A Non-Believer's Perception of Christianity and Its Adherents

[AllieBaba]

What a self important, pontificating windbag.

 

[AllieBaba]

I can defend that insult by simply referring ppl to your previous 100 posts.

 

[JBeukema]

Did jesus have time travel?

If ye: Then why didn't he go back and fix the world from the start?

if no: then the authors of your holy book are liars who did not know their history

 

[Coloradomtnman]

only to those incapable of logic and reasoning in the first place. If you go tread nmy posts, you'll see that time and agai I get the same response everytime I cite their own doctrine and book to show the self-contradiction of their faith: silence

They don't even try to defend themselves anymore- they just go silent or go on the attack. We're supposed to respect such lunacy and hypocrisy simply because of their numbers?

No, we're supposed to respect them because they're people.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

I can defend that insult by simply referring ppl to your previous 100 posts.

To whom are you referring?

 

[AllieBaba]

That's a good Christian principle right there. Of course you object to it.

 

[AllieBaba]

I can defend that insult by simply referring ppl to your previous 100 posts.

To whom are you referring?

The pontificating windbag.

Why, do you think you're one, too?

 

[AllieBaba]

Cuz if you do, I'm down with that as well.

 

[C-101]

Yeah, its just a joke among non-believers. Its not to be taken seriously.

Hence, my

That seems kinda lousy that God had intended for there to be strife, even among his believers.

It also seems lousy that Jesus and God expect us to love them more than our own spouses, parents, and children. I've never even met Jesus or God, I don't hang out with them, they don't make me laugh or go on road trips with me. I didn't raise them from birth. I am incapable of loving people, especially more than my own family, whom I have never met.

Now you can reply to that with: Well, I have met God and Jesus and they're with me everyday and I talk to them everyday, etc. But that just seems delusional to me. If you sit down and have a drink with Jesus, then you're hallucinating. If you pray to God, you aren't really hanging out with him. You don't spend time with God like you do with your wife and kids, your friends, or your family.

And your sentiments are exactly why most pastors will avoid that scripture. It seems too demanding to them.

Though the scripture may seem demanding one must fulfill that scripture to the highest degree they can. Remember, the Lord is merciful and is incapable of sin so as I Christian I would not be too troubled by this passage. Just show strong faith. Christ will do the rest.

Overall, what I'm telling you buddy is the raw truth. If you want heart-warming fiction go to your local mega church.

That smacks of monotheistic self-righteousness, elitism, and Christian-exceptionalism to me.

That smacks of agnostic cynicism, presumptuousness, and self-centered arrogance to me.

I'll have to remember that. Good to know. Thanks.

No problem. Anyone's help in quelling misnomers is appreciated.

How is that? How does God commiting genocide serve as a moral less for Christians to increase their understanding of the Lord and His Word? I don't understand that. Can you elaborate for me?

I can see that you never got past the violence, did you?

One example of a moral lesson is the Joshua and the story of his conquest of Israel.

Throughout the story, Joshua does not win by mere force of arms and men, but rather through faith in God and being rewarded because of it.

Specifically, the sounding of trumpets around Jericho. Any "logical" person would be skeptical that the blaring of trumpets could bring down massive stone walls.

But the faithful person, in this case Joshua, puts stock in God's plan and therefore his faith in God and not his own military talent rewards him with the collapse of Jericho's walls.

The conquests of Joshua were bloody, but with each story there a moral to be found for Christians.

The book of Kings or Job are the best examples of the rewards of faith, thus providing understanding to modern-day Christians of the importance of faith.

That doesn't clear that matter up for me. Why was a sacrifice needed? Couldn't God, who is omnipotent and omniscient, have simply erased our sins? Couldn't he have planned ahead and made it so that we have free will, and those that choose to do harm against His creation are not punished but shown the reality of what their actions do? Why couldn't God have just made Himself known to all of us so that no one would have to, for whatever reason, suffer or burn in Hell?

God tried the method of revealing himself to his Creation in the Old Testament and man through his own free will still denied God. Romans Chp. 1 best explains this.

If there are no consequences for doing evil, why would one cease to do evil?

God through Christ has made his presence well-known and anyone who denies Him effectively seals their own fate and punishment.

We have a golden opportunity to be imperfect, ask for forgiveness, and reach Heaven.

With Hell being the consequence of not taking that opportunity, why would one choose not to believe in God?

Why didn't God just smite Satan? Then we wouldn't have to suffer or go to Hell.

I won't pretend to understand the mind of God. For Paul writes that His ways past are unsearchable.

So, why didn't He? That's my point. Who made these seemingly arbitrary rules by which God has to act? Why couldn't He have just rid the Universe of Satan and Hell, allowed us free will, and shown us the consequences of our actions when those actions cause harm? That's seems a lot more like unconditional love, mercy, and forgiveness. I hear about how God can't tolerate sin. Why not? We have to have tolerance, and He even asks it of us, but He can't practice tolerance?

Read the Old Testament sometime. God has tried all of the above and Man was still sinful.

Therefore, God formulated a plan by which his Creation could seek forgiveness and reach Heaven. The famous scripture: "For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son . . ." establishes this fact perfectly.

Very true, but I don't understand how you mean that. Would you mind explaining?

When one comes to know the truth of the Lord, certain events in the Bible which may seem illogical to the layman's eye become logical in the wrap of strong faith.

A prime example of this is the Resurrection.

Anyone who views the Resurrection in the viewpoint of human logic finds it to be illogical.

One who does understand the truth of God, however, defines the logic of the Resurrection to be sound.

In this sense, knowing the truth defines the true nature of logic regarding Biblical events.

I hope I explained that well.

For it being the one, true religion, it seems that those who believe in Christ would be beyond corruption. That lends itself to the perception that Christianity isn't the one, true faith.

That would true if the Bible made the demand of its adherents to be perfect, but it does not. The Bible in fact addresses the many flaws of mankind and acknowledges that such flaws are expected. Christ himself acknowledged the faults of Man by stating that "Every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven Men."

Furthermore, the Bible especially through the later books such as Revelations predicts the corruption of the world and the rise of corruption in the Christian faith. This corruption serves its purpose as testing the true mettle of the faithful and the Lord subsequently rewarding those who are faithful to the end.

Moreover, the perception that Christianity is not the true faith because of its taint is baseless.

Me neither. I would've thought that Christians would oppose the death penalty considering the quote from the Bible about those without sin, cast the first stone.

I don't believe it is the prerogative of sinful men to pass final judgment on other sinful men. Leave final judgment to the Lord.

I value the principles that the US was founded on more than I value life: I served in the Marine Corps for 4 years. Although the men who perpetrated 9/11 or plotted to kill innocent people shouldn't be allowed to go free or live a life or luxury, it is the principles of this nation not to torture people or imprison them without a fair trial. The US is founded on human rights, and we should treat even those who have attacked the US humanely. To torture them, to imprison them, to treat them without human rights goes against the very principles upon which this nation was founded. It effectively demonstrates that the terrorists have won. The US shouldn't compromise its principles, ever. Especially because of fear of terrorism. That's how terrorism succeeds.

Well, a difference of opinion between you and I. No matter. Thank you for your service.

These were wars against godless communism or a Muslim country that were supported by Christians. That's why I mentioned them. They weren't religious wars, but I think religion played a part in their support.

You might be able to find fringe Christians that support this mentality of religious war, but they are hardly the mainstream of Christian thought. The idea of "holy wars" for the most part died after the failure of the Crusades.

Let me clarify. The GOP is the party which represents the Religious Right. It might not mean to represent the Religious Right, but I think it does. It also happens to represent the KKK, and other right wing extremist groups. I don't think it wants to represent them, but its the nature of the beast. I would think that Christians wouldn't want to be associated with those groups. But I see that many, not all, Christians vote conservative.

Up until Barry Goldwater, all the Southern states voted democrat. The GOP was the original party of civil rights and still is despite what some democrat would say. The KKK is just a terrorist group. To associate it with a particular political party is quite a stretch.

It isn't explicitly written in the Bible, but if you follow this link, you'll see how the age of the Earth has been extrapolated from the Bible: Bible Age of Earth

Yes, I'm aware of the various interpretations of time in the Bible. But the fact remains, the Bible never claims the Earth is 6000 years old or 4.2 Billion years old or whatever it is now according to scientists.

If the Bible is used to explain the origin of the the Universe and everything in it, wouldn't science, which is simply a method and a language, be used to explain reality for human understanding? Shouldn't the Bible vibe with our scientific discoveries and observations?

No, because the Bible is a Holy Book filled full of divine events and acts. The quote, "with God, all things are possible" effectively eliminates any barriers that science might impose on the events of the Bible.

See the bold: that isn't merciful. Sorry, but it just isn't.

So if you destroy my house and show no remorse about doing so I should simply just forgive you?

The same is true with the Lord. If you deny Him, commit sins without remorse, and ridicule anything remotely resembling faith you are not going to receive unconditional mercy.

What's the point of faith and spiritual well-being if mercy is unconditional?

Why are you expecting a free ticket into Heaven?

If God sends someone to Hell for any reason at all, He is not a merciful God. Period. Mercy is not condemning someone. Forgiveness is forgiving someone and practicing mercy when you don't have to. Even child-rapist murderers deserve mercy. Why, because they're sick. They shouldn't be allowed to live in society, and they shouldn't live a life of luxury, but they are sick not evil. What they did was evil. To kill them does no one good and does everyone harm from the child -rapist murderer (of course) to the executioner to the family members who don't learn to meaning of mercy. To send a child-rapist murderer to Hell to burn for all eternity (which is a really, really, inconceivably long time) is unmerciful and unforgiving. That's mercy and forgiveness. It isn't easy. If someone raped and murdered my child, or spouse, a family member, my pets or even one of my friends, I would want to kill them. My principles would fly out of the window and I would think only of vengeance against that person. But that isn't right, healthy, or good. And it isn't merciful or forgiving. But I am a very imperfect human being, not a perfect God.

The problem is that you decide whether to go to Heaven or Hell based upon your own actions. Along with your free will comes personal responsibility.

God is offering you a chance no matter what evil you've done in your life to seek forgiveness and be accepted into Heaven.

Jesus says that even words spoken against Him and His father in Heaven can be forgiven.

So in effect, you pick your fate.

But it discredits the religion for an outsider who thinks analytically and critically about these things.

Only to the degree that such corruption of the religion is relatively greater than that of other faiths.

To expect perfection in a faith is unreasonable and many things are permanent if undesirable facts of religion.

 

[JBeukema]

C-101 misses one very iomportant fact: the bible disproves itself time and again

 

[Coloradomtnman]

And your sentiments are exactly why most pastors will avoid that scripture. It seems too demanding to them.

Though the scripture may seem demanding one must fulfill that scripture to the highest degree they can. Remember, the Lord is merciful and is incapable of sin so as I Christian I would not be too troubled by this passage. Just show strong faith. Christ will do the rest.

Overall, what I'm telling you buddy is the raw truth. If you want heart-warming fiction go to your local mega church.

Ha ha! I like that term: mega church. I guess this is one point, of many, where one has to have faith in order to "Get it".

That smacks of agnostic cynicism, presumptuousness, and self-centered arrogance to me.

I guess its a matter of perspective, then?

I can see that you never got past the violence, did you?
One example of a moral lesson is the Joshua and the story of his conquest of Israel.
Throughout the story, Joshua does not win by mere force of arms and men, but rather through faith in God and being rewarded because of it.
Specifically, the sounding of trumpets around Jericho. Any "logical" person would be skeptical that the blaring of trumpets could bring down massive stone walls.
But the faithful person, in this case Joshua, puts stock in God's plan and therefore his faith in God and not his own military talent rewards him with the collapse of Jericho's walls.
The conquests of Joshua were bloody, but with each story there a moral to be found for Christians.

For me, there is no getting past the violence. A morality story based upon violence, even if the morality in the story isn't, is too open for misinterpretation and misconstrument for violence and seems inappropriate, especially for a faith which preaches "to turn the other cheek".

God tried the method of revealing himself to his Creation in the Old Testament and man through his own free will still denied God. Romans Chp. 1 best explains this.
If there are no consequences for doing evil, why would one cease to do evil?

Ah, but there are consequences other than Hell. The only people who might not think so are those with antisocial personality disorder (people without consciences). I'm an agnostic so I have to find a reason for existence as there is seemingly no creator to have given me one. Now this is a very abstract and difficult subject to relate and one which would require a whole thread unto itself, so let me just make it short: My morality is based on giving life meaning. To act inhumanely or cause harm causes my life to be meaningless, and that is worse than death, even an eternal death (no afterlife). So I am forced to, if I wish to avoid meaninglessness, to act morally (and obviously my morals are different than yours but there are many ways in which they are similar). That is why, even though I don't believe in Hell, I will not commit evil acts.

God through Christ has made his presence well-known and anyone who denies Him effectively seals their own fate and punishment.
We have a golden opportunity to be imperfect, ask for forgiveness, and reach Heaven.
With Hell being the consequence of not taking that opportunity, why would one choose not to believe in God?

I think I understand why that would make sense to one with faith, but let me try to explain why it doesn't for someone like me:

I am a person whose mind works to make sense of the Universe, naturally we all are. All the stimuli that my senses encounter everyday are organized in my mind so that I can best understand my perceived reality. Part of the method for doing this is logic and reason, scientific logic and reason. Everything I've been exposed to regarding religion doesn't vibe with my personal experiences thereby making it impossible for me to have faith in any one religion. Sure, I could just choose to "believe" in Christianity but it wouldn't be sincere because I would have to somehow disbelieve or ignore what I've experienced. I would be one of those Christians who is just buying Afterlife Insurance. God would know the difference, would He not? Either way I am destined for Hell. So instead, I will be true to myself and live my life sincerely instead of being disingenous and living as a Christian. Does that make sense?

Read the Old Testament sometime. God has tried all of the above and Man was still sinful.
Therefore, God formulated a plan by which his Creation could seek forgiveness and reach Heaven. The famous scripture: "For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son . . ." establishes this fact perfectly.

Couldn't God show himself to people like me, or to each individual on a basis which is most appropriate for that individual that would convince them of His existence? Why not? Why must He rely solely on faith when He gave us the ability to reason, which makes us, human beings, unique from every form on life on Earth? From a non-believer's perspective, this illogic is inescapable and unacceptable.

When one comes to know the truth of the Lord, certain events in the Bible which may seem illogical to the layman's eye become logical in the wrap of strong faith.
A prime example of this is the Resurrection.
Anyone who views the Resurrection in the viewpoint of human logic finds it to be illogical.
One who does understand the truth of God, however, defines the logic of the Resurrection to be sound.
In this sense, knowing the truth defines the true nature of logic regarding Biblical events.
I hope I explained that well.

I think you did. But I also think that for a person without faith and who relies on logic, that is a helluva hump to overcome. Especially when, for me, the "truth" of reality is impossible to know.

That would true if the Bible made the demand of its adherents to be perfect, but it does not. The Bible in fact addresses the many flaws of mankind and acknowledges that such flaws are expected. Christ himself acknowledged the faults of Man by stating that "Every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven Men."
Furthermore, the Bible especially through the later books such as Revelations predicts the corruption of the world and the rise of corruption in the Christian faith. This corruption serves its purpose as testing the true mettle of the faithful and the Lord subsequently rewarding those who are faithful to the end.

Why is God so demanding of His acceptance? Is He really that worried about His popularity? Is He so petty and egomaniacal that his creations must love and worship Him? Now don't take that the wrong way, I'm not trying to insult your God. Its just how I, and many non-believers, perceive Him and why we reject Him.

Moreover, the perception that Christianity is not the true faith because of its taint is baseless.

But you see, its not baseless from my point of view. I don't want to be associated with a faith that is subject to corruption. Another of the many reasons why I, instead, do not have religious faith at all.

I don't believe it is the prerogative of sinful men to pass final judgment on other sinful men. Leave final judgment to the Lord.

Amen to that, brother.

Well, a difference of opinion between you and I. No matter. Thank you for your service.

My pleasure. And displeasure. Ha!

You might be able to find fringe Christians that support this mentality of religious war, but they are hardly the mainstream of Christian thought. The idea of "holy wars" for the most part died after the failure of the Crusades.

Okay, but, nonetheless, many Christians have supported these wars (for whatever reason). I thought, and correct me if I am wrong, that Jesus preached to "turn the other cheek".

Up until Barry Goldwater, all the Southern states voted democrat. The GOP was the original party of civil rights and still is despite what some democrat would say. The KKK is just a terrorist group. To associate it with a particular political party is quite a stretch.

Not really. I don't think the GOP is the party of the KKK, but the KKK votes Republican. Now why is that?

Yes, I'm aware of the various interpretations of time in the Bible. But the fact remains, the Bible never claims the Earth is 6000 years old or 4.2 Billion years old or whatever it is now according to scientists.

Conceded.

No, because the Bible is a Holy Book filled full of divine events and acts. The quote, "with God, all things are possible" effectively eliminates any barriers that science might impose on the events of the Bible.

I don't think science attempts to impose barriers so much as understand the nature of reality. Its a method of taking human perception and aligning it with reality as accurately as it can. To do this it uses mathematics (a kind of language) and language. By default that makes it so we can not actually know reality as it is (that and the fact that we perceive reality through our senses). We can not perceive reality objectively and therefore we can not know absolute truth. I think this is dicomfitting for many people; I know it is for me. But science is just a method of explaining reality so that human beings can understand what is happening around them. I guess God didn't concern Himself with that in the Bible?

So if you destroy my house and show no remorse about doing so I should simply just forgive you?

Yes. Will you? I don't know. I wouldn't find it easy to forgive someone for doing that to me. But that doesn't change the fact that I should. I even thought that such forgiveness ,"as I forgive those who trespass against me", was a lesson of the Christian faith.

The same is true with the Lord. If you deny Him, commit sins without remorse, and ridicule anything remotely resembling faith you are not going to receive unconditional mercy.[?QUOTE]

Those acts described above just don't seem that terrible to me. If someone denies me, commits sins without remorse, and ridicules my beliefs, I don't think they deserve to feel as though they are burning alive for eternity. I think mercy should be unconditional. Retribution is not justice, and is not, as I perceive it, right or good.

What's the point of faith and spiritual well-being if mercy is unconditional?

That, I would think, IS the point of faith and spiritual well-being: unconditional mercy and forgiveness and therefore: love of my fellow man.

Why are you expecting a free ticket into Heaven?[?QUOTE]

Oh, I'm not.

The problem is that you decide whether to go to Heaven or Hell based upon your own actions. Along with your free will comes personal responsibility.
God is offering you a chance no matter what evil you've done in your life to seek forgiveness and be accepted into Heaven.
Jesus says that even words spoken against Him and His father in Heaven can be forgiven.
So in effect, you pick your fate.

There is a branch of philosophy out there that wonders if we really do have free will. Let me explain: if you choose to murder somone, is it simply a decision you made or is it a long string of cause and effect, from your genetic predispositions, environmental factors, life situations etc. Kinda like the butterfly in Africa whose wings cause a hurricane in the Carribean. All the little factors in your life are what affects your decisions, and your previous decisions affect your future ones, even and especially the bad ones. This is a logical hypothesis and one that can't be verified or refuted with science. As human beings who wish to be in control of ourselves and our lives, this idea is repugnant to us. But that doesn't mean that it isn't valid and, to me, there does seem to be some logical validity to it. So I don't know if I am personally responsible for my actions and decisions, but that doesn't mean that I don't take responsibility for them. But, being unsure whether I practice free will or if I am forced, directly or indirectly, to make the decisions I do (not to mention the uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics which demonstrates that the occurrences in the Universe are probabilities and not certainties) I don't feel certain that the Creator would send his creations to Hell based upon their decisions.

Only to the degree that such corruption of the religion is relatively greater than that of other faiths.

Are you talking about Christianity being more corrupted than other faiths? The above is a little vague.

To expect perfection in a faith is unreasonable and many things are permanent if undesirable facts of religion.

Well, that seems to be the nature of life, huh?

 

[AllieBaba]

Life as God created it. It's all in the bible. The explanation for everything.

 

[JBeukema]

Life as God created it. It's all in the bible. The explanation for everything.

except when it tries to explain itself. Then it becomes very confused

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Life as God created it. It's all in the bible. The explanation for everything.

The Bible doesn't explain everything in detail. Such as mitochondria, quasars and black holes, dark matter and energy, the wave/particle duality of light, the constant of the speed of light, gravity, probability wave collapse, the uncertainty principle, whether global warming is happening or not, counter-terrorism/counter-insurgency guerilla tactics, why I have to wipe after I poop (talk about intelligent design), and many many many MANY other mysteries of life.

 

[C-101]

C-101 misses one very iomportant fact: the bible disproves itself time and again

In what way?

Coloradomtnman, I'll respond later.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

C-101 misses one very iomportant fact: the bible disproves itself time and again

In what way?

Coloradomtnman, I'll respond later.

Yeah, sure. When you get the time to respond thoughtfully and without hurry works best for me, if that works for you?

 

[C-101]

C-101 misses one very iomportant fact: the bible disproves itself time and again

In what way?

Coloradomtnman, I'll respond later.

Yeah, sure. When you get the time to respond thoughtfully and without hurry works best for me, if that works for you?

Sorry, I've been quite busy. I'll try to respond tonight.

Thank you for your patience.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

In what way?

Coloradomtnman, I'll respond later.

Yeah, sure. When you get the time to respond thoughtfully and without hurry works best for me, if that works for you?

Sorry, I've been quite busy. I'll try to respond tonight.

Thank you for your patience.

No problem. I'd rather read a well-thought out response later than a hurried one now.

 

[Againsheila]

Oh great, another bash Christians and Chritianity thread started by coloradoetc.

Sorry, this time, I'm staying out. I will, however, be praying that you eventually see the light.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Oh great, another bash Christians and Chritianity thread started by coloradoetc.

Sorry, this time, I'm staying out. I will, however, be praying that you eventually see the light.

Okay. Thanks for praying for me: it's very thoughtful of you.