Why are christians so annoying?

[Norse]

But, then again, christianity has only ever been about changing their mind, scribbling this bit out, adding this, editing that, changing this and that, and then screwing it up and starting again.

This is so one sided and vague I can't even begin to invest the necessary time to critique and rebut it.

Ha!

I win I win, ner ner ner ner ner ner

[Norse]

Well, sounds to me like you're clutching at straws.

What are you even talking about Norse? If you think I'm clutching at straws, then explain my fallacy. I'm just going to follow Mr. Nate's action - until you present an argument (which the above is not) which is even worth rebutting, I'm not even going to bother.

2-0 to the norse.

Who else accepts defeat?

[OnlyAmbrose]

[DangerBoy]

I wasn't objecting to people choosing to convert on their own at all. What I was objecting too are the people who, insted of letting people choose their own religion, go out and do a little active recruiting. The "Repent lest ye spend eternity in Hell" type people. I don't care what religion you are, but when you start to push it on me and others, thats when I start objecting.

I don't know what you're referring to when you say 'people who won't let other people choose their own religion'. How is that even possible? Do you know of groups of evangelicals that are going around not permitting people to believe what they want to believe? How does someone perform this miraculous feat? They must indeed be powerful in order to be able to enter the mind of someone else and prevent them from exercising their free will.

Has anyone physically been able to capture you or your friends, force them to attend a church service, and somehow force a conversion out of them? Yeah, it's true that my church teaches about hell being a place of punishment for sin. Anyone who doesn't want to believe that is free to not believe it. Nobody is being forced to believe it. People can always leave if they don't like the message. If someone shares an invitation to accept Christ you can just simply say, "No thanks, I'm not interested".

Perhaps you jut don't like the message of the Bible. Well, too bad. I don't like the message of other religions but I don't hate them for wanting to share it with me.

[MR. Nate]

I win I win, ner ner ner ner ner ner

Sorry, should have stopped after the vague pointless generalizations. They can't possibly be rebutted. Now you've got something to defend.

I've just had a quick read through my bible, and have come across a few flaws here.

I find this hard to believe, especially in light of some previous posts, But, since the objections are, to an extent, logical, I will make an attempt.

According to the Bible, events have occured which are even more miraculous than the resurection of Jesus Christ. Events such as the stopping of the sun by Joshua (Joshua 10:12-14), the reversal of the sun's course by Isaiah (Isaiah 38:7-8) , the resurrection of the saints, and their subsequent appearance to many (Matthew 27:52-53) were witnessed by thousands of people. The stopping and reversal of the sun would have been visible worldwide. The idea that people could have witnessed these events without having been amazed by them is, quite simply, ludicrous. Other cultures having witnessed this would certainly have offered their own explanations in keeping with their own cultural and religious beliefs. Surely a society existing at the time would have documented this miraculous event. Yet nowhere have such works been found.

I have a hard copy of some archeological evidence for this. I'll post it if I can find it. Suffice to say, a lot of the older cultures around the world testify to a long day, evening or night, and most would be consistant in date and time with the stories in Joshua.

In the instance of the resurrection of the saints, Matthew is the only person to mention this occurence in the Bible. Surely other first-century Christians would have used this as further proof of Jesus' divinty. It would fall to reason that Paul and the gospels would have mentioned it. This is not, however, the case. Nowhere else in the Bible is this mentioned or even hinted at. These events are then, at best, highly unlikely to have occured. The fact that Matthew is alone in writing of the resurrection of the saints leads us to believe that certain writers of the Bible had differing views on christianity.

Argument entirely from silence, which is not valid. It could simply not have been as important to other gospel writers, or to Paul. To say they don't mention it does not cast any question

However, after Adam and Eve had eaten from the tree forbidden by god, this deity said to Eve "I will intensify the pangs of your childbearing; in pain shall you bring forth children. Yet your urge shall be for your husband, and he shall be your master." (Genesis 3:16). This tells us that, according to the Christian religion, women shall naturally be dominated by men. This kind of behavior is not conducive to a being who believes in inherent equality. Women are repeadtedly treated as objects and told to be submissive in the Bible. "According to the rule observed in all the assemblies of believers, women should keep silent in such gatherings. Rather, as the law indicates, submissiveness is indicated for them. If they want to learn anything, they should ask their husbands at home. It is a disgrace when a woman speaks in the assembly." (1 Corinthians 14:34-35). "Man was not made from woman but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman but woman for man. For this reason, a woman ought to have a sign of submission on her head." (1 Corinthians 11:8-10).
The Bible also permits bondage. "Slaves, male and female, you may indeed possess, provided you buy them from among neighboring the nations. You may also buy them from among the aliens who reside with you and from their children who are born and raised in their land. Such slaves you may own as chattels, and leave to your sons as their hereditary property, making them perpetual slaves." (Leviticus 25:44-46). This same Bible gives laws on the punishment of slaves. "When a man strikes his slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property." (Exodus 21:20-21)

There is a confusion here between equality in being and equality in rank. Women are equal persons to men, but it some areas, God has seen fit to place men in positions of authority. Just like your Boss is in charge of you, even though you're probably smarter. In addition, a number of the restrictions are concessions to the fact that we live in a fallen world. If we hadn't screwed things up, God wouldn't have had to set down rules on slavery.

We find further examples of prejudice in Deuteronomy. In the Bible, it is stated that "No one whose testicles have been crushed or whose penis has been cut off may be admitted into the community of the Lord. No child of an incestuous or adulterous union may be admitted into the community of the Lord, nor any descendant of his even to the tenth generation." (Deuteronomy 23:2-3). Consider the first statement. If a faithful Christian were to get in an automobile accident with a resulting injury to his genitals, he would not be admitted into Heaven. The second statement is even more ridiculous than the first. An innocent child, through no fault of its own, is born a bastard. He may not be admitted into heaven. But more than that, none of his descendants may ever be admitted. These are not characteristics which are normally associated with justice and goodness. These are petty, cruel actions. This is not the only discrepancy in the christian Bible. Judah's daughter-in-law, Tamar, is said to have been a harlot (Genesis 38:24). Because of her harlotry, she became pregnant (Genesis 38:25). She had twins and named them Perez and Zerah. "These are the descendants of Perez: Perez was the father of Hezron, Hezron was the father of Ram, Ram was the father of Amminibad, Amminibad was the father of Nahshon, Nahshon was the father of Salmon, Salmon was the father of Boaz, Boaz was the father of Obed, Obed was the father of Jesse, and Jesse became the father of David." (Ruth 4:18-22). Therefore David, King of Israel, was a descendant of a bastard and subsequently should not have been allowed into the community the Lord. This is a huge contradiction, as David is such an important figure in the bible.

The "community" which you speak of would be the "assembly" which had a number of other stipulations. Every Israelite, and some time in their lives, would be outside the assembly for one reason or another - Women on their period, men who had wet dreams, anyone who contacted a dead body etc. Being inside or outside the assembly does not in any way indicate a relationship with God. Rather, in the OT, it was demonstrative of the Holiness and Purity of God.

The contradiction involving David pales in comparison, however, to the one of the very definition of a supreme being. In Christianity, Christ is central in atoning for the sins of mankind. Had there been no sins of mankind, there would be no story of Christ. The nature of sin must then therefore be analysed. It is accepted by Christians that god created everything. If this is true, then this same god created evil. It is written in the Bible that god is all-knowing (1 John 3:20).

I'm pretty sure this has been answered. - See the "How is what Jesus did different than 'suicide by cop'" thread, page 6 & 7 (it's current)

God is, in effect, omniscient. If god is omniscient and creates, he then knows all possible outcomes of all possible creations of all possible universes. If he created our universe, he chose what its destiny would be. In doing so, he chose the paths of our lives. Thus, we can conclude that the universe is completely deterministic to god and, by being a creator, he cannot allow freewill to exist unless the universe is no longer predetermined to him. If this is true, then humanity is merely a collection of automotons. If this is not not true, then god cannot be omniscient.If the Christian god were omniscient, then he could foresee his own future. If this being knows its own future, he does not have the power to change it. Considering, however, that god is omnipotent, there is a major conflict with his omniscient nature. If god were able to change his future, that would mean that god would not be able to foresee when he would make sudden changes in his future and what changes would result, eliminating the possibility of his being omniscient. Therefore, these qualities cannot be held simultaneously by one being. It is important now to look at the possibility of omnipotence. The Christian god is perfectly good and omnipotent. Yet evil exists. If god is omnipotent and perfectly good, he could and would dispell evil. Three possible conclusions arise from these statements. God is perfectly good but evil exists, so he is not able to dispell evil and thus is not omnipotent. The second possible conclusion is this: that god is omnipotent but evil exists, and god is therefore not perfectly good. The last possible, and most feasible, conclusion is that god does not exist.

One of the classic atheist objections. In fact, God could determine events, and even pre-ordain them without limiting free will. Just because He know your decision before you make it does not limit your ability to freely choose. I've used this example in the past, but if you are a poker player, you can with limited knowledge and experience, predict with 90% accuracy what another player is going to do. Now God, who has unlimited knowledge and experience, (including knowledge of your personality and thought process) can predict with 100% accuracy. He knows what your going to do, He's just waiting for you to do it.

I'm sure this doesn't dispell all the issues raised in the above post, but I can take them one at a time if you'd like. This is the best I could do in the time I've got.

[Norse]

Sorry, should have stopped after the vague pointless generalizations.

you sure should have.

I've just had a quick read through my bible, and have come across a few flaws here.

I find this hard to believe, especially in light of some previous posts, But, since the objections are, to an extent, logical, I will make an attempt.

I have a bible or 2 by my side, a few swift flicks later.....

I have a hard copy of some archeological evidence for this. I'll post it if I can find it. Suffice to say, a lot of the older cultures around the world testify to a long day, evening or night, and most would be consistant in date and time with the stories in Joshua.

Sure

There is a confusion here between equality in being and equality in rank. Women are equal persons to men, but it some areas, God has seen fit to place men in positions of authority. Just like your Boss is in charge of you, even though you're probably smarter. In addition, a number of the restrictions are concessions to the fact that we live in a fallen world. If we hadn't screwed things up, God wouldn't have had to set down rules on slavery.

This example is a poor one at best. It is poor, since my boss is a great deal older and more experienced than myself. He has earned the right to be my superior within the work place.

You are comparing this to a divine right of men over women?

Plus, you seemed to swerve the "sexual" and slavery-ownage aspects.

One of the classic atheist objections. In fact, God could determine events, and even pre-ordain them without limiting free will. Just because He know your decision before you make it does not limit your ability to freely choose. I've used this example in the past, but if you are a poker player, you can with limited knowledge and experience, predict with 90% accuracy what another player is going to do. Now God, who has unlimited knowledge and experience, (including knowledge of your personality and thought process) can predict with 100% accuracy. He knows what your going to do, He's just waiting for you to do it.

So, for example, he willingly allows the paedaphillic preist go about his business without intervening? Does this seem to be a moral and godly thing to do?

Does he want this to happen? Is this a part of the master plan?

I'm sure this doesn't dispell all the issues raised in the above post, but I can take them one at a time if you'd like. This is the best I could do in the time I've got.

nah, not really

In fact, your post has only served the purpose of proving my original point.

Christians are annoying, and Im actually beginning to think evil too.

[2dimes]

Christians are annoying, and Im actually beginning to think evil too.

Duh, that should have been pretty obvious.

Colour and behaviour is not relevant because everyone is bad sometimes.

[unriggable]

MR.Nate, God must not know about quantum mechanics then.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc

[Arbustos]

This has become an "argue the existence of God" thread... have you ever considered that it doesn't really matter if you think God exists or not? Most of Christianity's main tenets aren't that objectionable to the general mindset... what's so wrong with people following these beliefs? If a belief in God is what it takes to get them on the right course, what of it? As an agnostic, I don't spend a significant amount of time pondering the existence of a higher being. It just isn't something I think I need to know to lead a good life. Since a belief in God shouldn't be what repulses you about Christians, what is it?


Please don't say intolerance or quote Leviticus.
I'll just point out now that there are individuals with different views than you across the spiritual spectrum, including atheists. (Don't worry, I'm not gay-bashing in some ridiculously circuitous way.)

[Backglass]

In the Bible, it is stated that "No one whose testicles have been crushed or whose penis has been cut off may be admitted into the community of the Lord.

"I'm truly sorry about your farming accident...BUT rules are rules. Now OFF TO HELL YOU GO, HEATHEN!" - St. Peter

what's so wrong with people following these beliefs? If a belief in God is what it takes to get them on the right course, what of it?

If thats what it takes to set your life straight, good for you. If someone wants to worship gods, monkeys, toasters, rush limbaugh or mother nature, fine...go for it. I don't care what you do in your home, church, mosque or synagogue. Spend your afternoons on your knees, sacrifice a chicken, refuse to eat beef, chant with a string of beads, kneel on mat and pray facing a certain direction, only eat food that has been prayed over, whatever!

But the problem is that some religions CAN'T stop there and, by their "calling" so they claim, feel the need to thrust their religion upon everyone else via the public schools, public court system, attempting to pass laws governing strangers bodies, etc.

If everyone just kept to themselves and didn't try to force others to conform to there way of thinking, things would be so much nicer.

[luns101]

Since a belief in God shouldn't be what repulses you about Christians, what is it?

I think vtmarik's post probably summed up my feelings the best.

[Arbustos]

But the problem is that some religions CAN'T stop there and, by their "calling" so they claim, feel the need to thrust their religion upon everyone else via the public schools, public court system, attempting to pass laws governing strangers bodies, etc.

If everyone just kept to themselves and didn't try to force others to conform to there way of thinking, things would be so much nicer.

By some religions, do you mean most? (Or at least the ones that have been an integral part of a nation's development.) The ingrained nature of Christianity in our society is unavoidable... I'm not saying that's a good thing, but you claiming such an integration is being forced is ludicrous. The vast right-wing conspiracy, right?



I'm not saying Christian groups don't push legislation, but so do other factions. You obviously still have a problem with the ultra-evangelicals, and that's understandable (so do I), but their actions shouldn't lead you to generalize all Christians as annoying...

And no way in hell are people going to stop pushing their ideas on other humans... you know that, I know that, so why even post it?

P.S. I'm a liberal agnostic, so don't take me for some crazy Bible-thumper.

[Arbustos]

Since a belief in God shouldn't be what repulses you about Christians, what is it?

I think vtmarik's post probably summed up my feelings the best.

Which one? I'm too busy to look it up.

[luns101]

If everyone just kept to themselves and didn't try to force others to conform to there way of thinking, things would be so much nicer.

Not really...there wouldn't be as much fun tailgating at football games while arguing about who's #1.

[luns101]

Since a belief in God shouldn't be what repulses you about Christians, what is it?

I think vtmarik's post probably summed up my feelings the best.

Which one? I'm too busy to look it up.

Page 10, I think the 8th one down. I'll expand on my feelings a little bit. It really doesn't bother me if someone doesn't believe in God. The guy who referred me to this website (Leatnic) is one of my best friends and an atheist.

What does bother me is when Backglass, despite the fact that he's a funny guy, constantly ridicules those who do put their faith in God. He ascribes motivations for that faith as trying to force others to convert. How does he (or others) know this? His inference that we believe in magic creatures is a round-about way of saying that we are unable to distinguish between the lines of reality and fantasy. I think that also shows that he is arguing from a position of self-righteousness that he projects onto Christians. I like the guy but I wish he could answer CrazyAnglican's posts for once.

[Arbustos]

OK, I agree with you.

[Backglass]

He ascribes motivations

Your honor, I have NEVER ascribed! I swear it!

for that faith as trying to force others to convert. How does he (or others) know this?

It came to me in a grilled cheese sandwich, but I digress. Inst this the purpose of all the aforementioned public displays? To "get the good word out" and save a few souls? If not to convert...why the fuss? Why the fight? Why the public necessity? If what you believe is true then it doesn't matter if MY kids pray in school or I see the 10 Commandments in the town square. YOU and YOUR family are still "going to a better place" anyway...right? It IS all about recruitment. We can't have those pesky Muslims out number us after all!

His inference that we believe in magic creatures is a round-about way of saying that we are unable to distinguish between the lines of reality and fantasy.

This will come across as harsh I am sure but if, as an adult, you honestly in your heart of hearts believe there are gods in the clouds who know our every move, winged angels delivering messages to earthlings, men parting ocean waters and that two of every living creature on the planet were collected and transported on a wooden boat then YES. You have a hard time distinguishing what is reality and what is fantasy. These ancient stories and hundreds more like them are just that. Stories. Good ones intended to teach a particular way of living, but stories nonetheless.

I think that also shows that he is arguing from a position of self-righteousness that he projects onto Christians. I like the guy but I wish he could answer CrazyAnglican's posts for once.

I disagree. If you look at a crack addict and say "I think your an idiot for doing that, but it's your life", are you coming from a position of self righteousness? The difference is I am not trying to change your religious views, as silly as I think they may be. But the annoying group we are discussing in this thread, the ones who constantly push their beliefs into the previously mentioned arenas ARE.

And thats not you Luns. You are more level headed...I know that.

[UnderSeage]

Actually the jews are the most annoying

[muy_thaiguy]

Actually the jews are the most annoying

I'm just waiting for Aegnor to see this.

[Fircoal]

All religion is annoying. nothing but problems.

[muy_thaiguy]

All religion is annoying. nothing but problems.

Now THAT is quite a generalization there.

[Fircoal]

All religion is annoying. nothing but problems.

Now THAT is quite a generalization there.

a very truth one though.

[CrazyAnglican]

*watches intensely as a brawl might be about to occure*

Yep, I'm just waiting for someone to say "Here, hold my beer"

[muy_thaiguy]

All religion is annoying. nothing but problems.

Now THAT is quite a generalization there.

a very truth one though.

But would you care to explain it though?

[muy_thaiguy]

*watches intensely as a brawl might be about to occure*

Yep, I'm just waiting for someone to say "Here, hold my beer"

No beer, but, you wanna hold my Pepsi?