A Few Words About Christian Self-Righteousness

[BluePhantom]

A common criticism about Christians is their intolerance for things such as divorce, homosexuality, drinking, and...well....just about everything else. I am going to argue that scripture teaches that such condemnation and intolerance is contrary to the lessons of Jesus and Paul and are thus in contrast to Christianity.

First a word about self-righteousness and being judgmental from Paul:

"You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2 Now we know that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3 So when you, a mere human being, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment? 4 Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, forbearance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness is intended to lead you to repentance? 5 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." (Rom.2:1-5, NIV)

Next a word about judgement and hypocrisy from Jesus according to the gospels.

“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. 3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye." (Matt. 7:1-5, NIV)

Taken together, this suggests that we have no place judging others until we are blameless. Yet according to Paul, no one is blameless.

"As it is written: “There is no one righteous, not even one; 11 there is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God. 12 All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one." (Rom 3:10-12, NIV) Paul is quoting Psalms 14 and 53 in this verse.

Thus since no one is blameless, none have any justification to judge. What are we commanded to do? Jesus answers that.

"28 One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?” 29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.” (Mark 12:28-31, NIV)

So what is love? Paul chimes in.

"If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing. 4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres." (1 Cor. 13: 1-7, NIV)

So according to Paul and Jesus we are to treat all people with patience, kindness, compassion, tolerance, humility, forgiveness, and respect no matter their choices or lifestyle. As such, condemnation of people who have divorced, who are homosexual, who are atheist, who embrace other beliefs, etc is prohibited by scripture and is therefore, against Christian teaching. Christians should walk their own path, worry about their own sins, and let other people walk theirs.

 

[BluePhantom]

Damn...I hit post before i was ready. Sorry. Give me a few minutes to finish the OP

Ok all set

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Every time I think I should be more tolerant of self-righteous, self-congratulatory, holier-than-thou, bible thumpers, I read their posts here.

Some religions are nothing more than hate groups with fancy club houses.

 

[BluePhantom]

Every time I think I should be more tolerant of self-righteous, self-congratulatory, holier-than-thou, bible thumpers, I read their posts here.

Some religions are nothing more than hate groups with fancy club houses.

Sadly some religions have become that, Christianity included depending on who you are dealing with. But that is not what the Bible teaches. Your beef, therefore, is with those who do not follow the religion they claim or who manipulate the teachings in order to advance their personal agenda and not with the theology itself.

 

[koshergrl]

Belongs in the flame zone. Ignore.

 

[BluePhantom]

Belongs in the flame zone. Ignore.

Koshergrl only you would think that making an argument about what scripture actually teaches and how people misinterpret that scripture, or ignore it outright, is a flame. I am making a comment about the actual teachings of scripture as opposed to how many Christians conduct themselves. If you are offended, you probably should be. Too bad....you could benefit from actually reading it and applying it.

 

[koshergrl]

Belongs in the flame zone. Ignore.

Koshergrl only you would think that making an argument about what scripture actually teaches and how people misinterpret that scripture, or ignore it outright, is a flame. I am making a comment about the true nature of the Christian religion as opposed to how many Christians conduct themselves. If you are offended, you probably should be. Too bad....you could benefit from actually reading it and applying it.

Actually, it's based on the thread title. I hadn't even read the OP. It's not because I'm offended. It's because it violates the rules of this forum.

 

[BluePhantom]

Belongs in the flame zone. Ignore.

Koshergrl only you would think that making an argument about what scripture actually teaches and how people misinterpret that scripture, or ignore it outright, is a flame. I am making a comment about the true nature of the Christian religion as opposed to how many Christians conduct themselves. If you are offended, you probably should be. Too bad....you could benefit from actually reading it and applying it.

Actually, it's based on the thread title. I hadn't even read the OP. It's not because I'm offended. It's because it violates the rules of this forum.

Are you, of all people, trying to argue that self-righteousness is not a legitimate issue within the Christian community? If so, that's about the single most hilarious thing I have heard today.

 

[koshergrl]

Belongs in the flame zone. Ignore.

Koshergrl only you would think that making an argument about what scripture actually teaches and how people misinterpret that scripture, or ignore it outright, is a flame. I am making a comment about the true nature of the Christian religion as opposed to how many Christians conduct themselves. If you are offended, you probably should be. Too bad....you could benefit from actually reading it and applying it.

Actually, it's based on the thread title. I hadn't even read the OP. It's not because I'm offended. It's because it violates the rules of this forum.

Are you, of all people, trying to argue that self-righteousness is not a legitimate issue within the Christian community? If so, that's about the single most hilarious thing I have heard today.

No, I'm arguing that this is a call out thread and doesn't belong here. And it doesn't.

 

[BluePhantom]

Belongs in the flame zone. Ignore.

Koshergrl only you would think that making an argument about what scripture actually teaches and how people misinterpret that scripture, or ignore it outright, is a flame. I am making a comment about the true nature of the Christian religion as opposed to how many Christians conduct themselves. If you are offended, you probably should be. Too bad....you could benefit from actually reading it and applying it.

Actually, it's based on the thread title. I hadn't even read the OP. It's not because I'm offended. It's because it violates the rules of this forum.

Are you, of all people, trying to argue that self-righteousness is not a legitimate issue within the Christian community? If so, that's about the single most hilarious thing I have heard today.

No, I'm arguing that this is a call out thread and doesn't belong here. And it doesn't.

I suppose you could interpret it that way if you chose and were really defensive about it. Or you could interpret it as making an argument about the modern state of religion, specifically one in opposition to self-righteousness among Christians, and inviting discussion about the topic in the hope of dispelling religious stereotypes. It is a topic about religion and the ethical application of religion in society by those of the religious community.

 

[amrchaos]

It is human nature to judge. It is also part of our ability to familiarize and learn about the world around us. That includes people.

I think it is impossible for anyone not to judge based upon their own perspective, and to sit quietly and not say anything is also a missed opportunity to learn and grow.

I do not accept this message of not judging. There are things each person should reject, should denounce, should be intolerant of. Telling people not t judge is like telling people not to think for themselves. I just do not accept that as a sensible message.

 

[BluePhantom]

It is human nature to judge. It is also part of our ability to familiarize and learn about the world around us. That includes people.

I think it is impossible for anyone not to judge based upon their own perspective, and to sit quietly and not say anything is also a missed opportunity to learn and grow.

I do not accept this message of not judging. There are things each person should reject, should denounce, should be intolerant of. Telling people not t judge is like telling people not to think for themselves. I just do not accept that as a sensible message.

Well I would answer in this manner. I think it is very healthy to look at the actions of lifestyles of other people and make evaluations about whether or not those things reflect our own character. What I mean is....take a friend of yours that is cheating on his wife. I think it's perfectly reasonable to look at his actions and ask ourselves whether his actions are accurate reflections of who we are as individuals. But I would stop short of making a judgment about his value as a human being.

I think that's what the real point is. Yes we can say "oh here's this guy and I notice he has lied to a lot of people, so I am just not going to hang out with that guy because I don't trust him". That's a personal choice about who you choose to associate with, but that's far different than reaching the determination that his intrinsic human value is less because he has an honesty problem.

It's not refusing to think for yourself. It's taking the advice of Confucius, perhaps, who said "even in the company of two men can I learn. The good of the one I copy and the defect of the other I correct in myself". It's my observation that many Christians "hate the sinner as well as the sin." I argue that what they should do is simply say "well what they are doing is not what I would do but they are a child of God and therefore worthy of receiving the respect of their human value." I would argue that many Christians do not respect even the human value of those with whom they disagree.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Belongs in the flame zone. Ignore.

Koshergrl only you would think that making an argument about what scripture actually teaches and how people misinterpret that scripture, or ignore it outright, is a flame. I am making a comment about the true nature of the Christian religion as opposed to how many Christians conduct themselves. If you are offended, you probably should be. Too bad....you could benefit from actually reading it and applying it.

Actually, it's based on the thread title. I hadn't even read the OP. It's not because I'm offended. It's because it violates the rules of this forum.

The OP does not violate any rules, but your post does.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Amr does not get the Word. Humans judge behavior by human standards, but moral judgement is up to God.

 

[BluePhantom]

Amr does not get the Word. Humans judge behavior by human standards, but moral judgement is up to God.

Exactly. I think though that he is also making reference to making judgments about criminal actions. For example do we love and respect a murderer, child molester, or rapist. That's a real hard one because such people are worthy of being condemned according to human law. Scripture tells us not to forget those who are in prison and offer them the love of Christ. I will be the first to admit....that's a tough one for me. It's hard for me to give the love of Christ and respect the intrinsic human value of a guy who beats a child to death. But that's exactly what scripture tells us to do, right? Hold them to human punishment according to human law but as for their spiritual judgment, let God sort it out.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Belongs in the flame zone. Ignore.

Koshergrl only you would think that making an argument about what scripture actually teaches and how people misinterpret that scripture, or ignore it outright, is a flame. I am making a comment about the true nature of the Christian religion as opposed to how many Christians conduct themselves. If you are offended, you probably should be. Too bad....you could benefit from actually reading it and applying it.

Actually, it's based on the thread title. I hadn't even read the OP. It's not because I'm offended. It's because it violates the rules of this forum.

Are you, of all people, trying to argue that self-righteousness is not a legitimate issue within the Christian community? If so, that's about the single most hilarious thing I have heard today.

No, I'm arguing that this is a call out thread and doesn't belong here. And it doesn't.

If you were ever wondering why you're not a mod here kg, this is a pretty good example of why.

There's nothing inappropriate about this thread except for your trolling of it.

Knock it off.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Belongs in the flame zone. Ignore.

Koshergrl only you would think that making an argument about what scripture actually teaches and how people misinterpret that scripture, or ignore it outright, is a flame. I am making a comment about the true nature of the Christian religion as opposed to how many Christians conduct themselves. If you are offended, you probably should be. Too bad....you could benefit from actually reading it and applying it.

Actually, it's based on the thread title. I hadn't even read the OP. It's not because I'm offended. It's because it violates the rules of this forum.

Ironic!

And no, this thread does not violate the rules of the Religion & Ethics forum.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I argue that what they should do is simply say "well what they are doing is not what I would do but they are a child of God and therefore worthy of receiving the respect of their human value." I would argue that many Christians do not respect even the human value of those with whom they disagree.

Perhaps because they haven't earned that respect?

There are two things commingled here.

One is respect for human life and the other respect for beliefs.

Even the most heinous criminal is still deserving of their basic rights as a person and that is a purely secular position.

Those that fail to live up to the tenets of their religion should be called out IMO. If a religion is to stand for something then it must uphold those principles and expect it's followers to adhere to them. Instead by giving them a pass they are effectively diluting their own religion and showing it as being hollow.

For example Jesus never said to love your fellow man except for the blacks, gays, Muslims and Atheists. There was no caveat. Just the opposite in fact. The parable of the good Samaritan was to love everyone without exceptions. So those who are Christians who go around spewing bigotry towards those groups are not only violating one of the basic teachings but they are discrediting the religion for everyone else.

Making excuses for those who are harming your religion simply compounds the felony. Now you are becoming an accomplice after the fact. Instead of calling out the bigots you are condoning them.

 

[BluePhantom]

I argue that what they should do is simply say "well what they are doing is not what I would do but they are a child of God and therefore worthy of receiving the respect of their human value." I would argue that many Christians do not respect even the human value of those with whom they disagree.

Perhaps because they haven't earned that respect?

There are two things commingled here.

One is respect for human life and the other respect for beliefs.

Even the most heinous criminal is still deserving of their basic rights as a person and that is a purely secular position.

Those that fail to live up to the tenets of their religion should be called out IMO. If a religion is to stand for something then it must uphold those principles and expect it's followers to adhere to them. Instead by giving them a pass they are effectively diluting their own religion and showing it as being hollow.

For example Jesus never said to love your fellow man except for the blacks, gays, Muslims and Atheists. There was no caveat. Just the opposite in fact. The parable of the good Samaritan was to love everyone without exceptions. So those who are Christians who go around spewing bigotry towards those groups are not only violating one of the basic teachings but they are discrediting the religion for everyone else.

Making excuses for those who are harming your religion simply compounds the felony. Now you are becoming an accomplice after the fact. Instead of calling out the bigots you are condoning them.

I think we are in agreement, but one thing

- I said "...many Christians do not respect even the human value of those with whom they disagree." to which you replied, "Perhaps because they haven't earned that respect?" and later stated "Even the most heinous criminal is still deserving of their basic rights as a person...". That seems to be contradictory. I am not quite following you there.

Other than that it appears we agree

 

[Derideo_Te]

I argue that what they should do is simply say "well what they are doing is not what I would do but they are a child of God and therefore worthy of receiving the respect of their human value." I would argue that many Christians do not respect even the human value of those with whom they disagree.

Perhaps because they haven't earned that respect?

There are two things commingled here.

One is respect for human life and the other respect for beliefs.

Even the most heinous criminal is still deserving of their basic rights as a person and that is a purely secular position.

Those that fail to live up to the tenets of their religion should be called out IMO. If a religion is to stand for something then it must uphold those principles and expect it's followers to adhere to them. Instead by giving them a pass they are effectively diluting their own religion and showing it as being hollow.

For example Jesus never said to love your fellow man except for the blacks, gays, Muslims and Atheists. There was no caveat. Just the opposite in fact. The parable of the good Samaritan was to love everyone without exceptions. So those who are Christians who go around spewing bigotry towards those groups are not only violating one of the basic teachings but they are discrediting the religion for everyone else.

Making excuses for those who are harming your religion simply compounds the felony. Now you are becoming an accomplice after the fact. Instead of calling out the bigots you are condoning them.

I think we are in agreement, but one thing

- I said "...many Christians do not respect even the human value of those with whom they disagree." to which you replied, "Perhaps because they haven't earned that respect?" and later stated "Even the most heinous criminal is still deserving of their basic rights as a person...". That seems to be contradictory. I am not quite following you there.

Other than that it appears we agree

Probably because I was trying to draw a distinction between the secular and the nonsecular.

From a purely secular POV I will uphold the rights of everyone irrespective as to whether or not I personally agree with their actions, beliefs or opinions. That doesn't mean that necessarily have my respect because in order to do that they need to earn it first.

So a criminal has a right to fair trail but unless they are willing to honestly admit to their crime and serve their time they haven't earned any respect as far as I am concerned.

For me the same applies to those who profess to be followers of religions that uphold certain behaviors.

For instance someone who proudly proclaims to be for "Christian family values" while committing adultery gets zero respect from me. They are entitled to their right to be innocent until proven guilty but they most certainly don't get a "pass" simply because they embrace Christianity.

Let me pose this question to you to see if it makes my position any clearer. If someone who claimed to be a Christian falsely accused someone else of being a rapist or a pedophile would you be willing to give them a pass simply because they are a Christian and "we are all sinners"?

To me what that person did was a violation of Christian dogma (thou shalt not bear false witness) and therefore doesn't deserve any respect at all. Furthermore they should be shunned by other Christians IMO.

Instead we see other Christians giving that person a "free pass" because of "shared beliefs" and thereby condoning the false witness violation.

When the other Christians do that they lose my respect.