What's your beef with Christianity?

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

The conditions of the bible are that you love God and your neighbor. If you do that, you believe in Jesus. If you don't do that, you are already in hell and no one sent you there.

I keep this real simple because I can get real "heady" at times.

Oversimplified. It is possible to love God and love one's neighbor without believing in Jesus. Someone is sending you there, because one certainly doesn't go their of their own accord.

[Mato Kinze]

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

God is Love. And when love is a verb, it is Christ. What does it mean to have faith in God? To me, it means making love the priority over how much money I have or how right I might be. Maybe it's flimsy reasoning, but when my daughter hugs me, I know why it is the foundation of my life.

Merc, I get that for YOU Love is Jesus and vice versa. This is not the case for all. Much of what's being debated here seems to be the literal versus the interpretational or alagorical meanings behind the dogma associated with the Christian Bible.

I don't know too many rational people who will argue that Jesus of Nazareth (or Jesus the Nazarene - two different things) existed as a historical figure. I also don't think there's too many here that disagree that the message Jesus preached (so far as we can tell more than 2,000 years after his death) based on writings that have survived were those of love and compassion. Show me someone who thinks that Love and Compassion are "wrong" emotions or "bad" and I'll show you someone who's not in touch with ANYTHING spiritual.

That being said, the original question was not, "What's your beef with Jesus?" It was "What's your beef with Christianity?" I'll take that to mean what the "religion" of Christianity has been made to be by hundreds of generations of Human Beings attaching their own personal interpretations of what Jesus MEANT by his message as well as those who seem to think that they somehow "know" they're right.

[SmartAlx]

Actually Mato,

It seems to be an argument partially about what the definition of Christianity means to each of us. This is a good point.

I think the argument is that many people believe that Christianity is judgment, dogma, rules and rituals.

Those of us who have studied the Bible with an open mind though say that real Christianity is about a personal relationship between each of us and God, as well as a book on how we should be treating one another, and if the world were open to this belief, more people would be willing to study the Bible as a book of wisdom, or an instructional manual.

So, there we have the argument. We Christians are trying to open the world mind, not necessarily with the immediate intent of converting everyone, but moreso with the intent of repairing the damage done by bad examples of Christians.

[pianoperformer]

Oh, I don't think anyone can argue that the morals taught in the Bible are good to follow. However, I would argue that they are mostly universal. I've not met anyone who thinks that stealing is good, for example. Nor do I think most people, regardless of their religion, believe that it is preferable to treat other people poorly.

However, I disagree about the motive. if I say that I have a good relationship with God, and that I also treat other people well, or at least am working on doing so better, I don't think you would be satisfied. You would invariably say something to the effect of, "No you don't have a relationship with god because you don't accept Jesus as your savior," and then we are back to the start, because your definition of having a relationship with God is different from mine, and you cannot prove to me that mine is wrong without using the Bible, and I do not believe that the Bible is correct in such matters, just like I would not accept the Koran as inspired.

You use an interesting word though. "Not with the immediate intent...." But it is definitely an intent. This cannot be denied because the Bible itself promotes such practice.

Also one cannot say that one has a closed mind, if one has already opened one's mind to the Bible, and found it lacking, therefore moving onto other things. I study many beliefs. If I find that the belief fits me well, or that it makes sense, then I adopt it. I gave Christianity such a chance, indeed gave it three chances, and have found it lacking each time. Therefore, I don't have a closed mind, I have just moved on. this is in response to you saying you are trying to open the world mind.

[torilink]

Originally Posted by SmartAlx

Actually Mato,

It seems to be an argument partially about what the definition of Christianity means to each of us. This is a good point.

I think the argument is that many people believe that Christianity is judgment, dogma, rules and rituals.

Those of us who have studied the Bible with an open mind though say that real Christianity is about a personal relationship between each of us and God, as well as a book on how we should be treating one another, and if the world were open to this belief, more people would be willing to study the Bible as a book of wisdom, or an instructional manual.

So, there we have the argument. We Christians are trying to open the world mind, not necessarily with the immediate intent of converting everyone, but moreso with the intent of repairing the damage done by bad examples of Christians.

well, Christianity THE CHURCH will want to quantify "relationship with God", what it really is saying is a "relationship with God as we define God".

and as for treating one another in any way, it is according to what??? there are many cases of those "Beloved of God" not treating others well. I'm thinking of a King who killed tens of thousands and arranged for the husband of the woman he lusted after to be killed.... so, really I don't think it is that clear cut and always is determined by "The Church" which isn't God.

[mercuryrising]

Originally Posted by Mato Kinze

That being said, the original question was not, "What's your beef with Jesus?" It was "What's your beef with Christianity?" I'll take that to mean what the "religion" of Christianity has been made to be by hundreds of generations of Human Beings attaching their own personal interpretations of what Jesus MEANT by his message as well as those who seem to think that they somehow "know" they're right.

I understand what you are saying and I think I have been a bit of a Pollyanna about the whole deal. I felt that I had created this monster of a thread that I hadn't intended to create. My question was wrong.

Let me point out exactly what initiated me to start this. It was this comment from Shnu in the "philosophy is a joke" thread:

While I respect many Christians, I regard the idea of a heaven, where all is good, and all questions are answered, as a childish fantasy. Epicurus had a grown up view of humanity's place in the world: the gods do not obsess over weighing up our every action and devising rewards and punishments for them.

God will not answer your questions if you make no effort to. And he might not help even if you try.

To me, a comment like this has nothing to do with theology or the underlying meaning of Christ's teachings. It's just plain insulting. This person is really saying, "I act like I respect Christians, but really I think they're all mental infants."

This gives no credence to the thousands of human beings who have done more than wax philosophic about the Bible or to the individual he's talking to.

And for all the discussion about Christians being judgmental and dogmatic, what was 12345's response to this statement?

Likewise, while I respect non-Christians, these two bible verses actually affirm that we *must* have the faith of a child to enter heaven.

Mark 10:15 (King James Version)
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.

Luke 18:17 (King James Version)
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.

God bless you, shnu.

I could give you other examples from this thread itself.

For me, no matter what another person believes, I respect that person enough to not insult them. But when it comes to Christianity, it seems this level of respect goes out the window.

[mercuryrising]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

Oh, I don't think anyone can argue that the morals taught in the Bible are good to follow. However, I would argue that they are mostly universal. I've not met anyone who thinks that stealing is good, for example. Nor do I think most people, regardless of their religion, believe that it is preferable to treat other people poorly.

However, I disagree about the motive. if I say that I have a good relationship with God, and that I also treat other people well, or at least am working on doing so better, I don't think you would be satisfied.

Is it up to him? Is he judging you? Or is he telling you what he believes and giving you an offer? So you don't take the offer. That's your choice. His mission is to be available when someone does want to take that offer... he doesn't have anything to do with whether someone accepts it or not. That's between that person and God.

You would invariably say something to the effect of, "No you don't have a relationship with god because you don't accept Jesus as your savior," and then we are back to the start, because your definition of having a relationship with God is different from mine, and you cannot prove to me that mine is wrong without using the Bible, and I do not believe that the Bible is correct in such matters, just like I would not accept the Koran as inspired.

What is your definition of having a relationship with God? I'm not asking so that I can argue with you about it, but because I would like to know.

You use an interesting word though. "Not with the immediate intent...." But it is definitely an intent. This cannot be denied because the Bible itself promotes such practice.

Also one cannot say that one has a closed mind, if one has already opened one's mind to the Bible, and found it lacking, therefore moving onto other things. I study many beliefs. If I find that the belief fits me well, or that it makes sense, then I adopt it. I gave Christianity such a chance, indeed gave it three chances, and have found it lacking each time. Therefore, I don't have a closed mind, I have just moved on. this is in response to you saying you are trying to open the world mind.

Actually, this isn't the way people are converted. It's not a philosophic debate. More like a surrender. And no one can force you to do that. In reality, no one is. It's something you have to want and it has to come from your experience, not what you read in a book.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

Is it up to him? Is he judging you? Or is he telling you what he believes and giving you an offer? So you don't take the offer. That's your choice. His mission is to be available when someone does want to take that offer... he doesn't have anything to do with whether someone accepts it or not. That's between that person and God.

Very true. But sadly, very many Christians are a little over-zealous in their attempt at conversion.

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

What is your definition of having a relationship with God? I'm not asking so that I can argue with you about it, but because I would like to know.

My view of God is rather impersonal as compared to that of Christianity, I suppose relationship might not be the right word. My goal then is to find my purpose and fulfill it, while trying to serve others. Also it is to try to spread more love and joy rather than negativity. Doing so, I feel it brings me closer to I guess what one could call source. I do believe that duality is illusory, but fear, guilt, anger, etc, only serve to perpetuate that separateness.

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

Actually, this isn't the way people are converted. It's not a philosophic debate. More like a surrender. And no one can force you to do that. In reality, no one is. It's something you have to want and it has to come from your experience, not what you read in a book.

I see your point but also disagree. My beliefs must make sense to me, or else I can't honestly say I believe them. Sure, nothing can be proved 100%, but if something in my soul says it just doesn't feel right or make sense, then I can't accept it. After that, i can work on installing that belief so to speak, and then experience can ensue.

[fwellers]

Originally Posted by SmartAlx

Actually Mato,

It seems to be an argument partially about what the definition of Christianity means to each of us. This is a good point.

I think the argument is that many people believe that Christianity is judgment, dogma, rules and rituals.

Those of us who have studied the Bible with an open mind though say that real Christianity is about a personal relationship between each of us and God, as well as a book on how we should be treating one another, and if the world were open to this belief, more people would be willing to study the Bible as a book of wisdom, or an instructional manual.

So, there we have the argument. We Christians are trying to open the world mind, not necessarily with the immediate intent of converting everyone, but moreso with the intent of repairing the damage done by bad examples of Christians.

I personally have no issues with Jesus being the Saviour, and people coming to "heaven" ( which I also interpret is full spiritual realization ) through him. If the bible is taken as a spiritual message, seeing past the outer, into the inner, then it makes sense in a lot of areas.
However, I also believe people can get to full spiritual realization through Buddha, or Krishna, or Allah. They can get there through Taoism, Paganism etc... Heck, nobody needs a "religion" to grow all the way up.
I am coming to an understanding that, since in many ways our reality is an illusion anyway, there is more than one "truth" from the level of human understanding.

That's the thing about Christianity ( also other religions ) though. They make zero room for any other beliefs. Christ is the ONLY way.

Here's a statement that 99+% of christians will outright reject until the cows come home.

If the christian bible never existed, there would still be "heaven" and everyone would still get there eventually.

[Ree]

Originally Posted by SmartAlx

Actually Mato,


So, there we have the argument. We Christians are trying to open the world mind, not necessarily with the immediate intent of converting everyone, but moreso with the intent of repairing the damage done by bad examples of Christians.

And therein lies my main beef with Christianity: This strange need y'all have to spread Christianity to every corner of the earth. Y'all seem to have a burning need to affect others and the way they feel about Jesus and Christianity and Christians, to the point that you alienate most normal people.

There may have been a definite need for the spreading of the word 2000 years ago when Jesus walked on this planet, but I think the word is pretty much out there these days.

The world doesn't really need anything from Christianity. Perhaps if you truly spread around some of the Christian love you brag about all the time. Unfortunately from what I've seen it,s mostly lip service. Deep down inside, if you will be completely honest I think you'll admit that you dislike those of us who don't believe as you do and that's why you want to convert us.

[fwellers]

Yup. Jesus said to be ready to explain the light within you.
So that means to me, that you should just live your truth, and if your love shines through enough for someone to ask about it, then you tell them your truth. Otherwise, just go about your life, without trying to convert.
You only can convert through action. Not through the normal means christianity has used.

Jesus also said to pray in your closet. In other words, keep your spiritual practice to yourself, don't go out in the world and make a big deal about it, and try to flaunt it, sell it, or otherwise make the world bend to it.

There is plenty about christianity that doesn't jive at all with what Jesus supposedly said. ( and I say supposedly, because all we really have is the flawed translations of what others said he said ) .

[SonoranBob]

I don't know if I would paint the whole of Christianity that way, that might be a little presumptuous. It is certainly a valid general observation about the fundamentalist branch for sure, and often is true elsewhere.

My thought is that all religions, philosophies, and belief systems I've looked at fail to bring about a fundamental shift in the human condition. If Christianity really did anything useful for the human condition I would expect that after two millennia, we'd be long since living in paradise.

Look the world over and you will look in vain for any creed that has a broad spectrum of humanity lining up in the street to get some of what they got. When I see that happening on a sustainable basis and within weeks or months I see vast changes for the better as a result -- when I see people experiencing joyful ease while still in possession of their God-given brains and their wallets -- then I will sit up and take notice.

Until then I take everything with a very big grain of salt. I mean, it is inherently impossible for us, as parts of a much greater whole, to adequately comprehend the whole. It is impossible to be both a participant in life, and be an objective observer of it. It is impossible to obtain accurate, reliable information, especially of general applicability, when the information itself will impact your perceptions and your actions will change reality on the fly.

This is why we work with metaphors, similes, rules of thumb, and other mental shortcuts. We don't have the equipment to see the entire picture and we don't have the brains to deal with it properly if we did.

Hence, all religions can only very roughly approximate reality -- on a good day. Maybe.

Some new age and neo-Buddhist types speak now of a coming world-changing fundamental shift in consciousness, implying that we are evolving better spiritual, mental and emotional equipment to take in more of reality and deal with it better. Whether this is yet another illusion of false hope to keep people interested or if it actually happens remains to be seen.

In the meantime I stick with those things that cause a shift in MY world and make IT a better place and I gauge the strength and reality of such shifts based on how the lives of those I have contact with are enriched (or not).

--Bob

Originally Posted by Ree

The world doesn't really need anything from Christianity. Perhaps if you truly spread around some of the Christian love you brag about all the time. Unfortunately from what I've seen it,s mostly lip service. Deep down inside, if you will be completely honest I think you'll admit that you dislike those of us who don't believe as you do and that's why you want to convert us.

[SmartAlx]

Originally Posted by fwellers

Here's a statement that 99+% of christians will outright reject until the cows come home.

If the christian bible never existed, there would still be "heaven" and everyone would still get there eventually.

The problem isn't the first part about heaven existing. We know that period of time in which the world has had a bible is shorter than the period of time in which there was no Bible. There were scriptural teachings, but as an example, before Solomon, the books that he wrote didn't exist, right? We know that.

Anyway, the problem is the socond part, which I highlighted.

[SmartAlx]

Originally Posted by Ree

And therein lies my main beef with Christianity: This strange need y'all have to spread Christianity to every corner of the earth.

Didn't you read what I said? not necessarily with the immediate intent of converting everyone

Y'all seem to have a burning need to affect others and the way they feel about Jesus and Christianity and Christians, to the point that you alienate most normal people.

and read this...
but moreso with the intent of repairing the damage done by bad examples of Christians

The world doesn't really need anything from Christianity. Perhaps if you truly spread around some of the Christian love you brag about all the time.

That IS what the world needs from Christianity. You are contradicting yourself.

Unfortunately from what I've seen it,s mostly lip service.

You are only paying attention to the bad examples.

Deep down inside, if you will be completely honest I think you'll admit that you dislike those of us who don't believe as you do and that's why you want to convert us.

Absolutely NOT! I love everyone! And I feel for people who are not on the right path with God. My abilities aren't evangelical so I put the non-believers in God's hands. I pray for them.

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by SmartAlx

Absolutely NOT! I love everyone! And I feel for people who are not on the right path with God. My abilities aren't evangelical so I put the non-believers in God's hands. I pray for them.

Isn't dividing the world into a duality of believers and non-believers inherently sanctimonious and elevating you onto a superior plane? Yes, yes, I know, you'll protest that it's not -- when I occupied your shoes I couldn't see it either. But I've come to believe that.

I think it's better to pity the poor ignorant unbelievers and pray for their wretched souls than it is to torture and burn them at the stake, but it still seems to me that your condescending pity for those less wise than you contains the seeds of those greater evils. And this is what makes people react negatively to evangelical approaches.

The French provide an extreme viewpoint that illustrates the problem. They consider religion a very private matter. They tend to be aghast at us here in the States, that we would even discuss our personal religious views in mixed company, much less try to convert anyone. One of them told me that to the French, evangelization is as gauche as discussing your masturbation technique. Cut it out already, is their reaction.

The other aspect that people react negatively to is that the idea that there is but one way to God -- yours -- is inherently arrogant. As I posted earlier, no religion can possibly have exclusive and perfectly accurate knowledge nailed down. Those who claim to, and insist on being taken seriously as such, will always be proselytizing and even if they are lower key than Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses (or suicide bombers!) it's all cut from the same cloth and people don't like it because they don't like being condescended to and they are instinctively wary of the implications of such an attitude if it's ever allowed to be carried to its logical extreme.

--Bob

[SmartAlx]

Originally Posted by SonoranBob

Isn't dividing the world into a duality of believers and non-believers inherently sanctimonious and elevating you onto a superior plane? Yes, yes, I know, you'll protest that it's not -- when I occupied your shoes I couldn't see it either. But I've come to believe that.

I think it's better to pity the poor ignorant unbelievers and pray for their wretched souls than it is to torture and burn them at the stake, but it still seems to me that your condescending pity for those less wise than you contains the seeds of those greater evils. And this is what makes people react negatively to evangelical approaches.

Again, someone replies to something they don't read.

Don't put words in my mouth please. It's bad for arguments and it's awful logic. It doesn't belong in a forum like this.

You assume that when I hear that someone doesn't believe that I immediately tell them something like, "oh you poor thing. I pity you. I will do you a favor and pray for your wretched soul. You can thank me later in heaven. Meet me at the plaque that lists the thousands of souls I saved." When did I ever infer that I do anything like that?

No one feels condescended to when they learn that I am a Christian. I hope they think, "oh, of course. That's why he's so nice."

Keep your business out of my mind please. I am allowed to think whatever I want. If I am not then you are just as judgmental as you think I am.

[Ree]

Originally Posted by SmartAlx

No one feels condescended to when they learn that I am a Christian. I hope they think, "oh, of course. That's why he's so nice."

Which infers that those of us who are not Christian are NOT nice??!!