A Few Words About Christian Self-Righteousness

[BluePhantom]

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.

Ok I am following you, now. Here is an interesting perspective though. When one defines themselves as "Christian" they are binding themselves to a core set of principles and behaviors according to that definition. Non-Christians are not bound to any of it, obviously, so a non-Christian has the luxury of passing judgment or demanding that respect be earned. Paul alluded to this in Galatians when he discussed circumcision. I will paraphrase his argument. Basically, he argued that circumcision is an act which defines oneself as accepting the old covenant. So if one gets circumcised they have to follow the Law (Torah). But if one is not circumcised, they have not committed to that covenant and therefore it does not apply to them. So are you saying that if a person defines themselves as Christian that they are required to give respect even when a person is not deserving of it?

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"?

Absolutely not. We see people on these very boards that do shit like that all the time. But while I can recognize their hypocrisy and comment on their twisted understanding and corrupt application of Christian faith, I neither wish harm on them nor believe they have any less intrinsic human value than anyone else. I do wish they would shut up, worry about their own faults, and quit making Christians look bad, but as far as their salvation is concerned, I trust God enough to let Him make the correct determination about that.

in fact, Paul addresses what you are getting at in Romans. He writes, "20 The law was brought in so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, 21 so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. 1 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?" (Rom. 5:20-21, 6:1-2, NIV)

So, no....simply because you are Christian, you don't get a pass from sinning. I would, in fact, argue that the only ones who get a pass are non-Christians because they have not committed themselves to the principles of Christianity. This would, of course, apply to any religion or manner in which one uses a term to define themselves. Thus, for an atheist to be self-righteous does not violate Christian faith (except we might think they are an asshole), but for a Christian it is a big deal because it is forbidden by the principles of their choice to accept the "Christian" definition.

 

[Avatar4321]

To those who truly follow Christ, self righteousness is impossible. The very fact that you recognize you need a savior is an admission that you cannot be righteous on your own. It puts Christ out of the picture theologically speaking.

 

[BluePhantom]

To those who truly follow Christ, self righteousness is impossible. The very fact that you recognize you need a savior is an admission that you cannot be righteous on your own. It puts Christ out of the picture theologically speaking.

BINGO!!! Right on the nosey. I commented above about 'trusting God enough to make the determination for Himself'. When a Christian acts self-righteous, they do two things that refer to this. a) They are not trusting God to make the determination, because they are making it for Him. They take it out of God's hands. b) They display the audacity to speak on God's behalf. I, personally, think God is perfectly capable of speaking for Himself and He doesn't need me, or anyone else, to tell Him what to decide.

Just the way I look at it. BTW....some awesome discussion happening here. Nice.

 

[BULLDOG]

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.

Exactly. A Christian, and what has become known as a conservative Christian are nowhere near the same thing. The latter just hijacked the name to try to add credibility to their vile goals.

 

[Derideo_Te]

So are you saying that if a person defines themselves as Christian that they are required to give respect even when a person is not deserving of it?

No, not give, but receive instead simply because they claim to be Christian.

So, no....simply because you are Christian, you don't get a pass from sinning.

Thus, for an atheist to be self-righteous does not violate Christian faith (except we might think they are an asshole), but for a Christian it is a big deal because it is forbidden by the principles of their choice to accept the "Christian" definition.

We are in complete agreement!

Peace
DT

 

[BULLDOG]

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.

So you disagree with what Jesus taught?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

" Whatsoever you do to the least of my people, that you do unto me"


For me, this says it all.

 

[Derideo_Te]

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.

Exactly. A Christian, and what has become known as a conservative Christian are nowhere near the same thing. The latter just hijacked the name to try to add credibility to their vile goals.

Agreed!

How can one profess to be a Christian while pursuing an extremist, selfish and greedy Libertarian political agenda? The Libertarian platform itself is unchristian in that it seeks to eliminate all support for the least fortunate in society. Pope Francis has been quite vocal about the disparity between what is Christian and what is not when it comes to the wealth disparity.

Genuine Christians don't look down on the poor and blame them for their circumstances which is exactly what we constantly see happening from the extreme right while they talk out of the other side of their mouths about "family values".

 

[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.

Exactly. A Christian, and what has become known as a conservative Christian are nowhere near the same thing. The latter just hijacked the name to try to add credibility to their vile goals.

Well.....hijacking it may be true and in some cases it may not apply. What I mean is that there are certain Christians who are of a pure heart, but lack the capacity for true understanding of the faith they have embraced. It's not that they are bad people, it's just that, for whatever reason, they honestly don't get it even though they try as hard as they can. Those people are to be pitied and not condemned, IMO. But, yes, there are absolutely those who can understand, and do understand and choose to only apply the parts that fit their personal agenda. In other words, they create God in their own image in order to justify actions and pre-existing beliefs. These people are not following their faith by choice, and that's a real issue that gives the community of faith a bad name.

There are also those who get stuck in the faith of their childhood and never allow themselves to evolve beyond it. They attempt to apply a child's faith to adult issues and an adult's world and don't understand why it doesn't provide the comfort and spiritual support they seek. That's a whole other topic though.

 

[BluePhantom]

Agreed!

How can one profess to be a Christian while pursuing an extremist, selfish and greedy Libertarian political agenda? The Libertarian platform itself is unchristian in that it seeks to eliminate all support for the least fortunate in society. Pope Francis has been quite vocal about the disparity between what is Christian and what is not when it comes to the wealth disparity.

Genuine Christians don't look down on the poor and blame them for their circumstances which is exactly what we constantly see happening from the extreme right while they talk out of the other side of their mouths about "family values".

Well that is delving into political areas that are perhaps best discussed on a different thread. What I will say, very briefly, is that I can understand the argument of the community of faith that says 'let us deal with charity and helping the poor and you guys [government] worry about other stuff'. For example, although I disagree with the views of the Mormon faith, I must give them credit that they usually have very tight-knit families, they give generously to charity, they usually raise their children with a good moral foundation, they take care of their own as well as others, and for the most part they 'walk their talk'. So for them to say "hey just let us deal with poverty in our own area" yeah I get that. Anyhow....probably a discussion for a different thread.

 

[BULLDOG]

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.

Exactly. A Christian, and what has become known as a conservative Christian are nowhere near the same thing. The latter just hijacked the name to try to add credibility to their vile goals.

Well.....hijacking it may be true and in some cases it may not apply. What I mean is that there are certain Christians who are of a pure heart, but lack the capacity for true understanding of the faith they have embraced. It's not that they are bad people, it's just that, for whatever reason, they honestly don't get it even though they try as hard as they can. Those people are to be pitied and not condemned, IMO. But, yes, there are absolutely those who can understand, and do understand and choose to only apply the parts that fit their personal agenda. In other words, they create God in their own image in order to justify actions and pre-existing beliefs. These people are not following their faith by choice, and that's a real issue that gives the community of faith a bad name.

There are also those who get stuck in the faith of their childhood and never allow themselves to evolve beyond it. They attempt to apply a child's faith to adult issues and an adult's world and don't understand why it doesn't provide the comfort and spiritual support they seek. That's a whole other topic though.

If a person lacks the capacity for true understanding of the faith they have claimed to embrace, then they haven't embraced that faith at all. They have just chosen certain aspects of it, and ignore the rest. Perhaps they should be pitied, but they are not,and should not be considered practitioners of that faith.

 

[BluePhantom]

If a person lacks the capacity for true understanding of the faith they have claimed to embrace, then they haven't embraced that faith at all. They have just chosen certain aspects of it, and ignore the rest. Perhaps they should be pitied, but they are not,and should not be considered practitioners of that faith.

I see your point. It's a reasonable argument. I will concede that one.

 

[BluePhantom]

here's just an additional thought. If you were to ask an evangelical, or Baptist, or Catholic or whatever why they do not follow the principles of the Book of Mormon, they would probably answer "well I am not Mormon so those principles don't apply to me". Exactly, so why is it that Christians insist that non-Christians must adhere to their principles? Unless they define themselves as "Christian", Christian principles do not apply to them, just like Mormon principles do not apply to non-Mormons.

Indeed, in 1 Corinthians 5, Paul argues (paraphrasing) 'what people outside the church do is not our concern. Our concern is what people inside the church are doing'. Hell, Paul got it 2,000 years ago.

 

[BULLDOG]

If a person lacks the capacity for true understanding of the faith they have claimed to embrace, then they haven't embraced that faith at all. They have just chosen certain aspects of it, and ignore the rest. Perhaps they should be pitied, but they are not,and should not be considered practitioners of that faith.

I see your point. It's a reasonable argument. I will concede that one.

Don't get me wrong. Nobody is perfect, and anyone is subject to fall short of what ever belief system they have chosen. You don't have to be a perfect Christian to be a Christian, (God knows I'm not) but you do have to embrace the basic tenants of that belief, and strive to maintain those tenants.

 

[Derideo_Te]

If a person lacks the capacity for true understanding of the faith they have claimed to embrace, then they haven't embraced that faith at all. They have just chosen certain aspects of it, and ignore the rest. Perhaps they should be pitied, but they are not,and should not be considered practitioners of that faith.

I see your point. It's a reasonable argument. I will concede that one.

Don't get me wrong. Nobody is perfect, and anyone is subject to fall short of what ever belief system they have chosen. You don't have to be a perfect Christian to be a Christian, (God knows I'm not) but you do have to embrace the basic tenants of that belief, and strive to maintain those tenants.

And I will add that it isn't all that easy to live up to those tenants either.

Speaking strictly as an Atheist I only have myself to answer to when I fall short and I am pretty harsh on myself when I do! I have one absolute rule which is that I will never lie to myself under any circumstances. So when I eff up I admit to myself and try to make amends to set it right asap.

For those who believe that they can simply "ask for forgiveness" and their transgressions will evaporate that doesn't work for me. I have to take action such as admitting I was wrong or apologizing or whatever is appropriate to the party that I have transgressed against.

Not saying that I expect others to live as I do, including those who are Atheists. Just my own personal moral code that I adhere to for no one else's benefit but my own peace of mind so that I can face myself in the mirror each day.

 

[BULLDOG]

here's just an additional thought. If you were to ask an evangelical, or Baptist, or Catholic or whatever why they do not follow the principles of the Book of Mormon, they would probably answer "well I am not Mormon so those principles don't apply to me". Exactly, so why is it that Christians insist that non-Christians must adhere to their principles? Unless they define themselves as "Christian", Christian principles do not apply to them, just like Mormon principles do not apply to non-Mormons.

Indeed, in 1 Corinthians 5, Paul argues (paraphrasing) 'what people outside the church do is not our concern. Our concern is what people inside the church are doing'. Hell, Paul got it 2,000 years ago.

It is certainly reasonable for a person who feels their belief system is the best to try to convince others of their beliefs. In a pure sense, that is a gift. It can be seen as an honest effort to improve another's life. However, demanding others follow the rules of your religion is not the same as convincing them to share your beliefs.

 

[BluePhantom]

For those who believe that they can simply "ask for forgiveness" and their transgressions will evaporate that doesn't work for me. I have to take action such as admitting I was wrong or apologizing or whatever is appropriate to the party that I have transgressed against.

That is a big problem. When I attended a catholic Church for some time, I saw people who were cheating on their spouse, ripping off their employees, etc. They would go to the confessional, ask forgiveness, and go right back out and do it all over again secure in the knowledge that next week they would simply confess, ask forgiveness, and be absolved again. Pffft....talk about missing the point. I will leave it to God to determine whether He accepts their apology, but I am not seeing a whole lot of remorse there. And, just for the record, I am aware that it is not just Catholics who do that and it is not all Catholics who do that. Just some. Don't want to piss of the Catholics, ya know.

 

[BluePhantom]

here's just an additional thought. If you were to ask an evangelical, or Baptist, or Catholic or whatever why they do not follow the principles of the Book of Mormon, they would probably answer "well I am not Mormon so those principles don't apply to me". Exactly, so why is it that Christians insist that non-Christians must adhere to their principles? Unless they define themselves as "Christian", Christian principles do not apply to them, just like Mormon principles do not apply to non-Mormons.

Indeed, in 1 Corinthians 5, Paul argues (paraphrasing) 'what people outside the church do is not our concern. Our concern is what people inside the church are doing'. Hell, Paul got it 2,000 years ago.

It is certainly reasonable for a person who feels their belief system is the best to try to convince others of their beliefs. In a pure sense, that is a gift. It can be seen as an honest effort to improve another's life. However, demanding others follow the rules of your religion is not the same as convincing them to share your beliefs.

I agree. I see nothing wrong in offering someone your perspective and telling them how faith, or a lack thereof, has affected your life and giving them the opportunity to choose a similar path. Insisting that they do, or getting pissed if they choose something else, is quite a different story. That's what I am getting at when I am always saying 'walk your own path with God and let others walk theirs'.

 

[BULLDOG]

If a person lacks the capacity for true understanding of the faith they have claimed to embrace, then they haven't embraced that faith at all. They have just chosen certain aspects of it, and ignore the rest. Perhaps they should be pitied, but they are not,and should not be considered practitioners of that faith.

I see your point. It's a reasonable argument. I will concede that one.

Don't get me wrong. Nobody is perfect, and anyone is subject to fall short of what ever belief system they have chosen. You don't have to be a perfect Christian to be a Christian, (God knows I'm not) but you do have to embrace the basic tenants of that belief, and strive to maintain those tenants.

And I will add that it isn't all that easy to live up to those tenants either.

Speaking strictly as an Atheist I only have myself to answer to when I fall short and I am pretty harsh on myself when I do! I have one absolute rule which is that I will never lie to myself under any circumstances. So when I eff up I admit to myself and try to make amends to set it right asap.

For those who believe that they can simply "ask for forgiveness" and their transgressions will evaporate that doesn't work for me. I have to take action such as admitting I was wrong or apologizing or whatever is appropriate to the party that I have transgressed against.

Not saying that I expect others to live as I do, including those who are Atheists. Just my own personal moral code that I adhere to for no one else's benefit but my own peace of mind so that I can face myself in the mirror each day.

I am a Christian, but I'm not mad about it. I am mad about the hypocrites who have hijacked my religion for political purposes though. Forgiveness is not just a Get out of Hell Free card. It requires an honest acknowledgement of the thing that requires forgiveness, and a conscious choice to not do it the same way in the future, so I don't think our beliefs on that are really that different as far as that one aspect. Perhaps I am the only adherent to my own version of Christianity, but I don't see where following the teachings of Jesus requires obnoxious, holier than thou behavior like the bible thumpers seem to. Jesus was the most notable liberal I have ever heard of.

 

[BluePhantom]

If a person lacks the capacity for true understanding of the faith they have claimed to embrace, then they haven't embraced that faith at all. They have just chosen certain aspects of it, and ignore the rest. Perhaps they should be pitied, but they are not,and should not be considered practitioners of that faith.

AH!!! You know what just struck me? What Christians like those (maybe all Christians - myself included) could benefit from? A sponsor. We should learn from AA and have someone on speed dial so when we get all high and mighty and are about to do something stupid we can call that person and he can say, "WHOA! WHOA! WHOA! Hold on mother fucker. How is that gambling problem of yours doing? You still polishing off a 12 pack a night? You still jacking off in the shower thinking about porn? Ok well then maybe you need to shut the hell up and worry about that stuff instead of what those people over there are doing."

I like it. I guess most people would call that a 'pastor' but sometimes they need sponsors of their own.