True Christianity

I just wandered into these boards today, but I must say, the atheists are making themselves look a hell of a lot worse than the Christians. I personally consider myself a "spiritual agnostic" lol. I was "saved" when I was 12...went to a VERY fundamentalist Christian high school where I experienced the bigotry and judgment that eventually, along with a few philosophy classes, led me to lose my faith.

I have to say, though, that most of the attacks on Christianity that I see on here are towards a very specific (yet still very powerful) group of them. The Christians you don't hear about as much are the ones who really do focus on Jesus' message of love and charity. Certain denominations do this better than others (Presbyterians and Catholics come to my mind). I agree that the Christians who focus on judging and pushing their beliefs into our law and society are INCREDIBLY annoying, however, I think it is important to not forget the (what I like to call) TRUE Christians out there who focus on helping the poor and loving the lost. These people do a lot of good, whether you believe their dogma or not. Before the government got involved in things like welfare, it was the church that fed the poor and helped unwed mothers.

I think the people on here that are simply BASHING the Christians are only showing their own ignorance and immaturity (especially those of you in your 40s-really! at least at your age come up with some actual theological arguments). We have all heard the same basic crap arguments, why not try thinking outside of the box. If you look at the actual words that JESUS himself spoke in the New Testament, you will see that the true message of Christianity is nothing to be ridiculed

 

Well the issues aren't theological to disprove Christianity. They rely on rational arguments. Theological arguments are best suited to debating specific doctrinal points.

Ratioanlistic arguements are for debating the existense of a invisible God, life after death, a ressurected human, etc...

 

aah, my mistake. I'm a philosophy major, not religion, so I got my definition messed up. I was thinking more along the lines of logic, rationality, etc...

 

Theological--from the greek meaning Theos (God) and (Logos) word, or discourse in some contexts...

No harm no foul.

 

Rational arguments?

on the christianity forum?

Where!?!!?

*looks around*

 

You've seemed a little ruthless lately fedup. Life without God gotcha down?

 

Thanks for pointing this out. The attacks are either name calling or logical fallacies of the form "Some Christians did such & such, therefore all Christians are bad. This has been pointed out many times, but the attacks go on and on. The people involved are either unable to comprehend the fallacious nature of their arguments, or they do understand and do it anyway. Hmmmm...

 

You make my point. Anyone who goes back to view your posts can see the same pattern of demagoguery. Deliberate, systematic fallacies masquerading as argument.

 

Fallacy #1. Ad homminem attack. Shift focus of argument from issue to person.e.g.,Poor little fella.

So persecuted.

So ridiculed.

So abused.

You've shifted the focus from the issue (using fallacious arguments to attack Christians) to me (poor little whiny Christian, can't you just keep quiet and take it).

Fallacy number two. "try to disprove some of my arguments". I have, many times, I think successfully. You usually withdraw for awhile, come back and restate them all over again.

 

ooo it's about to get nasty up in here...

 

state them again and lets all have a go.

im leaving for school though, be back in about 4 hours.

 

If Christians are supposed to follow the same book of lies, their beliefs SHOULD be the same. Or are some Christians just more Christian than others?


As everybody knows, there are lots of different denominations who call themselves Christian--some with radically different takes on what the Book is all about. Some are more in keeping with Jesus' teachings than others. The bible is highly metaphorical and it's the nature of metaphor to allow for different interpretations. I don't regard it as God giving dictation. But then, you know that.

 

Too numerous to state again. But you might check out the zeitgeist post.

 

Once again, you illustrate my point. The fact that different people have disagreements about the interpretation of a text, as is true of interpreting any text I know, is translated into: "Christians can't get the whole story straight". and They just make up shit as they go along."

 

Does any discipline not have many different views and opinions? They aren't making things up as they go along, they are taking the information they have and working from there. The nature of humanity is that we all view things differently. Despite what you may think, Christians are not robots, they have free minds (or at least the True Christians that I talked about do).

I hate that attitude "Are you afraid"......hasn't that become cliche by now? It just sounds like a 5th grade bully.

lol I'm not sure I can stick around this forum, yall have a lot more patience with ignorant asses than I ever could.

Is this guy really 48? or am I missing something?

 

yay for going to classes!!!! (remember me from your other thread?)

Just keep on going on

 

Just out of interest ( I didn't read the zeitgeist thread) what did you think of the movie? I thought it was very interesting. There were parts that I thought were a little too thin on substance but thick on shocks to be truth and parts that made quite a bit of sense (namely the beginning chapter, and the very ending.)

 

yeah but I skipped my first one today.

*shame*

 

It comes with the faith. Trust me, it isn't just online that you get scorned and bullied for being a Christian.

 

I just take it light-heartedly. none of here are going to convert each other over internet discussions. Yes, I do get frustrated sometimes if my comments are ignored, but you cannot force people to think the same way.

I do have to agree to a point about the "making up up as they go along" idea. Paul seems to have developed his theology as he went and encountered different problems, but that isn't nessecarily to say he made it up as he went along, it is just to say that as time went on he encountered more deep questions that needed more elaboation.

yes, FedUp is 48. He has a radio show. Call him the Debtonator, that'll really get his juices flowing

I tend to shy away from the label of "true christian". Each person has their own definition of what a true christian is. for some people you have to focus on the sermon on the mount, for others you have to base your experience as a christian on the book of Acts when the apostles are influenced by the Holy Spirit. For others you might need to hear the Mass in Latin, for others you have to have leavened bread during the Eucharistic celebration. Some true christians ...You get the point.

And FedUp, I think a good arguement about different Christian groups and why they exist can be compared to the US Constitution. The USSC interprets what is written in the constitution and applies that to laws that are not explicitly written. It depends on interpretation of the Law. Some view the second ammendment i the strictest terms meaning that a government cannot legalize a state rligion, while others think that it means that anything religious cannot have anythig to do with government what so ever. There are people like this on both sides of the theological persuasion as well. Free churches do not want anythig to do with the government. It is all on how you interpret texts.
That is the problem with Jonathan Z. Smith identifies with canon-how do you make a finite text apply universally?