Why I Am Not A Christian

[Newby]

You want to discuss your disapproval of my manners s'more?

Fine. Lemme know when you are done and ready to actually discuss the flaws I and others see in christianity that drove me off. If that ever happens.

It would be cool if you'd answer any of the questions that I've just asked you too, but as predicted, I really didn't think you would. I think we both know why that is. I've given up being naive a long time ago.

*Yawns*

Got any other dodges, Newby? This one's getting boring.

Thanks for confirming you're a complete waste. Where's this 'debate' you wanted? I'm still waiting for you to answer questions about remarks you made. Let's go, Madeline, put your beliefs out there.

 

[Newby]

whether or not she intended it, the OP is disrespectful to the beliefs of christians, IMO.

it's not terribly surprising to me that the result is more heat than light.

Perhaps that is because we live in a predominantly Christian society and many Christians are not used to having their beliefs rejected by others. Non Christians in our society are more familiar with having their beliefs rejected and so we are used to keeping a cool head when it happens. Perhaps we just wrongfully assume everyone is like us.

there's a difference between rejecting someone's beliefs and mocking those beliefs.

Thank you Del, very well said. Mocking is the word that I've been lacking.

 

[Newby]

The things I find valuable in christianity never seem to be valuable to practicing christians. They all seem to value the aspects of the faith that strike me as most irrational, anti-human and anti-rational.

Nonetheless, I do find much of what Jesus allegedly taught to be quite true. And have said so.

Okay, so you're stating that you then find practicing Christians to be irrational, anti-human, and anti-rational? And you expect a christian reading your words to not be insulted?

So what is it exactly that you find valuable that you think practicing christians do not which in turn makes them irrational and anti-human in your opinion?

Still waiting.

And waiting....

 

[Newby]

Please point out to me where I said my reaction to the cross symbol was the only reaction a person could have or that my reaction is "the truth of how things are", whatever that is supposed to mean.

The only truth I have expoused is that I, personally, am repulsed by the veneration of the cross and the glorification of cruxification.


"The cross means different things to different people."

Duh!

I think in your aim to play conciliator in this thread, Sky, you are losing sight of what is actually being discussed.

BFD, you've stated your feelings on it about what, 20 times now. Good for you, what the hell do you expect someone to say to such a statement anyway? You're welcome to feel however you want about it, it doesn't change my feelings or anyone else's, so what is the objective in stating it 20 times? The only objective I see is that you think it's 'shocking' and you're just trying to provoke, like I said you'll have to find new victims to play your games with.

20 times? Exaggerate much?

"you'll have to find new victims" ? I think that statement confirms my psychological assessment of you in an above post.

Sorry, to disappoint you, Newby, but I could not care less if I've changed your feelings about the meaning of the cross symbol or not. When will you proselytizing fanatics ever learn that, unlike you, not everyone wants to push their beliefs in everyone else.

Then why repeat it over and over again? I ask again, what's the point?

 

[CurveLight]

Waving red flags? Are you sure you don't have Madeline confused with ScurvyDelight?

Madeline admitting she's trying to be 'ass kissy' is a red flag. There is no need to walk on eggshells if you genuinely want an intelligent interfaith dialogue. You do have to start with a genuine respect for the other side.

The things I find valuable in christianity never seem to be valuable to practicing christians. They all seem to value the aspects of the faith that strike me as most irrational, anti-human and anti-rational.

Nonetheless, I do find much of what Jesus allegedly taught to be quite true. And have said so.

Must be another exampke of you "NOT" broad brushing Christians. Again.

 

[Madeline]

The things I find valuable in christianity never seem to be valuable to practicing christians. They all seem to value the aspects of the faith that strike me as most irrational, anti-human and anti-rational.

Nonetheless, I do find much of what Jesus allegedly taught to be quite true. And have said so.

Okay, so you're stating that you then find practicing Christians to be irrational, anti-human, and anti-rational? And you expect a christian reading your words to not be insulted?

So what is it exactly that you find valuable that you think practicing christians do not which in turn makes them irrational and anti-human in your opinion?

Still waiting.

Valuable but rarely taught or emphasized: That wealth is very likely to cause spiritual death. That judgment of another is usurping God's authority. That forgiveness is necessary to one's spiritual health.

Worthless (and in error, I think): That sex is bad. That sexuality is only permissible to procreate, or more liberally inside a heterosexual marriage. That women are defective. That GLBT folks are going to hell. That abortion is evil and must be stopped by any means, sometimes including murder. That the function of a christian in this world is to help govern the behavior of others, especially the sexual conduct of others. That prostitution is the lowest a woman can fall (without condemning her customers) and that the term "good christian woman" could never apply to a whore.

 

[Madeline]

Newby wrote:

Then why repeat it over and over again? I ask again, what's the point?

Maybe Anguille would enjoy the feeling of being heard, Newby. If you didn't rush in (not you personally, but others as well) to tell her how stupid and erroneous her feelings were and instead just acknowledged them and maybe even began a dialogue about them, maybe she'd get what she needed.

Just a theory.

 

[Madeline]

CurveLight wrote:

Must be another exampke of you "NOT" broad brushing Christians. Again.

Fair enough. Sleep well?

 

[Sky Dancer]

Please point out to me where I said my reaction to the cross symbol was the only reaction a person could have or that my reaction is "the truth of how things are", whatever that is supposed to mean.

The only truth I have expoused is that I, personally, am repulsed by the veneration of the cross and the glorification of cruxification.


"The cross means different things to different people."

Duh!

I think in your aim to play conciliator in this thread, Sky, you are losing sight of what is actually being discussed.

BFD, you've stated your feelings on it about what, 20 times now. Good for you, what the hell do you expect someone to say to such a statement anyway? You're welcome to feel however you want about it, it doesn't change my feelings or anyone else's, so what is the objective in stating it 20 times? The only objective I see is that you think it's 'shocking' and you're just trying to provoke, like I said you'll have to find new victims to play your games with.

20 times? Exaggerate much?

"you'll have to find new victims" ? I think that statement confirms my psychological assessment of you in an above post.

Sorry, to disappoint you, Newby, but I could not care less if I've changed your feelings about the meaning of the cross symbol or not. When will you proselytizing fanatics ever learn that, unlike you, not everyone wants to push their beliefs in everyone else.

I haven't experienced the Christian posters on this thread as proselytising Christianity. I have seen them defend their faith and points of view.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Newby wrote:

Then why repeat it over and over again? I ask again, what's the point?

Maybe Anguille would enjoy the feeling of being heard, Newby. If you didn't rush in (not you personally, but others as well) to tell her how stupid and erroneous her feelings were and instead just acknowledged them and maybe even began a dialogue about them, maybe she'd get what she needed.

Just a theory.

Newby said that it's ok that Anguille sees the Crucifix the way she does and that she disagrees with Anguille's view.

 

[Newby]

Okay, so you're stating that you then find practicing Christians to be irrational, anti-human, and anti-rational? And you expect a christian reading your words to not be insulted?

So what is it exactly that you find valuable that you think practicing christians do not which in turn makes them irrational and anti-human in your opinion?

Still waiting.

Valuable but rarely taught or emphasized: That wealth is very likely to cause spiritual death. That judgment of another is usurping God's authority. That forgiveness is necessary to one's spiritual health.

Worthless (and in error, I think): That sex is bad. That sexuality is only permissible to procreate, or more liberally inside a heterosexual marriage. That women are defective. That GLBT folks are going to hell. That abortion is evil and must be stopped by any means, sometimes including murder. That the function of a christian in this world is to help govern the behavior of others, especially the sexual conduct of others. That prostitution is the lowest a woman can fall (without condemning her customers) and that the term "good christian woman" could never apply to a whore.

I don't know what Christian church you've ever attended, but the three things that you listed are absolutely taught. How could you read about the life of Jesus and the words and examples that he gave and not get those messages. So, you're wrong with your assumptions.

I've never attended any church that even addressed sexuality or lack thereof.

I've never been told that women are defective by anyone in any church.

I've never been told to go out and tell non-believers that 'they're going to hell', nor have I ever personally done that.

Abortion has never been discussed on the pulpit in the church that I attend, but I personally believe it to be wrong, it's the murder of your own child.

I'm supposed to govern the sexual conduct of others? Really?

Jesus personally stopped the stoning of a prostitute and told her to go and sin no more.

So, I don't know where you came up with all of these misguided notions, but they're so far off of the mark that I don't even know how to address them. Where have you learned such things, because it wasn't from any christian church that I'm familiar with? Or are you just making this up as you go along?

 

[CurveLight]

I have not called any particular person a nutter, Newby. Where is all this ultra-sensitivity coming from anyway? The whole thread is about why some people reject christianity -- when you began reading were you surprised it happened sometimes because the beliefs did not ring true for them?

This all feels like an elaborate dance around the issue and I have to wonder why the topic at hand is not being discussed.

Maybe you can send me a ******* list of pre-approved words that I can use to try and express myself, Newby.

Apparently anything is preferable to you to discussing the substance of what I or any other non-christian has said on this thread. Why is that, I wonder?

Proposal:

Maddy, I'll start a new thread specifically to try and answer your questions. The only way it will work is if you and I both promise to ignore others' posts until we've exhausted our dialogue. Having been a Christian for ten years and being one class shy of a degree in biblical studies I think we can get down to the nitty grity. The major perk is I don't give a **** how rude you are so long as we are discussing the issue. Ball is in your court.

 

[Madeline]

Still waiting.

Valuable but rarely taught or emphasized: That wealth is very likely to cause spiritual death. That judgment of another is usurping God's authority. That forgiveness is necessary to one's spiritual health.

Worthless (and in error, I think): That sex is bad. That sexuality is only permissible to procreate, or more liberally inside a heterosexual marriage. That women are defective. That GLBT folks are going to hell. That abortion is evil and must be stopped by any means, sometimes including murder. That the function of a christian in this world is to help govern the behavior of others, especially the sexual conduct of others. That prostitution is the lowest a woman can fall (without condemning her customers) and that the term "good christian woman" could never apply to a whore.

I don't know what Christian church you've ever attended, but the three things that you listed are absolutely taught. How could you read about the life of Jesus and the words and examples that he gave and not get those messages. So, you're wrong with your assumptions.

I've never attended any church that even addressed sexuality or lack thereof.

I've never been told that women are defective by anyone in any church.

I've never been told to go out and tell non-believers that 'they're going to hell', nor have I ever personally done that.

Abortion has never been discussed on the pulpit in the church that I attend, but I personally believe it to be wrong, it's the murder of your own child.

I'm supposed to govern the sexual conduct of others? Really?

Jesus personally stopped the stoning of a prostitute and told her to go and sin no more.

So, I don't know where you came up with all of these misguided notions, but they're so far off of the mark that I don't even know how to address them. Where have you learned such things, because it wasn't from any christian church that I'm familiar with? Or are you just making this up as you go along?

Seriously?

 

[Madeline]

I have not called any particular person a nutter, Newby. Where is all this ultra-sensitivity coming from anyway? The whole thread is about why some people reject christianity -- when you began reading were you surprised it happened sometimes because the beliefs did not ring true for them?

This all feels like an elaborate dance around the issue and I have to wonder why the topic at hand is not being discussed.

Maybe you can send me a ******* list of pre-approved words that I can use to try and express myself, Newby.

Apparently anything is preferable to you to discussing the substance of what I or any other non-christian has said on this thread. Why is that, I wonder?

Proposal:

Maddy, I'll start a new thread specifically to try and answer your questions. The only way it will work is if you and I both promise to ignore others' posts until we've exhausted our dialogue. Having been a Christian for ten years and being one class shy of a degree in biblical studies I think we can get down to the nitty grity. The major perk is I don't give a **** how rude you are so long as we are discussing the issue. Ball is in your court.

I don't promise to ignore anyone else, CurveLight but yes, I'll reply. I'll be back after a bit.

Please leave a link so I and anyone else interested can follow you.

 

[Newby]

Valuable but rarely taught or emphasized: That wealth is very likely to cause spiritual death. That judgment of another is usurping God's authority. That forgiveness is necessary to one's spiritual health.

Worthless (and in error, I think): That sex is bad. That sexuality is only permissible to procreate, or more liberally inside a heterosexual marriage. That women are defective. That GLBT folks are going to hell. That abortion is evil and must be stopped by any means, sometimes including murder. That the function of a christian in this world is to help govern the behavior of others, especially the sexual conduct of others. That prostitution is the lowest a woman can fall (without condemning her customers) and that the term "good christian woman" could never apply to a whore.

I don't know what Christian church you've ever attended, but the three things that you listed are absolutely taught. How could you read about the life of Jesus and the words and examples that he gave and not get those messages. So, you're wrong with your assumptions.

I've never attended any church that even addressed sexuality or lack thereof.

I've never been told that women are defective by anyone in any church.

I've never been told to go out and tell non-believers that 'they're going to hell', nor have I ever personally done that.

Abortion has never been discussed on the pulpit in the church that I attend, but I personally believe it to be wrong, it's the murder of your own child.

I'm supposed to govern the sexual conduct of others? Really?

Jesus personally stopped the stoning of a prostitute and told her to go and sin no more.

So, I don't know where you came up with all of these misguided notions, but they're so far off of the mark that I don't even know how to address them. Where have you learned such things, because it wasn't from any christian church that I'm familiar with? Or are you just making this up as you go along?

Seriously?

What church taught you such things or where did you come by those opinions? I was raised Catholic, and I'm not a catholic any longer, but I know for a fact that the Catholic church does not teach any of the things you mentioned either.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Valuable but rarely taught or emphasized: That wealth is very likely to cause spiritual death. That judgment of another is usurping God's authority. That forgiveness is necessary to one's spiritual health.

Worthless (and in error, I think): That sex is bad. That sexuality is only permissible to procreate, or more liberally inside a heterosexual marriage. That women are defective. That GLBT folks are going to hell. That abortion is evil and must be stopped by any means, sometimes including murder. That the function of a christian in this world is to help govern the behavior of others, especially the sexual conduct of others. That prostitution is the lowest a woman can fall (without condemning her customers) and that the term "good christian woman" could never apply to a whore.

I don't know what Christian church you've ever attended, but the three things that you listed are absolutely taught. How could you read about the life of Jesus and the words and examples that he gave and not get those messages. So, you're wrong with your assumptions.

I've never attended any church that even addressed sexuality or lack thereof.

I've never been told that women are defective by anyone in any church.

I've never been told to go out and tell non-believers that 'they're going to hell', nor have I ever personally done that.

Abortion has never been discussed on the pulpit in the church that I attend, but I personally believe it to be wrong, it's the murder of your own child.

I'm supposed to govern the sexual conduct of others? Really?

Jesus personally stopped the stoning of a prostitute and told her to go and sin no more.

So, I don't know where you came up with all of these misguided notions, but they're so far off of the mark that I don't even know how to address them. Where have you learned such things, because it wasn't from any christian church that I'm familiar with? Or are you just making this up as you go along?

Seriously?

I can only speak from my own experience. The Catholic Church that I grew up in was anti-sex and was very big on teaching about mortal sin--those things that would send you to hell.

Not ordaining women as priests sends a message that women are not worthy of the priesthood--aren't Christ-like, a deeply anti-female belief and practice.

I was a Catholic as a child in the fifties and sixties. The nuns in our Catholic school were a bit dotty. They taught us things like good girls don't wear patent leather shoes because boys can see the reflection of your panties under your dress. The nuns were also into hitting kids.

I had my work cut out for me to sexually liberate myself as an adult.

Being raised a Catholic was a real mixed bag.

 

[Anguille]

BFD, you've stated your feelings on it about what, 20 times now. Good for you, what the hell do you expect someone to say to such a statement anyway? You're welcome to feel however you want about it, it doesn't change my feelings or anyone else's, so what is the objective in stating it 20 times? The only objective I see is that you think it's 'shocking' and you're just trying to provoke, like I said you'll have to find new victims to play your games with.

Maybe you could begin by listening to Anguille with an open mind, Newby. It doesn't take much imagination to empathsize with someone else's pain, if you set aside your own needs and desires for just a moment.

Sorry, I have no trust in her whatsoever to be honest or altruistic, and I'm pretty much at the same point with you. Your intensions are not honest or good.

It's so easy to just dismiss people by claiming they are selfish liars.

Whatever it takes to preserve your fragile sense of superiority, I suppose.

 

[Newby]

I don't know what Christian church you've ever attended, but the three things that you listed are absolutely taught. How could you read about the life of Jesus and the words and examples that he gave and not get those messages. So, you're wrong with your assumptions.

I've never attended any church that even addressed sexuality or lack thereof.

I've never been told that women are defective by anyone in any church.

I've never been told to go out and tell non-believers that 'they're going to hell', nor have I ever personally done that.

Abortion has never been discussed on the pulpit in the church that I attend, but I personally believe it to be wrong, it's the murder of your own child.

I'm supposed to govern the sexual conduct of others? Really?

Jesus personally stopped the stoning of a prostitute and told her to go and sin no more.

So, I don't know where you came up with all of these misguided notions, but they're so far off of the mark that I don't even know how to address them. Where have you learned such things, because it wasn't from any christian church that I'm familiar with? Or are you just making this up as you go along?

Seriously?

I can only speak from my own experience. The Catholic Church that I grew up in was anti-sex and was very big on teaching about mortal sin--those things that would send you to hell.

Not ordaining women as priests sends a message that women are not worthy of the priesthood--aren't Christ-like, a deeply anti-female belief and practice.

I was a Catholic as a child in the fifties and sixties. The nuns in our Catholic school were a bit dotty. They taught us things like good girls don't wear patent leather shoes because boys can the reflection of your panties under your dress. The nuns were also into hitting kids.

I had my work cut out for me to sexually liberate myself as an adult.

I grew up Catholic as well, but I did not have the same experiences that you did, altho it was a bit later than when you were probably involved. I don't agree with a lot of the things the Catholic church as an entity does, but that does not mean that every Catholic church is the same either. I don't agree with their stances on the sex of priests, I don't agree with their stance on birth control. I see them as a large political entity that has lost its way in teaching what Christ said was to be taught. It became all about the church and not about Christ, which is why I am no longer Catholic.

 

[CurveLight]

I have not called any particular person a nutter, Newby. Where is all this ultra-sensitivity coming from anyway? The whole thread is about why some people reject christianity -- when you began reading were you surprised it happened sometimes because the beliefs did not ring true for them?

This all feels like an elaborate dance around the issue and I have to wonder why the topic at hand is not being discussed.

Maybe you can send me a ******* list of pre-approved words that I can use to try and express myself, Newby.

Apparently anything is preferable to you to discussing the substance of what I or any other non-christian has said on this thread. Why is that, I wonder?

Proposal:

Maddy, I'll start a new thread specifically to try and answer your questions. The only way it will work is if you and I both promise to ignore others' posts until we've exhausted our dialogue. Having been a Christian for ten years and being one class shy of a degree in biblical studies I think we can get down to the nitty grity. The major perk is I don't give a **** how rude you are so long as we are discussing the issue. Ball is in your court.

I don't promise to ignore anyone else, CurveLight but yes, I'll reply. I'll be back after a bit.

Please leave a link so I and anyone else interested can follow you.

You complained about Christians avoiding the topic so I offered a solution I knew you would ignore.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Seriously?

I can only speak from my own experience. The Catholic Church that I grew up in was anti-sex and was very big on teaching about mortal sin--those things that would send you to hell.

Not ordaining women as priests sends a message that women are not worthy of the priesthood--aren't Christ-like, a deeply anti-female belief and practice.

I was a Catholic as a child in the fifties and sixties. The nuns in our Catholic school were a bit dotty. They taught us things like good girls don't wear patent leather shoes because boys can the reflection of your panties under your dress. The nuns were also into hitting kids.

I had my work cut out for me to sexually liberate myself as an adult.

I grew up Catholic as well, but I did not have the same experiences that you did, altho it was a bit later than when you were probably involved. I don't agree with a lot of the things the Catholic church as an entity does, but that does not mean that every Catholic church is the same either. I don't agree with their stances on the sex of priests, I don't agree with their stance on birth control. I see them as a large political entity that has lost its way in teaching what Christ said was to be taught. It became all about the church and not about Christ, which is why I am no longer Catholic.

As long as there are Churches around who teach from a misguided point of view you're going to have criticism of Christianity--and rightly so.

It's important to point out which Churches and what Christians practice this way and which ones don't. I am curious about what congregation you settled into Newby.