shooter. He always tells the truth. He doesn't candy coat things. And he's not just a straight shooter about sin, but also the promises of entering into a covenant relationship with Him, which are literally endless and loaded with benefits. And my parents could never reach me like God did, because He knows us on the deepest, most intimate level. Even my parents, I can pull the wool over their eyes. Not God. He sees right into the heart.

 

Also, a lot of parents abuse and abandon their children. God never abandons or forsakes us.

 

For as high as the heavens are above the earth,

so great is his love for those who fear him;

12 as far as the east is from the west,

so far has he removed our transgressions from us. 13 As a father has compassion on his children,

so the Lord has compassion on those who fear him;

14 for he knows how we are formed,

he remembers that we are dust.

15 The life of mortals is like grass,

they flourish like a flower of the field;

16 the wind blows over it and it is gone,

and its place remembers it no more.

17 But from everlasting to everlasting

the Lord’s love is with those who fear him,

and his righteousness with their children’s children —

18 with those who keep his covenant

and remember to obey his precepts.

 

 

Make no mistake about it hell will not be a pleasant experience. It will be a place of eternal separation from God. Right now, even if people reject God, they still experience His grace. No matter what our current state, we can all still experience hope. Even if you have terminal cancer, you can hope for a cure or death to relieve the pain. In hell there will be no hope. And the worst part is we will know for eternity that it was our own choice to be there.

 

"This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life"

 

For you quickjoe, you are a very bright guy. I very much understand where you're coming from. If there is something wrong with Christianity, it very much could be that God wants you to fix it. Those passions in your heart to bring science into Christianity are yours for the taking. God has a purpose for each person and will guide them in it if they allow Him. And to be honest, it really is where the joy of life is at. Doing what God designed you to do. It's up to you if you want to though. I hope you do or at least think about it.

Edited August 3, 2012 by TheFinalWord

[M30USA]

This whole discussion reminds me of an article I recently read...

 

It talked about the atrocious problem of pedophilia among clergy members. Everybody obviously has heard of this. It's inexcusible. But what most people don't know--and what the news won't tell you--is that clergy members actually have among the lowest percentages of pedophilia occurences among all groups of society. It's just when a clergy member does it, he is held to a higher standard (and rightly so). But reading the article made me realize that, yes, we humans are sinners and screw up, but sometimes the groups who get lambasted for various reasons are less guilty of sins than the groups they are being compared to. Just a thought.

[madjac74]

This whole discussion reminds me of an article I recently read...

 

It talked about the atrocious problem of pedophilia among clergy members. Everybody obviously has heard of this. It's inexcusible. But what most people don't know--and what the news won't tell you--is that clergy members actually have among the lowest percentages of pedophilia occurences among all groups of society. It's just when a clergy member does it, he is held to a higher standard (and rightly so). But reading the article made me realize that, yes, we humans are sinners and screw up, but sometimes the groups who get lambasted for various reasons are less guilty of sins than the groups they are being compared to. Just a thought.

 

So their goal is just to be less sinful than others? Perhaps they should put that in their sermons while they are telling me all the ways I am sinning.

[Emilia]

This whole discussion reminds me of an article I recently read...

 

It talked about the atrocious problem of pedophilia among clergy members. Everybody obviously has heard of this. It's inexcusible. But what most people don't know--and what the news won't tell you--is that clergy members actually have among the lowest percentages of pedophilia occurences among all groups of society. It's just when a clergy member does it, he is held to a higher standard (and rightly so). But reading the article made me realize that, yes, we humans are sinners and screw up, but sometimes the groups who get lambasted for various reasons are less guilty of sins than the groups they are being compared to. Just a thought.

 

I don't think they do. There are men who are peadophiles that will join the ranks in the church just to have access to young children. The same way as some care home workers and teachers used to until screening was made more stringent (at least in the uk). There isn't such screening in most churches.

[TaraMaiden]

.... the Catholic church does appear to be changing their tune and making sincere efforts to clean house. Better late than never.

 

you think....?

I don't think Bill Donohoe is doing the RC church ANY favours at all....

 

And -

 

In a 2010 end-​of-​year, shocking Christmas statement to Cardinals and other Vatican officials, Pope Benedict XVI announced, “In the 1970s, paedophilia was theorised as something fully in conformity with man and even with children,” and added that paedophilia wasn’t even considered an “absolute evil.”

 

From here.

[Emilia]

Quote from article linked

 

”I want to know if they do not just want to be priests because they are afraid of sex and intimacy, or other problems with sexuality. That should never be the reason.”

 

Belgian Catholic Church to 'screen’ for paedophile priests - Telegraph

[TheFinalWord]

It isn't hell per se, but the overwhelmingly negative view Christianity has for humanity. It's unbalanced because there is such reluctance (bordering on outright refusal) to acknowledge the good in people. We can't save ourselves, we can't measure up, everything is about beating us over the head with our dependence on another entity to solve our problems and show us the way. It's both demeaning and damaging because, for a lot of people it means they don't take personal responsibility for things. They pray instead of seek medical help, they don't care about the planet because either only Jesus can fix the problems we've created (so we shouldn't even try) or this world doesn't matter because getting into heaven is the only thing that matters.

 

Hey Quickjoe, well you certainly are entitled to your opinion. I'm sorry if you have only seen that side of Christianity. I honestly can't say that view describe the Christians I know.

 

But I would say that, at the end of the day Christianity is about accounting for your own life, not comparing oneself to other people's choices. It is individual. We have to give an account for ourselves, not what someone does with their own decisions. With the medical, yes, there are some extremely small groups that won't accept blood transfusions and the like. But that is a minority. Most Christians do accept modern medicine. In fact a large portion of my church is employed by the health care system; from brain surgeons down to receptionist. But people have a right to accept or not accept health care. That is their choice, and it is a very personal thing. For example, my grandma had severe kidney disease; however, she did not want to undergo 8 hours of dialysis everyday. She said it was just her time and she was ready to go and be with the Lord. I think that is a very personal decision, one she prayed about, and one I totally respect.

 

And it doesn't matter if you think this isn't "true" Christianity, because that's subjective and even if you're right it still doesn't matter to me. A thing ought to be judged on its reality, not its ideal.

 

I agree. This is where you could do a lot to help the body of Christ. I think you have a very logical mind and God gave you that to help us out.

 

Well the fact of the matter is "true" Christianity is very simple. It seems so complex, but it really isn't. People getting caught up in minor doctrines are not that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things. For example, I was watching a debate between a very scholarly Catholic leader and a very scholarly Protestant leader. They were debating about whether we are saved by grace alone or grace and works. It's funny because both of them believe in doing good works as evidence of faith, just the theological underpinnings of salvation are disputed. The outcome is the same. So don't let the disputes about theology give you the wrong impression of Christianity. The majority accept the same central tenants. The tenants were espoused by the church fathers, the first of which were the head disciples of the apostles. So we know for certain what real Christianity is. It's primarily the theology that underscores the tenants that there is dispute about. Really, it's not a big deal though. This was also around in Jesus' time, as there were two primary sects of Judaism representing by the Pharisees and Sadducees.

 

If you believe Jesus Christ was God in the Flesh, died for your sins, and rose again you're a Christian. Pretty simple.

 

This is also where I should point out that while I understand that you actually believe this stuff, I don't, and my only interest is how Christianity affects people, how it makes them view themselves, how it makes them treat others and the world they live in.

 

Sure I respect that. Well, as I said Christianity is very individual. So I can tell you how it has affected me. I was lost in drugs, had no purpose in life, used people, and hated a lot of people. I used to despise Christianity. If someone even mentioned it I would cuss them out. I used bible paper to roll cigarettes. I can tell you that since accepting Christ, my life has been a complete 360. I have no desire to do drugs, I am a productive member of society, and I have not hatred or negative emotions in my heart/soul whatever you want to call it. In Christianity there is something called a personal testimony.

 

If you want to know how Christianity has affected people one way to know is to ask Christians to share their testimony. But that is the main thing a lot of unbelievers only look at the cases of abuse by abusive people, or they only look at the political landscape. Christianity is a relationship with God and therefore affects people individually. And the primary part of Christianity is to examine our own lives, not compare ourselves to everyone else. Why? Well that has the potential to set us up for idolatry. Also, when we compare ourselves to other fallible humans we are building a false paradigm. That's why Christ said not to judge others based on the speck of dust in their eyes, but instead to pull the logs out of our own eyes.

 

One of enemies greatest tricks is to get us to ignore the individual choices we have made and instead to judge other people's character, and even question the justice of God, and use that as an excuse to justify ourselves. "Yes judge I assaulted that man, but John over there pulled a gun on someone. That's way worse than what I did!". That won't hold up in a court of law.

 

I apologise for not making this clear earlier, because you have clearly put a lot of time and effort into this response and I appreciate that, but to me it's largely talking about the characteristics of a being that I am quite convinced is not real. Even if you're right, I do not think that it addresses my contention that a lot of Christian theology is a form of spiritual self-flagellation, and the relationship it promotes with this "loving" father-figure has more in common with battered wife syndome than you'd probably care to admit. We're constantly told that no matter what we do and how hard we try, we can't be perfect and therefore we're worthless and wretched and deserving of the worst fate imaginable, but hey, it's okay because he still loves us even though we don't deserve it. That's an absolutely disgraceful theology. Surely you can see how that can promote an unhealthy attitude towards not only oneself but others as well.

 

I can understand while you feel that way and I appreciate how respectful you are towards me. I'm sincere about that.

 

I'm not sure about the self-flagellation part. I did a pretty good job of that myself before accepting Christ haha But there was a sect of Christianity called the gnostics in Paul's time. They believed in physical harm to learn "hidden knowledge" about God. Paul rebuked them many times. So Christianity does not espouse hurting yourself or accepting abuse from other people. It does espouse that we are not gods (even though we set ourselves up as gods via pride), but are fallible human beings that were created for a relationship with God. But the corollary is that we are free to reject such a relationship.

 

e're constantly told that no matter what we do and how hard we try, we can't be perfect and therefore we're worthless and wretched and deserving of the worst fate imaginable, but hey, it's okay because he still loves us even though we don't deserve it.

 

Well I'm not sure who told you that. So let me tell you, that you're not worthless. How do I know that? God died for you. You're not deserving of the worst fate imaginable, hell was made for satan. But if you choose to go there, God will give you your desire. That's why Christ asked, "what does a profit a man to gain the whole world if he loses his soul?". Would you sell one of your eyes for a million dollars? How about both eyes for a trillion? I don't think any of us would because we values our eyes. But we would forfeit our soul for a little pride. Our soul is so valuable to us and to God. So much so that Christ said it would be better to pluck out one of our eyes than to experience eternal separation from God.

 

It is up to each of us 100%. And it's only the worst fate imaginable b/c God will not be there. Even if we deny it, right now we all experience God's grace.

 

"You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?"

 

In hell that grace will not be there. So if you hate God, or the notion of God if you don't believe in him, it may not be that bad for you. You don't want him in this life, but you want him to force his presence on you for all eternity?

 

It is true that no matter how hard we try we're not perfect. I think we can all agree on that. I make about 100 mistakes daily. I think if we all honestly inspect our lives we can think of many instances in which we have treated people wrongly, acted unjustly, used people, put ourselves first, etc.

 

"You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us."

 

Hey quickjoe, I'm glad you're thinking about this stuff b/c it is important. Have a good day

Edited August 3, 2012 by TheFinalWord

[TheFinalWord]

I would respect anything that is true to what they say, christianity or should I say far too many christians are full of nothing but hypocrisy. You shape and mold the bible to say whatever you want, you pick and choose what is literal and what is not, you pick and choose what to follow and what to not follow and you cant even agree on what your sacred book actually means. When people can branch off and change things to fit what they want, then I cant respect that at all. Not because things change, but that discredits the bible to me. If a witness is on the stand and they are proven wrong or are lying just once then all thier credibility is gone. Thats how I feel about the bible and christianity.

 

Well I think that is the common perspective of those that are not Christians, but it's actually not the case among Christians. We agree on a lot more than we disagree.

 

But I would say that you are taking the same perspective of most non-Christians, which is to base your view of Christianity on other people.

That is where your view of Christianity is in error and not accurate. You can have that view, but it isn't an honest way to assess the merits of Christ. Christianity means to follow Christ, not any man. Even the apostles said not to look to them. We are only messengers, the one who authored the message is whom you should look to.

 

"You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere humans? For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere human beings? What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe—as the Lord has assigned to each his task. I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God has been making it grow. So neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow."

 

To judge Christianity by fallible humans and not Christ so is to miss the entire point. Look at His claims and His testimony and base it on that. Don't look at other humans as any sort of truth. If you do that in Christianity, or any walk in life, you are setting yourself up for failure.

 

"It is better to take refuge in the Lord

than to trust in humans.

It is better to take refuge in the Lord

than to trust in princes. "

 

If we honestly assess Christianity, we will see it has nothing to do with comparing ourselves to other people or using the misdeeds of other people as a scapegoat for our own actions. Instead the bible is a mirror in which to judge ourselves.

 

"Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like someone who looks at his face in a mirror and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like."

 

I agree with you that if a witness lies, their credibility is gone. That is why the bible says not to look to any man for any source of truth. Instead, look to God who is the source of all truth and who is incapable of lying. As humans we all must give an account, and I agree with you that all of us would be found guilty. We've all lied, we've all stolen, we've all used other people.

 

Even with what I say, don't take my word for it. Hear it from Christ yourself by watching this from the gospel of John God Bless

 

Book of John - I Am the Light of the World (8:12-59) ESV - YouTube

[TheFinalWord]

You seem to think (or, at the very least, you're arguing as though) I'm saying that Christianity is always or only like this. If you go back to my original incursion into this discussion, I said that there was an undercurrent of self-denigration and loathing present in Christian theology.

 

This doesn't imply that I'm saying every Christian hates themselves, or that there's nothing else to it.

 

What I am saying, however, is (and I think nearly every Christian I asked would agree) that Christianity teaches the following:

• We are wretched and sinful by nature.
  
• We deserve an eternity in hell.
  
• Anything good comes from god, not us.
  
• God is justified in treating us in any manner he sees fit.
  

When you add all these up, I think it paints a very bleak picture and is actively damaging for anybody who believes fully in these assertions and takes them to heart. Whatever other niceties you care to layer on top of this set of claims doesn't make them go away. It's still rotten at the core, and that is the objection I have. I don't think all the other stuff negates or justifies these horrible teachings.

 

Hope that clarifies things.

 

It does! Thanks for that. But I still think that your representation of God is only seen through a negative perception. That is fine, but it is only one way to look at things. Obviously, there is another way to see things b/c no one would accept this pessimistic paradigm of God. However, billions do so there must be another view than what you are presenting. From the way I see it, with your bullets, it places the blame on God. What I am saying is that each of us as individuals is to blame, not God.

 

• We are wretched and sinful by nature. = Do you deny that you have never willingly lied, stolen, cheated? By your own conscience choice committed immoral or unethical acts? I don't think any of us can deny we have? Call it sin or immorality. I don't think anyone can deny that as humans we constantly put ourselves first and commit immoral acts.
  
• We deserve an eternity in hell.= We are accountable for those immoral deeds. If you think of it as a court of law, why should we be able to break laws and not be held accountable? I think we all have an inner sense of justice. Many crimes go unpunished in this life. But God has promised no crime will go unpunished. So you see hell as something that is not deserving. Okay. I see it as we have all committed immoral actions and those have to be answered for. The punishment fits the crime and with all the crimes committed, such as these priests that got away with molesting kids, I am glad God will render justice.
  
• Anything good comes from god, not us. = Not anything. Many people do many good works. However, works don't justify man because we also do many bad works; even the best of us. A good deed doesn't negate a bad deed. "Yes Judge, I raped a woman, but yesterday I walked an old lady across the street". Doesn't hold up in court; that evil deed must be accounted for. Salvation comes from Jesus Christ, not us, because we have committed immoral actions. Whereas Christ was perfect and sinless and takes the place of our sin, if we accept him (called justification in theology) And in this thread we have seen that entire good actions committed by Christianity (feeding millions around the world, funding suicide prevention lines, operating homeless shelters, funding countless non-profits) are rendered completely negated by the bad deeds of Christians. So just use that same rational and apply it to me and you. We can do that with anything in which humans are involved b/c we are all fallible.
  
• God is justified in treating us in any manner he sees fit.= God is justified in giving us the free will to reject a relationship with him. Hell is just giving those who reject a relationship with him what they want; an existence without God. Why is that bad?
  

So see there is another way to view these things. It's a choice, glass half empty or half full?

Edited August 4, 2012 by TheFinalWord

[TheFinalWord]

Well, they kind of do. They're just content with the notion of "might makes right" insofar as their god is concerned, and I'm not. I think it is our duty to outgrow that kind of medievel thinking.

 

I can't see how I'm blaming a being that I think is fictional. This is all an observation on the theology of Christianity and how it affects the people who follow it.

 

Sure, I meant no disrespect. When I say "you blame God", I mean the idea of God. I respect you don't believe in Him.

 

People do good and bad things to each other. I don't think that even a single selfish or immoral act consigns one to being wretched or depraved or any of the other choice epithets commonly found in Christian literature to describe humanity. The point I'm trying to make is that this is unbalanced and inaccurate.

 

Incidentally, lying and theft are not always immoral.

 

The punishment ought to be in proportion to the crime.

 

And infinite punishment for finite crimes should deeply offend it.

 

You've really got it all to do if you're going to advance eternal unescapable suffering as a fitting punishment for something as arbitrary as not thinking some bronze age rabbi was god incarnate. Let's cut to the chase and talk plainly, there's only one unforgivable sin in Christianity, and it's got nothing to do with anything you could possibly do to another human. There's only one thing that gets you across the line, and it has nothing to do with making this world a better place for anyone.

 

So let's do both of us a favour and stop with metaphors involving law courts punishing people for actual crimes. We are condemned for thoughtcrime. The kiddy-fiddling priest you refer to, according to Christianity, has a better chance of evading Hell than Gandhi. That's your perfect justice system right there. You say the punishment fits the crime, but the punishment is the same regardless of the crime, or the amount of crimes. And it's always maxed out. Theft: death. Lying: death. Child abuse: death. Overdue parking ticket: death. Doubt: death.

 

Well here I think you are not seeing things from my perspective. You go from child abuse to a parking ticket? You still haven't answered my personal questions for you. Why is hell bad if you hate the idea of God? Would you not say it is hell for him to force his presence on you for eternity? You have only committed one evil deed? Sure lying and theft are not always immoral, but I think you know what I mean. Have you personally ever done anything immoral or unethical? I know I have. I would like to know anyone who hasn't.

 

Do you have a conscience? Do you have a sense of justice? I think you do. I am making this personal because that's what Christianity is about, which I think you're missing; probably not on purpose. Maybe I am not doing a good job explaining things.

 

Christianity is about examining your own life. I know you want to look at generalizations, but I am saying look at your individual life. Christianity appeals to each persons' conscience and sense of justice. It spiritually reconciles these two innate truths that separates us from the animals.

 

So if we only talk in generalizations, we will never get to the point of Christianity. That's my point with unbelievers. They never look at themselves against the claims of Christ; they look at generalizations. I use the court of law example, because the bible uses it directly. Leviticus, which is always quoted by atheists as showing God's tyrannical streak can be cited, but when I show the legal side of God's judgement from that same book, that isn't allowed? Then we are accused of picking and choosing?

 

God is a judge and our innate sense of justice and moral nature is what we Christians believe is part of what it means to be made in God's image (though tarnished by sin). So it is a court system. The reason I'm using it, honestly, is because so many on this board say they do not want to see bible verses haha So instead I'm trying to use something else to illustrate. Please give me something to work with here bro

 

The court system works because it appeals to our rational sense of justice and moral nature, which is also what the bible appeals to. It brings it down to a level that we can all grasp, without having to cite a thousand bible verses. And it makes it personal, which is what I'm trying to explain to you is what Christianity is about. In court, we as individuals are on trial. We have to give a personal account. What person x, y, and z did is not relevant when we are on trial. It forces us to look at Christianity from the perspective of our own individual lives, which is the point of the faith. But I can cite verse if you rather though. I'll let you pick.

 

Is there anything that god could do, in your opinion, that was not justified?

 

Yes, he can't lie, he can't go against his eternal nature, he can't break his covenant, and his word cannot return void. In other words, he is a just judge. I tried to avoid this, but I will give some verses.

 

Lamedh

 

89 Your word, Lord, is eternal;

it stands firm in the heavens.

90 Your faithfulness continues through all generations;

you established the earth, and it endures.

91 Your laws endure to this day,

for all things serve you.

92 If your law had not been my delight,

I would have perished in my affliction.

93 I will never forget your precepts,

for by them you have preserved my life.

94 Save me, for I am yours;

I have sought out your precepts.

95 The wicked are waiting to destroy me,

but I will ponder your statutes.

96 To all perfection I see a limit,

but your commands are boundless.

 

 

 

"As the rain and the snow

come down from heaven,

and do not return to it

without watering the earth

and making it bud and flourish,

so that it yields seed for the sower and bread for the eater,

so is my word that goes out from my mouth:It will not return to me empty,

but will accomplish what I desire

and achieve the purpose for which I sent it."

 

God is not human, that he should lie,

not a human being, that he should change his mind.

Does he speak and then not act?

Does he promise and not fulfill?

 

*Please note that Paul is making the case for Christ, personal "you, your, yourself"

 

"But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God’s wrath , when his righteous judgment will be revealed. God “will repay each person according to what they have done.” To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9 There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; But glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. For God does not show favoritism.

 

 

 

Look, I respect you don't accept my beliefs. It's totally cool. I don't want you to think I'm trying to change your mind. I'm just trying to get you to see things from our perspective so maybe you can at least appreciate our religion. If nothing else you'll at least have more of a reason to be annoyed by us Have a good one, busy day for me today! Good chatting with you!

 

PS: I saw the flood comment. Not trying to avoid that, but I don't want to get into that b/c it will distract. Unless you're thinking of taking it somewhere else besides a debate on biblical history.

PSS: I don't believe in a global flood.

Edited August 4, 2012 by TheFinalWord

[TheFinalWord]

You cant keep answereing with quotes and the rules of christianity when i dont share your views. You cant answer with a religion that I dont care for.

 

Totally cool. I was just correcting your misrepresentation of Christianity. Christianity is based on the bible, which you referenced in your post. However, you understanding of Christianity and the bible is misguided. If you don't want to examine it objectively, no problem by me. That's your right. But it's my right to correct your misrepresentation. I am glad you say you don't care for it, because that is my main point. You can't respond with objective perspective, it's your subjective bias that's causing you to reject it. No problem at all, but I don't think you should be annoyed when you get called on your double standards. Peace.

Edited August 4, 2012 by TheFinalWord

[TheFinalWord]

How is tha a double standard? If a person of another religion tried to convince you that you were wrong and his only means was by quoting his religion you would feel the same way. A muslim cant convince u, a christian, that you are wrong because his book say this and that.

 

It's a double standard b/c you see it as okay to strawman the bible, but when someone shows you that your strawman is erroneous with the bible you say the bible doesn't count? What exactly would count for you? I'm trying to be open minded here?

 

No I wouldn't feel the same way b/c I've actually read and studied the quoran. I've debated Muslims on those very merits. So no I wouldn't see anything wrong with it especially if I was saying their holy book said something it didn't say.

 

It's like you saying the US constitution supports a monarchy, then I show you the US constitution and you say it doesn't count?

Edited August 4, 2012 by TheFinalWord

[TheFinalWord]

You are so brainwashed and cant think fo yourself its probably impossible to talk to you. No matter what I say you will always go back to what your book says, and it proves nothing except thats what you believe. The constitution is physical. I can look at it and examine it. Your book on the other hand had been re-written and altered so many times that it is an unreliable source. The only time i reference it is to point out the hypocrisy of it. I dont have to believe in it to point out that chritians can take it any way they want to. Thats is hypocritical and selfish for people to form it as they wish. Either follow it completely or your a hypocrite.

 

No, I can debate you outside of the bible. My point is that if you bring up the bible and strawman it I am going to call you on that. So if you don't want to hear about the bible, don't bring it up. Pretty simple

 

Regarding your butchery of the historicity of the bible, you are in error there as well. I can debate it with you, but I don't think its worth it. You have a personal bias against Christianity. That's fine though. You can have that, but it doesn't count as evidence. Peace!

[TheFinalWord]

Does your religion not say that all sins are equal in god's eyes? Is there a Hell-lite we go to if we only commit a few "small" sins? If not, then your objection is not best laid at my door, but somewhat closer to home. This is what your religion teaches.

 

The other reason I'm not at all interested in debating interpretation of ancient scripture is because it's pointless.

 

Where does it say that? Why ask me then tell me you won't want to talk about interpretation of ancient scripture.

 

You don't want to talk interpretation and then give me a list of denominations? I already explained the doctrines aren't irreconcilable. The theology differs; outcome is the same. Not a problem It's just like evolution. People argue about how the mechanisms differ, but the outcome is the same.

 

I don't want to get into theology either, that's why I'm trying to show you the point of Christianity: Self-reflection. I'm not sure how to make that any more clear.

 

If the majority or a significant number of Christians are behaving in some way that is damaging or outright dangerous, that needs to be addressed with more than just "well they're not True™ Christians!" hand-wave. But this is to be expected from a religion that does not advocate personal responsibility.

 

'm not playing semantic games, nor going into the irrelevant details of what hell might or might not be. The issue is the grossly simplistic binary "justice" doled out based on belief or non-belief rather than merit, and how this invokes such a exclusivist and tribal mentality in its followers.

 

You don't want to play semantic games, but now I'm supposed to argue that Christian kids aren't allowed to play with other kids?

 

I thought I asked a pretty simple question. You're made it a point in several posts that hell isn't fair. I tried to show you another perspective, but you won't answer.

 

You don't want to address the justice of hell, you don't want to interpret scripture, but now you want me to address scenarios like praying for rain and who parents let their kids play with? Come on bro this is getting really odd.

 

 

I think we're still having two separate conversations here to some degree. I'm not at all interested in a discussion about what is the "true" doctrine or interpretation of some scripture. If the majority or a significant number of Christians are behaving in some way that is damaging or outright dangerous, that needs to be addressed with more than just "well they're not True™ Christians!" hand-wave. But this is to be expected from a religion that does not advocate personal responsibility.

 

I agree we are having two separate conversations. You want me to account for very specific (and I think odd) events now. So what if people want to pray for rain? What is the big deal; I'm not trying to blow it off, but I don't get it. I'm not sure what you want me to say here. I gave an explanation about hell and asked you a simple question. You brought up hell in nearly every response to me. I was trying to show you a different perspective without quoting scripture. Please give me a specific question that I can realistically answer. I'm honestly trying to give you my perspective, but I'm at a loss how to do that. If we've reached the end of the convo, no problem! Good chatting with you either way.

 

Confusedly yours,

FTW

 

PS:

 

23 Jesus entered the temple courts, and, while he was teaching, the chief priests and the elders of the people came to him. “By what authority are you doing these things?” they asked. “And who gave you this authority?”

24 Jesus replied, “I will also ask you one question. If you answer me, I will tell you by what authority I am doing these things. 25 John’s baptism—where did it come from? Was it from heaven, or of human origin?”

They discussed it among themselves and said, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will ask, ‘Then why didn’t you believe him?’ 26 But if we say, ‘Of human origin’—we are afraid of the people, for they all hold that John was a prophet.”

27 So they answered Jesus, “We don’t know.”

Then he said, “Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things.

Edited August 5, 2012 by TheFinalWord

[TheFinalWord]

Actually you cant debate outside of the bible. All of your reasoning and opinions are already given to you by the bible. No matter what I say even if its not bible related any answer you give will be from something in the bible. As far as evidence you are the one who has none at all. All of what you believe is out of faith, and faith is not evidence at all.

 

If you say so bro

 

I'm glad to see you citing bible verses in the other thread. Keep studying and asking the tough questions!

 

An interesting web site you might like to preview sometime:

 

http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/

Edited August 5, 2012 by TheFinalWord
link

[TheFinalWord]

I think we need to back up a step here, because we're completely talking past each other.

 

This is a thread about what gives Christianity a bad name. I pointed out a couple of examples that really taint it in my eyes. You came in to give counterexamples, which is fine, but it only demonstrates what we already know: that there are all kinds of Christianity out there. I'm referring to the aspects that give the rest a bad name, which is the original point of this thread. And the back-and-forth over church doctrines is really bordering on off-topic. And even if it isn't, it is where nearly very discussion ends up anyway, so it would be nice to avoid it just this once.

 

You're not obligated to explain your way around or reassure me that "true" Christianity is not at all like anything that could ever be perceived as bad.

 

What I wanted to completely shut down and not enter into was the form of argumentation where you (or somebody else) tries to say that, in response to me criticising X and Y, that X and Y aren't "true" interpretations and besides, there's A and B which are much nicer and we should focus on that instead. There is a reason this kind of argumentation is a fallacy (see No true Scotsman).

 

Also, it doesn't negate the fact that X and Y actually happen.

 

Hey quickjoe,

 

Happy Sunday!

 

Well, about the OP I don't think this thread has stayed on topic since page 1 If you feel like I've taken things off topic, I apologize for that. It's not on purpose, it's because I feel like I'm being asked to defend "things that give Christianity a bad name" that are not accurate.

 

The reason I get into interpretations is b/c I feel that there are a lot of sweeping generalizations and straw men (also fallacies) about Christianity that aren't true being forwarded in this thread. I assume you (and others) aren't setting up straw men on purpose, that's why I'm getting into interpretation. Setting up straw men on purpose is a form of dishonesty, and I try to give people the benefit of the doubt.

 

I don't feel obligated to defend straw men. That's why I address interpretation first so we all have the same starting point. If we don't even have the same starting conditions, we can't get anywhere and there will be constant equivocation. I feel like I am by and large being asked to defend straw men. If I am was only demonstrating what we already know, I don't feel I would have to defend straw men.

 

Does what I am saying make sense? If not let me know There is another author I like Stephen Covey (I don't just read theology)

"Seek to understand, then be understood: Use empathic listening to be genuinely influenced by a person, which compels them to reciprocate the listening and take an open mind to being influenced by you. This creates an atmosphere of caring, respect, and positive problem solving."

 

I think that premise is missing from most discussions about sensitive topics like religion and politics. I honestly try to start with that initial condition. My point in these discussions isn't to change anyone's mind, only that perhaps both sides can understand each other more. When we understand each other, respect can be built.

 

And even if it isn't, it is where nearly very discussion ends up anyway, so it would be nice to avoid it just this once.

 

Okay, well I don't want to waste time. Please tell me where exactly you want it to go from here? Thanks

[KathyM]

This is what I mean about Christians believing that might makes right, and that we have absolutely no rights whatsoever. It's an appalling idea, rightly shunned, but at the very core of Christianity.

Yes, Christians believe that God has the right to make the rules for His creation. Does that come as a surprise to you?