[PUG] Christiantiy

[myself]

I must clarify that my posts don't aim to bash Christianity; I tend to have positive view on it, even if I'm not involved in it. However I don't know why in practice Christians stick much more to the Old testament than the New testament. And these short notes:
- if Jesus loves everybody, and has saved everybody, what is there more to say or do; he didn't impose some special rules on people; he only asked them to love each other (if they can..), and to not participate in the economy - so why is it exactly the opposite in practice: Christian businessmen rule merciless competitive companies? Why are they often so nationalistic/racist?? Jesus said all people, not just the Jews, or just the Americans, or just the white race? Jesus didn't ask to only love people in near proximity, but literally everybody. To love even those with other beliefs, or who don't believe in anything; and even those who are enemies of one's belief.

I feel I'm more true to what Jesus said to people, without even believing in Jesus, than most people who claim to believe in Jesus. This is what I find strange. The other thing is the judgementalism; Jesus practically forgives everybody, he doesn't judge anyone. Why do so many who claim to believe in Jesus bash the killers, by murdering them, for example. Jesus was the one to go and save the killers from death penalty, and the lustful sinners from the crowd that wanted to lynch them. How come now in practice those who call themselves Christians support death penalties for murderers and so on. And support wars, even (implicitly) "holy" wars? It makes no sense, it makes me wonder why such Christians call themselves that way at all. This is the majority of Christians, but I'm not saying all are like that.

I'm actually thankful for the story of Jesus, whether he existed or not, because this story helped a lot of nasty cultural values to be reconsidered.

damn dude... true

christianity allows people to live their lives comfortably

that moral certainty

judgement day coming

i know this isnt what all christians are about

but so many of them are.

so so many

why cling to this clumsy thing?

salvation?

yeah, well jesus said it's ok. sin is taken care of. we just gotta love.

no more judgement waiting for you

God is cool with us all.

Time to move on aint it?

so many sheep

with crazy shepherds

people...

 

[muir]

I must clarify that my posts don't aim to bash Christianity; I tend to have positive view on it, even if I'm not involved in it. However I don't know why in practice Christians stick much more to the Old testament than the New testament. And these short notes:
- if Jesus loves everybody, and has saved everybody, what is there more to say or do; he didn't impose some special rules on people; he only asked them to love each other (if they can..), and to not participate in the economy - so why is it exactly the opposite in practice: Christian businessmen rule merciless competitive companies? Why are they often so nationalistic/racist?? Jesus said all people, not just the Jews, or just the Americans, or just the white race? Jesus didn't ask to only love people in near proximity, but literally everybody. To love even those with other beliefs, or who don't believe in anything; and even those who are enemies of one's belief.

I feel I'm more true to what Jesus said to people, without even believing in Jesus, than most people who claim to believe in Jesus. This is what I find strange. The other thing is the judgementalism; Jesus practically forgives everybody, he doesn't judge anyone. Why do so many who claim to believe in Jesus bash the killers, by murdering them, for example. Jesus was the one to go and save the killers from death penalty, and the lustful sinners from the crowd that wanted to lynch them. How come now in practice those who call themselves Christians support death penalties for murderers and so on. And support wars, even (implicitly) "holy" wars? It makes no sense, it makes me wonder why such Christians call themselves that way at all. This is the majority of Christians, but I'm not saying all are like that.

I'm actually thankful for the story of Jesus, whether he existed or not, because this story helped a lot of nasty cultural values to be reconsidered.

Yeah it's a great story whether it is real or not or whether you believe in the divinity of jesus or not.

It's a wonderful idea this idea that although you can't physically stand upto power (the romans and the pharisees), like the zealots tried to do, because the powerful have more muscle than you, what you the individual can do, is free your mind from their control. You can recognise that they are the enemy not other groups of people (like the samaritans) or each other (like adulterers or tax collectors!)

Every time the switch goes in someones mind and they see the reality that it is the powerful that are the enemy and the oppressors of the people then it is a mini revolution. I think this is the idea behind christianity, that you free your mind. You overcome the division, the hate and the control and you unite with others until you overcome the powerful by sheer weight of opinion/numbers.

Once a critical mass of people whose minds are free from control develops then positive change can occur; or as William Blake put it: freeing ourselves from 'the mind forg'd manacles' so that we can 'cleanse the doors of perception'

They control your body and how you live your life, and they try to control your mind, but you can break free and live free in your mind, if not in your body (yet)

The story has been hijacked though. The powerful have used religion as a way of corralling the thought of the masses into a narrow band. A narrow way of seeing the world and each other. That is the complete opposite of what christianity is about!!

People talk about 'the protestant work ethic' and piety has become associated with the amassing of personal wealth (or trying to; the reality is that most people who buy into this myth work hard all their lives but never know true wealth)

Capitalism and 'christianity' have walked hand in hand for a while. But it's not christianity, it is a perversion.

 

[Krumplenump]

How do I logically and mentally justify everything else in the world I've been told is true and do not have the means to verify?
Continue to question it or understand it with what I have available.

What humans 'have available' to help answer questions are 1) science or 2) the easy cop out of 'god made it that way'. If you are saying you choose the latter rather than the former - which, by the way, is continually questioning, disproving and improving itself - I am at a loss as to why.

Nope, just an answer to a question.

You think religion is an answer to a question? I'm intrigued as to which question you mean.

Are we talking about the faith or certain individuals that have made up its congregation? I don't remember the "Hate God and your neighbor and yourself" passage. Christ's message was pretty consistent. Where does it say in the bible that only Christians can do moral things?

Where is this 'monopoly on morality' I was supposed to have said the bible contains? I said that; given the clear ease of maintaining morals without religion, why use religion at all.

That said, depending on how scripture is interpreted, it could easily be said that Christianity professes a monopoly on morality, or rather that it is 'the only way'. Islam is certainly like this, and I think the only reason a common opinion that Christianity is not like this, is because it has been moderated and tamed unlike Islam. Thus, many interpretations of 'modern' Christianity aren't Christianity at all, they're self-defined and personalised belief systems of which the title the owner does not wish to change for fear of - subconscious or not - hell fire.

I'd recommend you make peace with whoever wronged you and look at the religion as people looking for answers just as you are.

No-one of a religious conviction has personally wronged me. If you'll notice the final question I asked was directed at the 'type' of Christians that follow televangelist types and people like Jim Jones, in which I raised the rhetorical question that the self-damaging effects of drug and alcohol abuse were preferable to contributing to the degeneration of whole societies by means of colluding in mass hysteria.

I evidently need to spell out here that I'm not saying drug and alcohol abuse is preferable to a being modest chap who professes a belief in god and does so privately and does not act upon or promote acting upon various extreme instruction in scripture.

The inability of people in comprehending to what type of Christian my questions were aimed at, or rather stating - like DefectiveCreative did - one of my questions was directed at an 'incorrect' definition of a Christian, just goes to show what an unassailable position the faithful find themselves in. And they utilise this 'disprovable' stance as though they stand on the other side of the riverbank with an equally viable set of cards in their hands.

 

[Krumplenump]

And for Barnabas, I'm curious if you, as a Christian, believe that people being pulled from the rubble of post-tsunami or earthquake wastelands weeks after the incident are 'miracles'?

Apply that to any example of extreme survivial 'against the odds'.

 

[muir]

I think the part of the story where jesus spends 40 days and 40 nights in the desert is very interesting

This idea of withdrawing from society to allow time to make sense of what is going on, what one's place is in the world and to think of a way forward.

Battling with inner demons and undoing them all one at a time. Thinking through each of them to break them down and understand why they are there, what they mean and what can be done to overcome them.

Everything that plagues him in his life, about himself, about society and about the way the world is, is broken down and analysed until there is nothing left but understanding; solutions and resolve then follow

The parallels with budha are obvious. The dissolusionment with the world, the need for answers and understanding, the shunning of worldy desire, the asceticism and ultimately the vision of the true path

Both are stories about individuals who have, in their minds, broken down every aspect of life in order to make sense of things and to find a way of navigating through life. Both overcome their societal conditioning, wipe clear societies value system and put in place their own value system and meaning out of the mess.

A traumatic experience, but both are rewarded with a clarity of vision

 

[Barnabas]

And for Barnabas, I'm curious if you, as a Christian, believe that people being pulled from the rubble of post-tsunami or earthquake wastelands weeks after the incident are 'miracles'?

Apply that to any example of extreme survivial 'against the odds'.

arn't miracles things that happen that are so far against the odds that they could only have happened if God had done it.

And no, I wouldn't call those people being pulled out of the rubble a miracle, good yes, mriacle no.

 

[IndigoSensor]

What humans 'have available' to help answer questions are 1) science or 2) the easy cop out of 'god made it that way'. If you are saying you choose the latter rather than the former - which, by the way, is continually questioning, disproving and improving itself - I am at a loss as to why.

That's not a cop out at all. It isn't widely known the forums, but I am actually quite spiritual (I have my own set of beleifs, mostly New Age). I fuse science and sprituality together to come up for reasons, patterns, questions, and answers to why everything around me does what it does. I am constantly question what I see, hear, and feel. To say that just saying "god made it that way" is not a cop out. To assume that religious folks don't bring events and feelings into question and wonder why this is the case is a misnomer. Yes, there are religious folks out there who will just skoff at something and disregard it because it doesn't line up with their view of the world and not question it, but I feel that this is the minority now a days.

All of this is only a problem when people try to impose their religious beliefs on other people, and this is becoming less and less common each and every day. I am not entirely sure why people get so bothered by other peoples religious belief systems, particularly from atheists. The most common thing I hear is "they are believing something that is not truthful!". Well you know what, you can't not prove it either. If their way of life is not effecting you in a harmful way, other then mild annoyance, then why try to change it? It makes their lives happy and fufilling, and that should be good enough for everyone. Not honoring that only proceeds to make things more complicated and quarrlsome for the world.

 

[Raccoon Love]

That's not a cop out at all. It isn't widely known the forums, but I am actually quite spiritual (I have my own set of beleifs, mostly New Age). I fuse science and sprituality together to come up for reasons, patterns, questions, and answers to why everything around me does what it does. I am constantly question what I see, hear, and feel. To say that just saying "god made it that way" is not a cop out. To assume that religious folks don't bring events and feelings into question and wonder why this is the case is a misnomer. Yes, there are religious folks out there who will just skoff at something and disregard it because it doesn't line up with their view of the world and not question it, but I feel that this is the minority now a days.

All of this is only a problem when people try to impose their religious beliefs on other people, and this is becoming less and less common each and every day. I am not entirely sure why people get so bothered by other peoples religious belief systems, particularly from atheists. The most common thing I hear is "they are believing something that is not truthful!". Well you know what, you can't not prove it either. If their way of life is not effecting you in a harmful way, other then mild annoyance, then why try to change it? It makes their lives happy and fufilling, and that should be good enough for everyone. Not honoring that only proceeds to make things more complicated and quarrlsome for the world.

I agree with this, I consider myself a spiritual person, and I have always tried to mix both spirituality and science,I am always questioning things and my mind won't stop until it reaches answers, I am not satisfied with explanations madeby religious groups like ''the holy scriptures state so'' or '' God meant it to be that way'', I believe this goes completely agains my nature and I do not believe God wants me to remain ignorant, I must search for the answers. I an a firm believer that no one has the right to impose their views on anybody, and in the end everything is subjective so we have every right to believe in whatever we want, it annoys me tremendously when other religions try to force their views on others.

 

[TheLastMohican]

To say that just saying "god made it that way" is not a cop out.

It certainly does do away with incentive to study how something was made. Presuming no divine cause, even as a thought exercise, is the best way to approach a scientific question. The supposed role of God has been retreating for hundreds of years, and shall continue to do so as long as we remain motivated to keep looking for natural causes.

 

[IndigoSensor]

It certainly does do away with incentive to study how something was made. Presuming no divine cause, even as a thought exercise, is the best way to approach a scientific question. The supposed role of God has been retreating for hundreds of years, and shall continue to do so as long as we remain motivated to keep looking for natural causes.

oy... Ok I will rephrase. It isn't a cop out if the person doesn't have any higher thought about it. One can very easily say "god made it that way" and have an intelligence answer and reasoning behind it. It can be a cop out, but it isn't always.

 

[Raccoon Love]

It certainly does do away with incentive to study how something was made. Presuming no divine cause, even as a thought exercise, is the best way to approach a scientific question. The supposed role of God has been retreating for hundreds of years, and shall continue to do so as long as we remain motivated to keep looking for natural causes.

Which is why I sometimes believe the entire purpose of religion is to keep us in ignorance, it restricts human curiosity by simply saying ''that's the way things are'', sadly I believe such views do not help society advance, instead they limit us. I believe we are creatures of constant change, and the ideal of just simply leaving things the way they are scares me, I believe constant evolution is one of our natural traits and well as time passes we acquire more knowledge, all religion has done is shut down doors of opportunity.

Though maybe I misunderstood this reply, please tell me so if I did .

 

[TheLastMohican]

Which is why I sometimes believe the entire purpose of religion is to keep us in ignorance, it restricts human curiosity by simply saying ''that's the way things are'', sadly I believe such views do not help society advance, instead they limit us. I believe we are creatures of constant change, and the ideal of just simply leaving things the way they are scares me, I believe constant evolution is one of our natural traits and well as time passes we acquire more knowledge, all religion has done is shut down doors of opportunity.

Though maybe I misunderstood this reply, please tell me so if I did .

I mostly agree, although some forms of religion are not built on restrictions, but on ideals of spiritual enlightenment, which often facilitate advancement. Eastern religions are fundamentally different from the Western/Middle-Eastern monotheistic ones.

Recently there has been a trend of blending Eastern and "New Age" beliefs into Christianity, which provides a pretty benign, fluid form of spirituality. Hopefully that will continue until religious divides become obsolete.

 

[DefectiveCreative]

This is the majority of Christians, but I'm not saying all are like that.

I'd disagree that those kinds of Christians make up the majority, a study by the Barna Group found that only 9% of adult respondents and 0.5% of young adult respondents claimed to hold to what the survey defined as a "biblical worldview" (aka: a literal interpretation of the Bible), which is a hallmark of fundamentalist and conservative Christianity (moderate and liberal Christianity preferring allegorical interpretations to varying degrees).

 

[Raccoon Love]

I'd disagree that those kinds of Christians make up the majority, a study by the Barna Group found that only 9% of adult respondents and 0.5% of young adult respondents claimed to hold to what the survey defined as a "biblical worldview" (aka: a literal interpretation of the Bible), which is a hallmark of fundamentalist and conservative Christianity (moderate and liberal Christianity preferring allegorical interpretations to varying degrees).

Of course this are the extremes, complete direct interpretation of the bible would include actions such as stoning a woman to death for adultery, of course such actions are now illegal which is why perhaps there is such a small minority who practice it but nonetheless there are still plenty of extreme conservative Christians who even though they might not display their actions through violence, they are still very discriminative and not accepting.

 

[DefectiveCreative]

...or rather stating - like DefectiveCreative did - one of my questions was directed at an 'incorrect' definition of a Christian, ...

Actually I said it was an inaccurate definition of a Christian.

This is what you posted:

The sort of things i'd ask the 'type' of Christian I first mentioned (humble, empathetic and moral) would be things along the lines of 'Why did you choose a faith that includes so much capriciousness and hate to model your empathetic, peace-loving lifestye on? Isn't that somewhat of a contradiction and therefore you are only a self-defined Christian, not a 'Christian' in it's accurate definition. Could you not have gained these principles of morality etc without Christianity?' (the answer to that of course is an undeniable 'yes')

This is a clear statement on your part that the definition of Christian that you consider "accurate" is the one that you mentioned earlier in your post: "someone who believes in the Abrahamic god and believes the bible word for word" (to quote you again), but that's no more accurate a description of Christianity than if I said they were all a bunch of peace-loving hippies.

The closest you're going to get to an accurate defintion of a Christian is the dictionary defintion, which according to Encarta is: believer in Jesus Christ as saviour: somebody whose religion is Christianity.

And according to Merriam-Webster is:one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Like I said before, no mention of a literal interpretation of the Bible anywhere.

 

[DefectiveCreative]

Of course this are the extremes, complete direct interpretation of the bible would include actions such as stoning a woman to death for adultery, of course such actions are now illegal which is why perhaps there is such a small minority who practice it but nonetheless there are still plenty of extreme conservative Christians who even though they might not display their actions through violence, they are still very discriminative and not accepting.

But "biblical worldview" doesn't necessarily mean a completely literal interpretation of the Bible, it just suggests a strong preference for a strict adherence to the Bible, which lends itself to literal interpretations (not least because both conservative and fundamentalist Christians fear that the more mutable allegorical interpretations might lead them to get things "wrong").

So what the study showed was that only 9% of the American adults who responded (and a measly 0.5% of the young adults) hold a particular view that suggests they are either fundamentalist or strongly (to perhaps moderately) conservative Christians.

 

[Raccoon Love]

But "biblical worldview" doesn't necessarily mean a completely literal interpretation of the Bible, it just suggests a strong preference for a strict adherence to the Bible, which lends itself to literal interpretations (not least because both conservative and fundamentalist Christians fear that the more mutable allegorical interpretations might lead them to get things "wrong").

So what the study showed was that only 9% of the American adults who responded (and a measly 0.5% of the young adults) hold a particular view that suggests they are either fundamentalist or strongly (to perhaps moderately) conservative Christians.

But of course this are only statistics, gathered by a particular source who might have a certain bias, from my observations, the amount of strong conservative Christians is still pretty large, I been through multiple conservative churches, also I seen plenty of polls that state the exact opposite and the amount of liberal christians and conservative Christians is still about 50/50, with mostly all of them falling somewhere in the middle ( being acceptant of certain things but not others) and of course I do agree that the younger generations do indeed have more of a liberal perspective. Also the fact that this in the US tells you something, everything is more regulated here, count a Christians in other countries and the results will be rather different, in fact there are still countries who apply punishments from fees to even death penalties for violating aspects of the old testament.

 

[Krumplenump]

That's not a cop out at all. It isn't widely known the forums, but I am actually quite spiritual (I have my own set of beleifs, mostly New Age). I fuse science and sprituality together to come up for reasons, patterns, questions, and answers to why everything around me does what it does. I am constantly question what I see, hear, and feel. To say that just saying "god made it that way" is not a cop out. To assume that religious folks don't bring events and feelings into question and wonder why this is the case is a misnomer. Yes, there are religious folks out there who will just skoff at something and disregard it because it doesn't line up with their view of the world and not question it, but I feel that this is the minority now a days.

All of this is only a problem when people try to impose their religious beliefs on other people, and this is becoming less and less common each and every day. I am not entirely sure why people get so bothered by other peoples religious belief systems, particularly from atheists. The most common thing I hear is "they are believing something that is not truthful!". Well you know what, you can't not prove it either. If their way of life is not effecting you in a harmful way, other then mild annoyance, then why try to change it? It makes their lives happy and fufilling, and that should be good enough for everyone. Not honoring that only proceeds to make things more complicated and quarrlsome for the world.

I can appreciate this point of view, and would let it govern me were I fortunate enough to reside in an area where "religious folks out there who just skoff at something and disregard it because it doesn't line up with their view of the world" are a minority. Alas I do not, and therefore, me merely taking the back burner with the issue of religiosity beyond a private belief system (which is quite rare where I live) is simply not an option, since to do so would make me feel nonchalant and inactive against seething religious falsehoods which could affect my friends and family and my future kids.

I think what you're getting at is 'why can't people just accept different opinions and quit trying to prove others wrong'. That is a very noble notion, and were the daily people (beyond friends) with whom I share my immediate world with as accepting of my views, I would be of theirs. Yes, I live in the best of the worst as far as Muslim countries go, but still, because of the controlling aspect religion has on peoples lives here I simply cannot turn a blind eye to it for the sake of 'not being bothered' by it; I feel a moral duty to stand against it's over-arching influence and to aid here in some small way the movement which in the western world is enjoyed as 'freedom of religion'.

If I lived in Montana I'd probably be less inclined to give a shit, since I could live and my children could grow up in a society where faith-based 'deviations' were accepted.

I hope that answers your query of 'why people get so bothered by other peoples religious belief systems' sufficiently.

As for the whole cop out thing. Bringing into the equation people who fuse science and faith (i.e religion, not sprituality or energy) together to reach conclusions is irrelevant, since someone who states 'it is how it is because God made it that way' nullifies any substance their understanding of, let's say, the law of gravity has, or how bacteria multiply. To put stock in and believe such an obtuse comment as though it sheds light on any given thing can be nothing but a cop out.

Actually I said it was an inaccurate definition of a Christian.

This is what you posted:

This is a clear statement on your part that the definition of Christian that you consider "accurate" is the one that you mentioned earlier in your post: "someone who believes in the Abrahamic god and believes the bible word for word" (to quote you again), but that's no more accurate a description of Christianity than if I said they were all a bunch of peace-loving hippies.

The closest you're going to get to an accurate defintion of a Christian is the dictionary defintion, which according to Encarta is: believer in Jesus Christ as saviour: somebody whose religion is Christianity.

And according to Merriam-Webster is:one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Like I said before, no mention of a literal interpretation of the Bible anywhere.

Let's not piffle over alternative synonyms shall we. I begrudge having to refrain from further debate with you over the definition of 'Christian', but I must because it will lead no where. I would however wish to solidify my claim that the entire reason I issued multiple questions to multiple 'types' of hypothetical Christians was due to the very reason that the definition of one is so ambiguous. Dictionary definitions, while I thank you for your scholarly research on my behalf, bare little relevance to the real world of multi-defined Christians we live in.

 

[just me]

I feel much sorrow, having devoted almost a lifetime trying to understand something and seeing so many people not even give it a chance. I feel loss, though not my own. However, I do feel a certain loss of words.

Mind you all, I see a lack of understanding growing in the midst of some of the youth around the world. It is sad for me to know how something that means so much to me is looked upon with so little respect by others.

I now go to wally world and wonder who it is buying groceries next to me in the store. Has life and life values really changed that much, or is it just here on this forum where it has changed or is trying to change? I ask myself these questions.

I can go to a local hospital and find the spirit I seek. I find it in a young and beautiful doctor's office where prayer was given over my Mother by the doctor for her healing. I see it in abundance everywhere around me.
It makes me wonder, but I still do not believe it is disappearing. I do believe there are those that would have one think it is disappearing.

This may help me to sleep better tonight. PUG, right? Hopefully there are those that may enjoy reading this.

Psalms 19: 8-11
The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring forever: the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. Moreover by them is thy servant warned; and in keeping of them there is great reward.

 

[IndigoSensor]

I can appreciate this point of view, and would let it govern me were I fortunate enough to reside in an area where "religious folks out there who just skoff at something and disregard it because it doesn't line up with their view of the world" are a minority. Alas I do not, and therefore, me merely taking the back burner with the issue of religiosity beyond a private belief system (which is quite rare where I live) is simply not an option, since to do so would make me feel nonchalant and inactive against seething religious falsehoods which could affect my friends and family and my future kids.

I think what you're getting at is 'why can't people just accept different opinions and quit trying to prove others wrong'. That is a very noble notion, and were the daily people (beyond friends) with whom I share my immediate world with as accepting of my views, I would be of theirs. Yes, I live in the best of the worst as far as Muslim countries go, but still, because of the controlling aspect religion has on peoples lives here I simply cannot turn a blind eye to it for the sake of 'not being bothered' by it; I feel a moral duty to stand against it's over-arching influence and to aid here in some small way the movement which in the western world is enjoyed as 'freedom of religion'.

If I lived in Montana I'd probably be less inclined to give a shit, since I could live and my children could grow up in a society where faith-based 'deviations' were accepted.

I hope that answers your query of 'why people get so bothered by other peoples religious belief systems' sufficiently.

As for the whole cop out thing. Bringing into the equation people who fuse science and faith (i.e religion, not sprituality or energy) together to reach conclusions is irrelevant, since someone who states 'it is how it is because God made it that way' nullifies any substance their understanding of, let's say, the law of gravity has, or how bacteria multiply. To put stock in and believe such an obtuse comment as though it sheds light on any given thing can be nothing but a cop out.

When you are environment though (like here for instance), where people are not going to be so blind to their belief systems and then try to impose it upon you, it is unnesscarry and in a way unfair to go out of your way to try and tell people what they believe is incorrect. Moral duty or not, take into concideration to the person on the other end. Not everyone is going to cause a problem with what they believe, by you going after them, you could be causing unnesscarry and unfair pain for them. You are letting your own judgements on what you feel is correct get in the way, which is really not much better then extremely religious folks.