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

[Cecilie1200]

Once again, we see an example of the awesome intellectual might of the average xtian specimine. Though not an intelligent race, they are very aggressive and known to use violence the moment their dogma is challenged. Infighting is common and genocide is ordered by their evil god. One must use caution around such beasts, as they are very dangerouns to mankind, reason, and civil society. If you encounter a xtian in the wild, do not try top capture it- cause they can be nasty. Contact your local authorites and keep your young and impressionable youth far away to prevent infection

Ooh, a slap at our intellect from someone for whom the height of cleverness is refusing to spell out the word "Christian". S'matter? Too many letters for you? I know I'M just all devastated that such a debating giant doesn't like me.

And oh, yeah. I'm deeply impressed that someone can come in here being deliberately offensive and insulting, and then whine like a little girl about how aggressive and violent others are when they give him back exactly the same. Can you say, "Hypocrite"?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Maybe they are bored. Maybe they are actually trying to have a discussion. That would be what happens when two mutually intelligent people exchange ideas and concepts with respect for one another. It happens.

therein lies the problem: it requires two or more intelligent people (barring MPD); you were talking about uneducated, illogical, delusional fools

Well, he was certainly talking TO one.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Recovering Christian?



You make it sound like an alcohol addiction..

[youtube]haBLjVqrrjM[/youtube]
[youtube]Qd0qFSMm7oo[/youtube]
[youtube]z9zuPTng2bc[/youtube]

We already knew you were a nasty, hate-filled bigot. You don't have to keep offering proof.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Cecil is very obviously unsure of gawd's existence, that's why he/she is so hostile.

I found a bible in my house once, so I threw it in the garbage. It was written by ape-men back before bumwad was even invented.

::sob, sob:: I attacked someone, and they fought back! She's so mean and nasty and hostile! She must not believe in God if she dares to give me back exaclty what I put out! People should be NICE to me when I act like an utter, boorish bigot!

Now why don't you go shout the N-word at black people and then whine because THEY don't smile and shake your hand? That's just about your intellectual speed.

 

[Anguille]

Funny how talk about religion, which is supposed to bring people together, generally ends up making people mad.

 

[editec]

As a non-believer, why do you care about any of these things?

I mean I am a nonbeliever of a number of religions (well, actually all of them except the one I happen to cling to), and nothing about their inconsistencies or mysteries matters to me one bit.

So what's motivates you to ask these questions, exactly?

Now that you mention it, Im rather curious now too.

Personally, I like studying different religions. I like learning about others. it makes communication easier and the ability to love stronger.

I would say that there were a number of reasons why I wrote this. I wanted to express my opinion. I wanted to get some feedback from Christians about my perception of their religion. I wanted to impact someone's way of thinking, and maybe open someone's eys about how their perfectly held religious beliefs were seen from outside the realm of the faithful.

I think its hard for Christians living in the US, which is supposed to be a secular nation, to understand what its like to not be a Christian or even a member of a religion, especially a world religion like Christianity. I wanted to try and express a small part of that.

I wasn't posing questions to be answered so much as I was writing what my perception of the Christian religion is. I wanted responses, and I wanted a reaction, but I was attempting to express myself as sincerely as possible and I hope that came across.

Yeah it makes sense to express your beliefs. In fact I think good people can be motivated with good intentions to do exactly that.

But the answer to ALL your questions about people with beliefs about religion can easily be answered.

Faith is that which surpasseth all understanding.​

You cannot UNDERSTAND other people's faith...not even by understanding their religion.​

So if you're seeking to get it, by pointing out the logical inconsistencies of their faith?​

All you can do is alienate those of faith.​

They cannot explain those inconsistencies even though a lot of believers think they can and try to do so, too.​

Faith is NOT logical.​

Religion isn't logical.​

We are ALL surviving on little more than faith.​

If not faith in GOD, or some religion, then faith in ourselves or something that we can see in this world.​

But seriously, if you look at life LOGICALLY, I mean if you look at it with absolutely no faith in SOMETHING, none of us would bother to get out of bed in the morning.​

Logically speaking...life itself is entirely pointless.​

Oh you'll find some faithful athetists who try to tell us that the point of life is to have a good time or to raise kids or to "die with the most toys" or something as equally absurd as faith in a GOD.

But these atheists can no more logically DEFEND their excuses for living every day, than the deeply religious can DEFEND their faith in GOD.​

That's sort of why I tend to eschew these religious debates.​

At best all I could do would be to take away somebody's completely illogical reason for being.​

Why would I want to do that to anyone?​

 

[Coloradomtnman]

I'm curious about a number of things. One, why does Colorado feel compelled to start so many threads devoted to the belief that Christians are just DYING to know what non-Christians - and him in particular - think of him.

I wanted to see what some Christians thought of my perception of Christianity as a whole, a perception from outside their religion. I thought it would be interesting to see how they reacted to, what I thought, are very reasonable conclusions for a non-believer to make of Christianity. I don't really care what they think of me personally.

Two, why does Colorado cherish the belief that he's fooling anyone about his hostility toward Christianity, particularly when he uses phrases like "recovering Christian"? (Hey, dumbass. Christianity is a belief system, not a disease or addiction. Really unbiased and open-minded there, genius.)

I was expressing my opinion Cecilie, so its not going to be unbiased. What having an open-mind has to do with this opinion...I don't know. Expressing my girlfriend as a "recovering Christian" was meant to show my actual opinion (and hers) and is also a joke among non-believers. Like my uncle's life partner who went to Catholic school and didn't realize, despite all the signs, that he was gay until he was in his twenties. He calls himself a recovering Catholic. You might not think its funny, but we who do not believe, do.

I readily admit, I have started threads that were meant to rile up Christians. I like pushing their buttons. I enjoy making people who are absolutely certain of their beliefs question and think about that unquestioning certainty. I like discussing religious beliefs. I'm not sure why exactly, but I think there are a number of reasons. Unfortunately, religious people seem to spend more time defending their beliefs than they do challenging mine or just resorting to personal attacks.

Three, would he and his minions flock to a thread titled "A Believer's Perception of Atheism and Its Adherents" for any reason other than hostility or belligerence, as they profess to expect Christians to do to threads like this?

Yes. I would go to that thread and read the OP to see what they thought about atheism. And then I would post my response. Its called communicating, arguing, debating, having discourse, etc. That's why I subscribe to USMB, and why all of us on USMB come to these forums. Right?

I would love for someone to start that kind of thread.

I'm not saying don't start threads to pick fights. Just stop trying to cloak it in a pretense of seeking honest debate.

But I am seeking honest debate. I never write posts like JBeukema, or ObamaBinLaden, or #1Homo, or Huggy which are just flat-out stupid insults. I attempt to actually contribute to the discussion. Those attempts might piss you off because sometimes they are direct challenges to your beliefs, but that's the point. I want a reaction. I want to challenge your dogmatically held beliefs. I also want mine challenged so that I can review my beliefs, and re-think them when someone makes a valid point.

I started a thread not too long ago that got into the realm of how one would define faith. I had always considered faith a bad word. But BrokenAngel, Tigerbob, a few others put forth their opinions and they changed my mind. Now I am currently redefining and re-thinking what faith means to me. I think it might not be such a bad word after all. That's the advantage of agnosticism: my beliefs can change in light of new infortmation and experiences.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Recovering Christian? You make it sound like an alcohol addiction.

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

Because it was intended for there to be division. Christ Himself said that he did not come to bring peace, but rather a sword by which we would be divided.

Matthew 10:34 “Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. 35 For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law’; 36 and ‘a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.’[e] 37 He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. 38 And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. 39 He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it."
~NKJV~

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.

It is in my estimation, a good way of filtering true believers from lip service "believers".

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

If anyone claims to be righteous than they are definitely not reading the Bible.
Romans 3:10 "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one"
So if you hear anyone claiming to be righteous just reference them to Romans 3:10.

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

Well, I believe anyone who reads the Old Testament without consulting the New Testament frequently for explanations is bound to be turned off by the violence. Case in point,
Romans 15:4 "For whatever things were written before were written for our learning, that we through the patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope."
I Corinthians 10:11 "Now all these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come."
So in other words Old Testament stories involving violence or not serve as moral lessons for Christians to increase their understanding of the Lord and His Word.

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?

Well, that's sort of the whole point of reading the Old Testament and the Gospels. There was always a plan in place for Christ to come and act as an ultimate sacrifice for our sins. Who would be a greater mediator between us and God than Christ the Lord's Son? Christ's blood was necessary to wash away and cleanse our sins in the hope that we could ask for forgiveness and reach Heaven.

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?

I'll present a greater alternative than yours. Christ could of refused to die for our sins. God could have left us all to Satan.

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

If we apply your human logic to Christ, why would He go to the trouble of taking the form of a man and going through numerous hardships in the first place? You say, "It wasn't that bad," but the simple fact is that the Lord could have done whatever He wished.

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?

Logic does not define truth but rather truth defines logic.

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

A very reasonable point. However, as with any religion, group, organization, etc. there are people and things that poorly represent the core values of your particular belonging. To think Christianity is devoid of any corruption is false and such corruption was predicted in the Bible to eventually come to the forefront.

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.

I do not support the death penalty,

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 value the lives of Americans over the creature comforts of terrorists,

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.

and I don't know what Korea, Vietnam, or Iraq has to do with Christianity.

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.

Your last sentence is out of place. Are you trying to say all Christians are Republicans and that the said Republicans are consisted of hatemongers?
Why the political statement?

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.

Where in the Bible is the age of the Earth stated?

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

Why would anyone perceive the Bible as a book of science?

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?

Repellent because you do not understand. Mercy is not unconditional with the Lord for the very reasons Jesus presents in this example.

Luke 14:28 For which of you, intending to build a tower, does not sit down first and count the cost, whether he has enough to finish it--
Lest, after he has laid the foundation, and is not able to finish, all who see it being to mock him, saying, "This man began to build and was not able to finish.”
Or what king, going to make war against another king, does not sit down first and consider whether he is able with ten thousand to meet him with twenty thousand?
Or else, while the other is still a great way off, he sends a delegation and asks conditions of peace.
So likewise, whoever of you does not forsake all that he has cannot be my disciple."

In other words, the Lord does not want those who follow Him to be weak and lacking in faith.

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

Evangelicals talk of Hell as the consequence of not accepting the mercy being offered to you. This is not contradictory to the image of God as merciful, but rather supportive of that image.

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 incorporation of pagan holidays is an unfortunate product of the Catholic Church not a historical inconsistency. Man's portrayal of Christ as white is not based upon history but upon man's perception. Therefore, it bears no significance in determining the validity of the Bible.

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

 

[Avatar4321]

Cecil is very obviously unsure of gawd's existence, that's why he/she is so hostile.

I found a bible in my house once, so I threw it in the garbage. It was written by ape-men back before bumwad was even invented.

Throwing out a book. What a surprise. I bet you torched it afterwards. Why is the people who want to pretend they are intelligent do anything other than read?

 

[Avatar4321]

Funny how talk about religion, which is supposed to bring people together, generally ends up making people mad.

We arent really talking about religion. That's just it. One sides attacking it. There isnt any honest discourse going on. There isnt any attempt to try to understand the others perspective.

I honestly cant imagine why youd expect people not to be mad when they are told they are stupid because they disagree with you.

 

[AllieBaba]

When they're told they don't have the ability to discern reality from fiction, when they are told they are not as well educated as the average 5-year-old.

It's the same thing that happens with abortion. If you don't believe in it, you're an ignorant hick who just doesn't know better.

That's the way the left views anyone with a different view than their own. It's a symptom of their conviction that they're just better than everyone else.

 

[AllieBaba]

Meanwhile they ignore the fact that many of those who don't agree with them are better educated, smarter, more worldly, than they are themselves.

 

[manu1959]

Funny how talk about religion, which is supposed to bring people together, generally ends up making people mad.

notice the non-belivers started the attack and insults....

 

[Coloradomtnman]

When they're told they don't have the ability to discern reality from fiction, when they are told they are not as well educated as the average 5-year-old.

It's the same thing that happens with abortion. If you don't believe in it, you're an ignorant hick who just doesn't know better.

That's the way the left views anyone with a different view than their own. It's a symptom of their conviction that they're just better than everyone else.

Sort of reminds me of the way some Christians view non-believers: If you don't believe in Christ you're going to Hell. If you don't believe in it, you're less in the eyes of the Creator and the church. Homosexuality is a sin and homosexuals will burn in Hell. Its symptom of their conviction that they're righteous unlike everyone else.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Funny how talk about religion, which is supposed to bring people together, generally ends up making people mad.

We arent really talking about religion. That's just it. One sides attacking it. There isnt any honest discourse going on. There isnt any attempt to try to understand the others perspective.

I honestly cant imagine why youd expect people not to be mad when they are told they are stupid because they disagree with you.

Yeah, I wish people like Huggy, #1Homo, JBeukema, et al. would lay off the insults as it is not how I wish to be represented and being that we're non-believers, I am lumped in with them from the faithful's point of view.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Meanwhile they ignore the fact that many of those who don't agree with them are better educated, smarter, more worldly, than they are themselves.

Uh, yeah. Where did you get that information, Allie?

 

[manu1959]

When they're told they don't have the ability to discern reality from fiction, when they are told they are not as well educated as the average 5-year-old.

It's the same thing that happens with abortion. If you don't believe in it, you're an ignorant hick who just doesn't know better.

That's the way the left views anyone with a different view than their own. It's a symptom of their conviction that they're just better than everyone else.

Sort of reminds me of the way some Christians view non-believers: If you don't believe in Christ you're going to Hell. If you don't believe in it, you're less in the eyes of the Creator and the church. Homosexuality is a sin and homosexuals will burn in Hell. Its symptom of their conviction that they're righteous unlike everyone else.

well if god does exist and certain interpretations are correct that is pretty much what will happen.....

 

[Anguille]

Funny how talk about religion, which is supposed to bring people together, generally ends up making people mad.

notice the non-belivers started the attack and insults....

It takes two to tango.
IMO the OP was not an attack. If some people found it insulting perhaps its because they are hyper sensitive and insecure in their beliefs.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Yeah it makes sense to express your beliefs. In fact I think good people can be motivated with good intentions to do exactly that.
But the answer to ALL your questions about people with beliefs about religion can easily be answered.

Faith is that which surpasseth all understanding.​

Well, if that is truly the case, and I consider you a wise man and I think that what you say is credible, then I must ask that if God gave us the power to reason, but we can't use reasoning to understand God then how does one who does not have faith obtain it?

You cannot UNDERSTAND other people's faith...not even by understanding their religion.
So if you're seeking to get it, by pointing out the logical inconsistencies of their faith?
All you can do is alienate those of faith.​

Is there no chance that interraction between believers and non-believers can cause change or better understanding between the two groups?

They cannot explain those inconsistencies even though a lot of believers think they can and try to do so, too.
Faith is NOT logical.​

Then I don't know how I could ever understand or have it.

Religion isn't logical.​

Then I don't know if I could ever have faith in it.

We are ALL surviving on little more than faith.​

That seems true to certain extent.

If not faith in GOD, or some religion, then faith in ourselves or something that we can see in this world.​

Seems like it.

But seriously, if you look at life LOGICALLY, I mean if you look at it with absolutely no faith in SOMETHING, none of us would bother to get out of bed in the morning.​

Not true. I look at life logically (I don't live it that way...). It does make life harder. But there is still beauty, there is still meaning and purpose.

Logically speaking...life itself is entirely pointless.​

Like I said above, that is not entirely true. Its just that those without religious faith have to find or make meaning of life, they have to give themselves a purpose.

Oh you'll find some faithful athetists who try to tell us that the point of life is to have a good time or to raise kids or to "die with the most toys" or something as equally absurd as faith in a GOD.​

A bit of a simplification. Look at humanism or naturalism. Those who follow those philosophies wouldn't think that any of the above reason for life are good reasons, but there are other reasons which are good reasons. You just have to figure them out.

But these atheists can no more logically DEFEND their excuses for living every day, than the deeply religious can DEFEND their faith in GOD.

I know that is untrue being that I am an agnostic (with atheistic tendencies). I would gladly discuss that very topic with someone with as critical a mind as I assume you to have (based on all posts I've read written by you).

That's sort of why I tend to eschew these religious debates.​

Understandable.

At best all I could do would be to take away somebody's completely illogical reason for being.​

A reasonable caution. I have only explained the entirety of my philosophical epiphanies to one person and luckily, she didn't fully grasp it (I was using words to describe my reality so no one would be able to fully grasp it). I would never want for someone to go through a true existential crisis unless they brought it upon themselves with their own philosophical musings or were searching for it. It can be a tough period in a non-believer's life but necessary to come to the point where a non-believer to truly understand that life is pointless, human beings aren't given a purpose for the Universe, and the Universe isn't here for us.

Why would I want to do that to anyone?​

Exactly.

 

[AllieBaba]

Meanwhile they ignore the fact that many of those who don't agree with them are better educated, smarter, more worldly, than they are themselves.

Uh, yeah. Where did you get that information, Allie?

Personal observation.

I included you; don't feel left out.