Why Attack Christianity?

[RevJP]

I was just wondering about reasons for what people do. I understand why Christians evangelize. Our faith tells us that we have an eternal soul and that the eternal dispensation of that soul is determined by what happens here on earth. Eternal life, living with the almighty God is based on our faith and acceptance of Him and failure to accept Him as Lord results in our eternal seperation from Him. The choice is clear, eternal glory, or eternal suffering.

So we are commanded to spread the Good news, to allow everyone to accept Christ, and we do so for the sake of their eternal soul, altruistic? Perhaps, but we do it out of love, His love working through us.

So what I am really wondering about is why non-believers need to attack our faith, or feel the need? narrowing it down a bit, why would a non-believer come to a Christianity discussion forum to denounce that faith, or try to persuade those there that their faith is wrong?

I'm really wondering at motivation. We understand the motivation of the Christian for spreading the Word of his/her faith, but what is the motivation for the non-beleiver to attack it? What do they gain or lose? What reward hinges upon them being successful or not at convincing someone to abandon their faith, or to turn away from considering adopting that faith?

If my faith is wrong, and there is no God, no heaven, no hell, what do I lose? In this life nothing, in eternity nothing? As a Christian I lose nothing. For the rabid non-beleiver however, the answer is quite different is it not? If their view is wrong and there is a God in heaven and a devil in hell, what do they lose?

So I'm wondering at why....

[Samurai Tailor]

ST88, first off, isn't agnostic belief an undecided one? As in, you are not really sure what to believe? You seem quite set that God is not there, I think you're using the wrong label.

The Huxleyan agnostic claims that God is unknown and/or unknowable. The matter of belief is separate; thus, an agnostic may be an atheist (common) or a theist (not so common).

First off, I'd like to have you mention at least one time when terror has been inflicted on non-Christians. Please do not try to use the holocaust because that was clearly an example of Satan's lies and deceit at it's ebst to someone of a Christian mindset.

Such a rejoinder is useless. To the atheist, Satan is just as much a fictional construct as is God. Obviously, we cannot argue only from within the presuppositional confines of our own worldviews if we wish to make headway.

In fact, it perhaps entails more questions than it answers: To whom was Satan lying? (Hitler did not seem to need any additional motivation) Why would God allow his adversary to wreak such unimaginable carnage if He could prevent it? Was 6 million the magic number? Anything less and the Jews' worldwide sympathy falls a hair short and they don't get their own state?

[ST88]

ST88, first off, isn't agnostic belief an undecided one? As in, you are not really sure what to believe? You seem quite set that God is not there, I think you're using the wrong label.

Perhaps you are using a different definition of agnostic than I am. harvey1 warned me about this, and I guess I just didn't listen. The question of whether or not God exists is meaningless. If you choose to answer the question, in my opinion, you are buying into the whole paradigm of spiritual mumbo jumbo. I find Faith to be irrational. This emcompasses that Faith that there is a God and also the Faith that there is no God. My stance is that such things are unknowable and therefore do not matter. My view of life is that here it is, no more no less.

In many ways, Christianity has it coming, what with around 1600+ years of terror inflicted on non-Christians.

First off, I'd like to have you mention at least one time when terror has been inflicted on non-Christians.

The Inquisition
The Crusades
African Slavery
Abortion Clinic Bombings
Do the Salem Witch Trials count? Because the Christians there thought they were persecuting non-Christians.

Oh, sorry, you just said one.

Please do not try to use the holocaust because that was clearly an example of Satan's lies and deceit at it's ebst to someone of a Christian mindset.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Do you mean that the Holocaust is a lie or that the Germans Army was convinced to perpetuate the Holocaust based on a lie?

Also, if you meant that Christians may be vocal in the ideas of Hell and eternal damnation, let me ask this of you. If you knew, or even strongly believed it was possible to suffer forever, wouldn't you do anything you could to attempt at steering people away from such a fate? It's not even a matter of terror, in the eyes of Christians everywhere, it's an act of love, to be able to share the glory we know with all of our brothers and sisters, before it is too late.

If it's love, why all the vitriol? Why do Christians spew hatred for people who take control of their own sexual lives? Or for people who just disagree with them? Saving me from Hell is all well and good, but what if there isn't a Hell? It would just amount to you pestering me. For myself, I think talking someone into a religious conversion is an ethical violation, and would therefore advocate a choice based on a personal decision after a good deal of study.

As a Christian you lose the appreciation of life for what it is.

That's quite the assumption, especially coming from someone who up to this point has done rather good at not making any. If anything Christians could cherish this world moreso than any non-believer. I look at things day after day and marvel in their beauty and praise God for the creations He has put forth on even such a sinful world. The beauty of nature alone is something to marvel at, and truly I don't understand how anyone can find something so beautifully created admist chaos a random event. Especially when they all take place on this planet. Priase God! And also, the love I share for my family, friends, and girlfriend are, in my mind, no less than the love God Himself gives me to give to them. Also, as far as doing good in this life (non-Christian and Christian works alike), scripture tells us that God indeed wants us to do our best in every aspect of our life, as if we are doing it for Him, to show our appreciation for this life so that He knows we will be worthy of the gift of an eternal one, and Lord knows I am gretaful everyday.

I think you proved my point. You don't appreciate life for what it is you appreciate life for what it means in terms of God. I'm sure it's no less beautiful. And I'm glad you have found peace with that notion. But Christians have more to look forward to as they prepare themselves for the afterlife, which is supposed to be more wonderful than anything anyone could imagine. Myself, I do not have this to look forward to. So this world, here, right now, is what I find more wonderful than anyone could imagine. No one else can look through my eyes, and language doesn't even begin to describe how I see the world, so you'll have to take my word for it on that.

[Mattu]

I'd also just like to mention, ST88, that yes talking to you into a conversation about Hell or anything Chritian in nature could be seen as pestering to you. Personally, and according to scripture, we aren't supposed to go around bugging people about it, and selling it to them, only to be prepared to talk about it, and wear it on our shoulder, so that people know they may come to us for questions they may have, and if not, may we find the answer together.

And also, as far as all the bad things of the world, if we do not turn to God and ask Him to help us during times of need, and try to take action against them for God, we are only bystanders to sin and Satan's acts. I believe all bad things come from our detachment from God, and that even then He is able to bring about good things from the greatest evil. This may lead you to ask me what good could have come out from all the evil you mentioned, but I was not around then, I know no accounts of people who lived on Earth during that time, but I know that through it all, good came from it, as is the way of life. Surely for many of those people, it was God's calling for them. It's truly hard to explain, but I don't mean to rpetend like I understand. I'm just a student with an amazing teacher.

I'm sorry if I misunderstood the term agnostic as well, I merely looked it up in a dictionary, as I'm not too fmailiar with that as a spiritual/religious belief. But what it sounds to me like, is that you figure there may or may not be a God, but either way, you don't concern yourself with it?

Overall, I just don't understand what in the Bible (the document to which Christians should aspire) is so bad. It really doesn't tell anyone to do anything wrong by our standards, and that is still upheld all this time after it was even written. To think that a book of it's age could have sentences about how the world is round, and how it hangs in space, before human minds even had concepts of these ideas, itself is just one small point to show how accurate it is with such minute details. I don't know, I guess it's just hard for me to believe that someone could not know God is there when to me it seems so obvious. It's not that I haven't wondered and thought otherwise, Lord knows I have and it is always a hard time when I am, but I always have something so profound happen in my life that just could not be taken as chance, it's strange. Enough personal info, and good luck in this debate


God Bless <3

[bernee51]

First off, I'd like to have you mention at least one time when terror has been inflicted on non-Christians.

Have you heard of the Inquisition. the Crusades, pogroms other than the Shoa

Please do not try to use the holocaust because that was clearly an example of Satan's lies and deceit at it's ebst to someone of a Christian mindset.

It had nothing to do with satan's lies - there was a growth in fascism in the early 20th century that the (mainly) christian west outside Europe chose to ignore.

If you knew, or even strongly believed it was possible to suffer forever, wouldn't you do anything you could to attempt at steering people away from such a fate?

we all suffer in this life, what is a christianity doing about that? what in christianity offers a chance to reduce suffering here and now?

[bernee51]

So what I am really wondering about is why non-believers need to attack our faith, or feel the need? narrowing it down a bit, why would a non-believer come to a Christianity discussion forum to denounce that faith, or try to persuade those there that their faith is wrong?

A very good question Rev - thanks for raising it. I note there have been a whole raft of answers coming from a broad perspective. I won't reiterate all the alledged wrongs of christianity over the last two millennia - they have all been pretty well covered.

Personally I do not attack christianity per se. I would offer the same arguments agianst all mythic belief systems. The attachment we develop to these belief systems are part of a well defined pattern of growth in human consciousness. We (indivudually and culturally) move through various stages of which the mythic is just one. For various reasons many get stuck in the mythic. The mythic belief system is not so much irrational as pre-rational.

I have no gripe with christians believing what they believe. My problem is with those who wish to force their beliefs on society as a whole. I can easily support your wish to end abortion, for example, but I cannot condone you imposing that wish as law on others. Same for same sex partnerships.

To have or not have a religion is an individual choice. The dogma of any religion can only apply to those who chose that religion - it should not apply to those who don't.

As to why I would come to this forum...I enjoy the talk, the mental stimulation. I believe all have something to offer - atheists and christians alike.

My personal belief is that we, homo sapiens, are a work in progress. We are continuing to evolve - physically, emotionally, consciously and spiritually. Fora such as these can, for some - those who are open to challenge, aid in that evolution

If my faith is wrong, and there is no God, no heaven, no hell, what do I lose? In this life nothing, in eternity nothing? As a Christian I lose nothing. For the rabid non-beleiver however, the answer is quite different is it not? If their view is wrong and there is a God in heaven and a devil in hell, what do they lose?

Pascal's wager is no reason to believe Rev - and it is bad logic

[RevJP]

Lots of comments and much of the discussion has nothing to do with the topic at hand, but interesting all the same. The discussion on athiesm and agnosticism was interesting (my personal view is that agnosticism is more of an honest approach than athiesm - cannot prove there is a god, but cannot prove there isn't so won't believe either way... kind of like the dark matter we were also talking about and the laws of physics. Who was it who was talking about science we don't know or cannot prove yet but may be found in the future? Scientific faith? I bleieve in this even though I have no proof... yet? )

Bernee said:

I won't reiterate all the alledged wrongs of christianity over the last two millennia - they have all been pretty well covered.

Thanks, they have. I find it amusing and often frustrating that 'anti-theists' mention every wrong done to mankind by religous but do not acknowledge the wrongs done by man just being man, political genocide, economic oppression (slavery was about economics and power, not about christianity- for those of you who take anything you can to blame on religion), etc. We all know there were wrongs done by religious people, but they certainly do not outweigh the wrongs done by men for other reasons.

The attachment we develop to these belief systems are part of a well defined pattern of growth in human consciousness. We (indivudually and culturally) move through various stages of which the mythic is just one. For various reasons many get stuck in the mythic. The mythic belief system is not so much irrational as pre-rational.

Am I understanding that you feel belief in myth is a step in the evolutionary process and those who have 'divorced' themselves from myth have become further evolved, or enlightened?

My problem is with those who wish to force their beliefs on society as a whole. I can easily support your wish to end abortion, for example, but I cannot condone you imposing that wish as law on others. Same for same sex partnerships.

Kinda like Political Action Committees, Labor unions, etc. Pushing thier agenda's, their views, and imposing those wishes as law on others? What you describe is an idea that people who hold similar views on what should be acceptable for the population at large shouldn't be allowed to express those views or to band together and vote for those ideas, or is it only those people who have religious conscience that should not be allowed to do that?

Let's see, child labor laws came about because people holding a view that children should be protected from oppressive and unsafe labor conditions, those views were imposed on society as a whole - was that wrong? Women now can vote, disabled people have equal opportunity, slavery is abolished, discrimination is illegal...

Anyway, I digress....

Pascal's wager is no reason to believe Rev - and it is bad logic

I'm sorry you misunderstood. I did not say it was a reason to believe, nor have I indicated that is should be accepted as such. It was on observation and rhetorical question in answer to those who feel they must save the faithful from their 'deluded beliefs'. Interesting though that the only two responses to that observation were attacks on something that was not even offered, yet no answer to the question (albeit the rhetorical question).

[spetey]

my personal view is that agnosticism is more of an honest approach than athiesm - cannot prove there is a god, but cannot prove there isn't so won't believe either way...

Does this mean you're an agnostic, RevJP? Wouldn't that be more "honest" for you, since you say you can't prove God exists? It sounds to me like you think there are good reasons to believe, and therefore that you are not agnostic. Similarly we atheists think there is good reason not to believe, and so we are not agnostic either. We come here to try to sort them out.

I find it amusing and often frustrating that 'anti-theists' mention every wrong done to mankind by religous but do not acknowledge the wrongs done by man just being man...

That's not fair to me and my post. There I explicitly acknowledge that of course both the religious and non-religious are capable of both good and evil. But I point out the special evil that always seems to accompany supernatural religion--namely, dogmatism. Dogmatism has encouraged ethnic intolerance and shoddy ethical and scientific reasoning for millennia, and that's why I think people should consider whether they are being dogmatic or not.

What you describe is an idea that people who hold similar views on what should be acceptable for the population at large shouldn't be allowed to express those views or to band together and vote for those ideas, or is it only those people who have religious conscience that should not be allowed to do that?

Of course, people can vote for their positions and thereby try to "push agendas". But wouldn't it be better if people thought carefully about the positions they push on others, instead of taking a knee-jerk dogmatic reaction ("Great Leader says...")? This forum is here in part to encourage people to think carefully about their positions, especially those that bottom out in religious faith.

As for what the Christian has lost: look, suppose a friend of yours believes firmly in the Invisible Pink Unicorn. This friend spends lots of time and money on her worship of this creature. She tries to convert others to her belief. She pushes for IPUism to be taught in public schools, and tries to pass laws that all pizzas should have pineapple (the IPU loves pineapple on pizzas), and stuff like that. What has she "lost" for her false belief? A great deal of time and effort put into something ultimately meaningless, that's what, and meanwhile if she and her fellow-followers manage to pass their laws, other people can be negatively affected. Of course, on the tiny chance she's right, she gets to frolic in the heavenly pastures with the IPU forever when she dies! Does this mean we should be content to leave her with her belief? Even if it means our kids have to study IPUism in school thanks to her?


spetey

[RevJP]

Spetey, spetey, spetey....

That's not fair to me and my post. There I explicitly acknowledge that of course both the religious and non-religious are capable of both good and evil. But I point out the special evil that always seems to accompany supernatural religion--namely, dogmatism. Dogmatism has encouraged ethnic intolerance and shoddy ethical and scientific reasoning for millennia, and that's why I think people should consider whether they are being dogmatic or not.

An observation of a trend is unfair to you? Please. I simply stated what I have observed, continuously. If it seems somehow unfair to you perhaps you should consider more closely the reasons for the observation.

As for religion and dogmatism, you connect those two as if they are mutually inclusive, yet you do not acknowledge that dogmatism is on its own the reasons you attack (for lack of a better descriptive). Politics is always accompanied by that special evil, all systems of thought are in one degree or another, that you choose to focus on religion or faith in your fight against 'dogmatism' speaks to something else entirely.

Of course, people can vote for their positions and thereby try to "push agendas". But wouldn't it be better if people thought carefully about the positions they push on others, instead of taking a knee-jerk dogmatic reaction ("Great Leader says...")? This forum is here in part to encourage people to think carefully about their positions, especially those that bottom out in religious faith.

Of course you make the assumption that religious faith preclude reason and thought. I wonder if you consider the same for opposing political views, or economic views.... Personally I can look at many of the proponents of an opposing political view and claim they do not see reason, or haven't engaged in thought but simply accept what their deluded political leader or candidate says.

In some cases it would be true, in most probably not. The same goes for people of faith.[/quote]

[spetey]

RevJP, not all positions are held dogmatically. Some are held for reasons. Yes, I think it is more likely that religious views are held dogmatically (on "faith") instead of for good reasons that could convince others. In fact, it seems to me that the only way to believe in a religion like Christianity is on faith (and not on reasons). But some people here are trying to convince me otherwise--they are trying to convince me there are reasons to believe. To the extent that a religious person has reasons for her view, she is not being dogmatic. I don't mind a reasoned position. My main enemy is dogmatism.

And no, I'm not being dogmatic about this--I have given reasons for why dogmatism is bad, and I have given reasons why I think there is no God. Of course it is possible for an atheist to be dogmatic. I think that's bad too--people can believe the right position for the wrong (or no) reasons.

If you think there are good reasons to believe in God, please give them on another thread (I like this one best!). If you think that it's okay to believe without reasons, please defend this view on this thread.


spetey

[RevJP]

RevJP, not all positions are held dogmatically. Some are held for reasons.

Of course it is completely subjective. One states one holds a view for reasons, the opposer dismisses those reasons and claims dogmatism.

I have found very few people who hold to a belief, who did not feel they had sufficient reason to do so. However, I have met many people who would dismiss another's reasons and mock them.

it seems to me that the only way to believe in a religion like Christianity is on faith (and not on reasons).

Good example, thank you. (and to be clear, Christianity is not a religion, it is a faith and a relationship with God. There are religions based on the Christian faith, but that is a different animal altogether.

But some people here are trying to convince me otherwise--they are trying to convince me there are reasons to believe

Trying to convince you? I'm sure their are some who are trying to convince you, however, what I see mostly are those who state thier reasons for their faith in answer to the inquiries of others. In fact, I have no recollection of anyone here starting a thread entitled: "He Spetey, you should believe because..."

If you seek someone's reason for a belief, you should have the common decency to consider it before dismissing it, unless of course the only reason you seek someone's reason for a belief is in fact only to dismiss and mock it. If that is then the case we have come back around to the original reason for this thread: WHY?