Why is it okay for missionaries to lie?

[HoreTore]

Doesn't their bible say it's wrong to do so?

Almost every missionary report I've read contains accounts of how their god has healed people. Blind people ciuld see again, cancer withdrawing, and even raising people from the dead (http://www.midnightministries.org.uk/raised_1.htm).

Almost all of these stories come from africa or some isolated community somwhere in the himalayas, the amazon, etc. Needless to say, they can never be confirmed from other sources. And how could they? Raising people from the dead is, unless you're some mad professor with a doomsday machine, quite impossible...

What is the purpose of these gigantic lies? Where is the morality of the people who manufacture and spread them? Why on earth would any sane person believe them?

And why doesn't other missionaries speak out against this nonsense? Are there no sane missionaries, or are they all lying bastards?

[Centurion1]

Doesn't their bible say it's wrong to do so?

Almost every missionary report I've read contains accounts of how their god has healed people. Blind people ciuld see again, cancer withdrawing, and even raising people from the dead (http://www.midnightministries.org.uk/raised_1.htm).

Almost all of these stories come from africa or some isolated community somwhere in the himalayas, the amazon, etc. Needless to say, they can never be confirmed from other sources. And how could they? Raising people from the dead is, unless you're some mad professor with a doomsday machine, quite impossible...

What is the purpose of these gigantic lies? Where is the morality of the people who manufacture and spread them? Why on earth would any sane person believe them?

And why doesn't other missionaries speak out against this nonsense? Are there no sane missionaries, or are they all lying bastards?

Do you think that communism promotes and creates economic growth?

[HoreTore]

Do you think that communism promotes and creates economic growth?

Um, what?

If you're talking about soviet-style communism, nah. And that might explain why people who define themselves as communist rarely speak about economic growth, they are in other because of other things.(equality, hippestuff, etc). But then again, the USSR did have a very high growth rate in the years after ww2 - the consensus among histories seems to be that it represented "the height" of mass production, but that it proved completely incapable of adjusting to a changing world, which the market manages to do wonderfully.

If you're talking about China, well... It's a rather undeniable fact that China has had a growth rate of about 10% per year over the last decade or so. Whether that represents "communism" is quite debatable.

But what does that have to do with missionaries blatantly lying abiut raising the dead? The bible is quite clear about lying being a sin you know... And communism of course does not have a ban on lies ~;)

[Major Robert Dump]

I think some of them genuinely believe what they are saying

Others justify the means by the ends

And others are just doing it for money. Watch an American television ministry sometime, and you will be shocked. In statements carefully crafted by their lawyers, they outright claim that if you send them money you will be healed, riches will be bestowed on you, opportunities will arise and new doors will open, and they even suggest that the level of blessing correlates to the amount of money. Seriously, on TV. And apparently, it's prefectly legal.

My birth mom was into those shows and she was psycho religious. She would send the rent money to the 700 Club and then act surprised when we got evicted.

[Centurion1]

Um, what?

If you're talking about soviet-style communism, nah. And that might explain why people who define themselves as communist rarely speak about economic growth, they are in other because of other things.(equality, hippestuff, etc). But then again, the USSR did have a very high growth rate in the years after ww2 - the consensus among histories seems to be that it represented "the height" of mass production, but that it proved completely incapable of adjusting to a changing world, which the market manages to do wonderfully.

If you're talking about China, well... It's a rather undeniable fact that China has had a growth rate of about 10% per year over the last decade or so. Whether that represents "communism" is quite debatable.

But what does that have to do with missionaries blatantly lying abiut raising the dead? The bible is quite clear about lying being a sin you know... And communism of course does not have a ban on lies ~;)

Because in the eyes of theoretical economics communism is a blatant enemy of the guiding principles of economic growth. Are you blatantly lying through your teeth? My econ book is pretty clear certain conditions should be present to encourage economic growth you know.

So
A. Maybe they aren't lying.

B. Maybe they think it is a miracle. There have been plenty of verified cases in the west of "miracles" that have happened that are then explained easily using western medicine and very expensive machines. For some reason I doubt that MRI and X ray machines are floating around the bush.

Just because YOU have no faith and don't believe in a God doesn't mean he isn't real. Hell, I felt self obsessed just writing that.

[HoreTore]

I get the God Channel here - it's quite fun to watch actually.

But the ones who honestly believe it - how is it possible to do so? Religious insanity, or what?

As for those who believe the end justifies the means - how do they manage to circumvent a rather direct commandment from their god so easily?

[Kralizec]

My birth mom was into those shows and she was psycho religious. She would send the rent money to the 700 Club and then act surprised when we got evicted.

Wow, that's...messed up.

[HoreTore]

Because in the eyes of theoretical economics communism is a blatant enemy of the guiding principles of economic growth. Are you blatantly lying through your teeth? My econ book is pretty clear certain conditions should be present to encourage economic growth you know.

So
A. Maybe they aren't lying.

B. Maybe they think it is a miracle. There have been plenty of verified cases in the west of "miracles" that have happened that are then explained easily using western medicine and very expensive machines. For some reason I doubt that MRI and X ray machines are floating around the bush.

Just because YOU have no faith and don't believe in a God doesn't mean he isn't real. Hell, I felt self obsessed just writing that.

I would be blatantly lying if I said the USSR was the best system ever for creating economic growth. But as it happens, I don't. And seeing as I'm not a communist or favour a planned economy, why on earth would I? Both the USSR and China have, however, had two periods of very high growth. The USSR in the post-war years(until late 60's/early 70's), and China has its period now. Now, if your economy books deny that, then who's the one lying? But can that be attributed to a planned economy alone, or even at all? Doubtful in the USSR case, highly unlikely with China.

And for crying out loud - of course they're lying. A baby dead for two weeks, raised from the dead. That cannot happen, and so the tale is an obvious lie. And I bet they know it. I mean, these people are trying to convert people by performing "miracles". If they had actually managed to raise someone from the dead through the power of god, what would they do? Contact every newspaper in the world to spread the story, that's what. Not hide it away in their organizations newspaper where noone will read it and noone gets saved... So, the reason why they haven't gone to mainstream media with their story is very sinple - they know they've just made it all up.

[Kralizec]

B. Maybe they think it is a miracle. There have been plenty of verified cases in the west of "miracles" that have happened that are then explained easily using western medicine and very expensive machines. For some reason I doubt that MRI and X ray machines are floating around the bush.

Sorry, but even if this is true for some cases it's still a lame excuse. Just because you don't know of a rational explanation for something (or worse: the scientific community doesn't know of one yet) doesn't mean it's okay to assume it's divine intervention. That smells of confirmation bias.

[Papewaio]

Hypochondria, kleptomania and over diseases of the mind are around.

Would you hold the victim of a mental illness responsible for their acts?

Btw I'm not saying all missionaries have a mental illness. But some of them will crack like anyone isolated and exposed to culture shock and the euphoria of travel.

For instance are holiday romances lies because they happen under exotic locations?

I'll think you'll find when people go on holidays on ships, resorts and hotels they operate under a different set of responses then normal.

Some will believe the one night stand at the resort is the start of a life time adventure.

Self delusion exists, we lie to ourselves everyday. It's a problem where it leads to harm. Just look at the rise of obesity it's just one example of the consequences of daily small denials.

[HoreTore]

Hypochondria, kleptomania and over diseases of the mind are around.

Would you hold the victim of a mental illness responsible for their acts?

I'm not proposing to burn them at the stake, am I?

I'm interested in their motivations, not punishment...

[Major Robert Dump]

I'm interested in punishment

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Doesn't their bible say it's wrong to do so?

Almost every missionary report I've read contains accounts of how their god has healed people. Blind people ciuld see again, cancer withdrawing, and even raising people from the dead (http://www.midnightministries.org.uk/raised_1.htm).

Almost all of these stories come from africa or some isolated community somwhere in the himalayas, the amazon, etc. Needless to say, they can never be confirmed from other sources. And how could they? Raising people from the dead is, unless you're some mad professor with a doomsday machine, quite impossible...

What is the purpose of these gigantic lies? Where is the morality of the people who manufacture and spread them? Why on earth would any sane person believe them?

And why doesn't other missionaries speak out against this nonsense? Are there no sane missionaries, or are they all lying bastards?

Well - there are two possibilities, given that the boy is alive, he either wasn't dead or he was and then he wasn't.

Are some miracles manufactured? Yes, certainly, there are documented cases of fraud. However, just because you do not believe something does not mean it is not true.

I have seen some weird stuff, including a guy apparently reclining backwards 30 degrees from the ground supported on nothing but air. I have had a "faith" healer lay his hands on me and straigten my shoulders, which were crocked. I do not say God did these things, he did not say God did these things, but I do say they happened.

Now - prove these missionaries are lying, they could just be mistaken.

[HoreTore]

There are many thousands of missionaries out on actual missions at any given time. I'm sure most of them are more interested in doing good works and trying to impart their morality than in fabricating claims of miracles. There are always bad apples, though.

Then why are none of them speaking out against it?

And I don't know about the US, but the major Norwegian missionary organizations are all "pro-miracle", including such things as raising the dead. So for me, it's a fair assumption that the majority are involved with fabricating and spreading lies.

[HoreTore]

Well - there are two possibilities, given that the boy is alive, he either wasn't dead or he was and then he wasn't.

Are some miracles manufactured? Yes, certainly, there are documented cases of fraud. However, just because you do not believe something does not mean it is not true.

I have seen some weird stuff, including a guy apparently reclining backwards 30 degrees from the ground supported on nothing but air. I have had a "faith" healer lay his hands on me and straigten my shoulders, which were crocked. I do not say God did these things, he did not say God did these things, but I do say they happened.

Now - prove these missionaries are lying, they could just be mistaken.

I do believe I already have - if they were telling the truth, they would've contacted mainstream media. They do not, so it's obvious that they know its a fake.

I mean, why on earth would an organization focused on saving millions keep quiet about an event which could potentially save millions? There's no logic in that, hence it's a lie.

And do I really have to point out that there is zero evidence of said boy ever existing? It should be quite obvious that he too is a fabrication.

[HoreTore]

For all I know they are speaking out against it. I don't spend a whole lot of time in the missionary information loop, so to speak. Do you?

I read the three major norwegian christian newspapers(Norge IDAG, Vårt Land and Dagen) regularly, so yeah. Never seen it mentioned.

(they're a never-ending source of epic lols and facepalms, I love 'em!)

[Papewaio]

Motivation is simple.

Scientist or Shepard we are a race of storytellers.

We love to be part of stories be they novel, dance, games or social media including this very forum.

[HoreTore]

Motivation is simple.

Scientist or Shepard we are a race of storytellers.

We love to be part of stories be they novel, dance, games or social media including this very forum.

I can accept that.

However, christianity is rather big on the no-lies thing, and that explanation alone doesn't explain why they so easily circumvent a major thingy in their religion... Especially since the people we are talking about here have above-average knowledge and fanaticism...

[Centurion1]

I can accept that.

However, christianity is rather big on the no-lies thing, and that explanation alone doesn't explain why they so easily circumvent a major thingy in their religion... Especially since the people we are talking about here have above-average knowledge and fanaticism...

We rely once again on the fact that your entire premise is based around the idea that they are lying. Can you prove they are? Is it impossible that it happened? When you can prove the non existence of God then you can prove miracles dont exist. I understand you think you know everything and are a shining beacon of truth and justice in the world but you aren't. You don't know everything and I hope maybe when your older you realize that.

[Montmorency]

But can that be attributed to a planned economy alone, or even at all? Doubtful in the USSR case, highly unlikely with China.

China's economy is half investment, much of it by the state...


Is it impossible that it happened? When you can prove the non existence of God then you can prove miracles dont exist.

However, just because you do not believe something does not mean it is not true.

Why should we believe it?

It is you who must prove the validity of these claims to us. In the meantime, presumption of falsity is best.


Now - prove these missionaries are lying, they could just be mistaken.

The latter is fine.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Have I been doing that position all wrong for the past 3 years?

[HoreTore]

We rely once again on the fact that your entire premise is based around the idea that they are lying. Can you prove they are? Is it impossible that it happened? When you can prove the non existence of God then you can prove miracles dont exist. I understand you think you know everything and are a shining beacon of truth and justice in the world but you aren't. You don't know everything and I hope maybe when your older you realize that.

They claim they have raised the dead. That cannot happen under any circumstances whatsoever. Hence, lie.

As for me "claiming I know everything", well that's just sillyness. Knowing that dead people are dead people does NOT equal "claiming to know everything".

[Major Robert Dump]

Have I been doing that position all wrong for the past 3 years?

Blow up dolls don't count

[a completely inoffensive name]

Blow up dolls don't count

They are called "internally pressurized, anatomically simulated, sexual stimulators", dad. And she has a name.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I do believe I already have - if they were telling the truth, they would've contacted mainstream media. They do not, so it's obvious that they know its a fake.

I mean, why on earth would an organization focused on saving millions keep quiet about an event which could potentially save millions? There's no logic in that, hence it's a lie.

And do I really have to point out that there is zero evidence of said boy ever existing? It should be quite obvious that he too is a fabrication.

You looked it up on the Nigerian census?

Read the report - the "Native" doctor declared the boy dead. The witchdoctor said the boy was dead, the parents took him to the mission and after three days he woke up.

Who is the pastor holding in the photograph? His own son?

THINK critically, there is no evidence of fabrication - what there is, is evidence that the locals are medically ignorant.

As to the why, these things happen all the time in Africa, they used to happen all the time in Europe too - the reason you used to have a Vigil with an open casket is because you couldn't necessarily be sure the man was dead. More recently you had bells atached to caskets and Swedish enbalmers used to drive a knife straight into the artery to make sure they were dead.

[Strike For The South]

Have I been doing that position all wrong for the past 3 years?

You haven't been doing this position. This position requires a human female

[a completely inoffensive name]

You haven't been doing this position. This position requires a human female

ur late to the party with that one. lurk moar.

[HoreTore]

You looked it up on the Nigerian census?

Read the report - the "Native" doctor declared the boy dead. The witchdoctor said the boy was dead, the parents took him to the mission and after three days he woke up.

Who is the pastor holding in the photograph? His own son?

THINK critically, there is no evidence of fabrication - what there is, is evidence that the locals are medically ignorant.

As to the why, these things happen all the time in Africa, they used to happen all the time in Europe too - the reason you used to have a Vigil with an open casket is because you couldn't necessarily be sure the man was dead. More recently you had bells atached to caskets and Swedish enbalmers used to drive a knife straight into the artery to make sure they were dead.

What we have is this:
1. One obvious and big lie(raising the dead).
2. No other sources. At all. The only mention of this incident is on that webpage. None of the names of the involved give any results on google.
3. But we know of several similar stories. Very similar in fact, the biggest difference between them is the names of the involved.

Add them all together, and we have a certain fabrication. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to think otherwise.

The "night of the living dead"-type stories are one of my absolute favourite fabrications though. A close tie with the story about the doctor(usually anonymous, sometimes given a generic name like J. Smith) who measured a soul leaving the body of someone dying "scientifically".

Edit: and if your "ignorant blacks"-theory was correct, it would still be a lie, since the missionaries would know what really happened, but instead chose to spread the lie about raising the dead.

[Strike For The South]

I love you HoreTore, I really do.

[Montmorency]

What he's saying is that sometimes people end up in a comatose state with very weak vitals, and can be mistakenly declared dead while in such a state; if and when they recover - especially if it's while in a morgue - it appears as though that individual has "returned from the dead".

As in, without explicit intent to deceive - when it's this sort of situation, at least.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

What we have is this:
1. One obvious and big lie(raising the dead).
2. No other sources. At all. The only mention of this incident is on that webpage. None of the names of the involved give any results on google.
3. But we know of several similar stories. Very similar in fact, the biggest difference between them is the names of the involved.

Add them all together, and we have a certain fabrication. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to think otherwise.

The "night of the living dead"-type stories are one of my absolute favourite fabrications though. A close tie with the story about the doctor(usually anonymous, sometimes given a generic name like J. Smith) who measured a soul leaving the body of someone dying "scientifically".

Edit: and if your "ignorant blacks"-theory was correct, it would still be a lie, since the missionaries would know what really happened, but instead chose to spread the lie about raising the dead.

It's just that they're religious, so you assume they're evil rather than just wrong.

You also believe I'm evil, or at least practicing cognative dissonance, because you cannot concieve of how a rational human being could come to believe in miracles.

That's the kind of person you are - but you are wrong to assume everyone's brain works as yours does.


What he's saying is that sometimes people end up in a comatose state with very weak vitals, and can be mistakenly declared dead while in such a state; if and when they recover - especially if it's while in a morgue - it appears as though that individual has "returned from the dead".

As in, without explicit intent to deceive - when it's this sort of situation, at least.

Nice to know I'm not writing Hittite.

[HoreTore]

What he's saying is that sometimes people end up in a comatose state with very weak vitals, and can be mistakenly declared dead while in such a state; if and when they recover - especially if it's while in a morgue - it appears as though that individual has "returned from the dead".

As in, without explicit intent to deceive - when it's this sort of situation, at least.

So, that brings the missionaries up from "lying cheats" to "ignorant idiots". Assuming, of course, that they have no clue as to what's going on and turn to god to explain what they are too dumb to do(as well as being too dumb to seek help).

Now, I do not have educational statistics on western missionaries, but my impression is that they range from educated to very educated. Not ignorant. And their backers, the ones who read their reports, certainly contain a fair amount of highly educated people, including medical staff. And yet, knowing the truth, they still choose to spread the obvious lies.

Sorry, I'm sticking with "lying cheats" over "ignorant idiots".

[HoreTore]

It's just that they're religious, so you assume they're evil rather than just wrong.

You also believe I'm evil, or at least practicing cognative dissonance, because you cannot concieve of how a rational human being could come to believe in miracles.

Evil? I created this thread because I'm having trouble finding an explanation for this behaviour. And for the record, "evil" isn't one of my assumptions, try "con artist" instead. Or "blinded by faith". As for me thinking you're "evil", that's just silly.

I haven't commented on your "miracle"(or whatever it was), have I? I have noted that you don't believe they raised the dead, and as such you don't believe anything I would call absurd. The "smaller miracles" are quite different to the outrageous ones like raising the dead. The motivations of those believing in one but not the other is obviously quite different to the ones believing god raises the dead.

And finally, my mother is quite the New Age-woman, and while I do not believe what she does, I don't view her negatively. Just like I don't view you negatively for your faith, Philipvs.

[Centurion1]

Your somewhat slow witted and dull aren't you my boy. Must be all that snow. Even your Gods were simple beings... just because you can't accept something and think its all a big lie doesn't mean it is. Nor does it mean that for believing it they must be ignorant buffons or liars. If anyone is being simpleminded its you for having such a closeted narrow view of the world and your fellow man.

[HoreTore]

Your somewhat slow witted and dull aren't you my boy. Must be all that snow. Even your Gods were simple beings... just because you can't accept something and think its all a big lie doesn't mean it is. Nor does it mean that for believing it they must be ignorant buffons or liars. If anyone is being simpleminded its you for having such a closeted narrow view of the world and your fellow man.

I'm a little confused here....

Are you suggesting that it's possible for people to be raised from the dead?

Edit: and please, do look over your post before you submit it. When you include so many derogative terms about me, it gets quite hard to grasp your actual point.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I'm a little confused here....

Are you suggesting that it's possible for people to be raised from the dead?

Edit: and please, do look over your post before you submit it. When you include so many derogative terms about me, it gets quite hard to grasp your actual point.

It is definitely possible for people to be raised from the dead. Why would you suggest that this is not possible? I think it will become likely as we continue to attain more knowledge of how the body works. Quite a few things are permanent, until they are made temporary.

[Major Robert Dump]

How come everytime someone brings up negatives about Nigeria, someone brings black people into the issue? I bet none of you here have ever even been to Nigeria. There's whites and asians all over the place there, not to mention a rich Chinese Amish community and a Peurto Rican slum.

[Greyblades]

As for me thinking you're "evil", that's just silly.

He's not? Crap, Once again I bought a DIY Exorcism kit for nothing.

[Fragony]

He's not? Crap, Once again I bought a DIY Exorcism kit for nothing.

Heh, back in school we used to give presents to eachother at 'Sinterklaas', our version of Santa Claus. Sounds the same? Yes it does. Anyway, names go on ballot, and out of everyone I got my religion teacher. So I bought him a hammer and some nails and called it a stigmata-kit. I have no idea why but he knew it was me

[Ironside]

It is definitely possible for people to be raised from the dead. Why would you suggest that this is not possible? I think it will become likely as we continue to attain more knowledge of how the body works. Quite a few things are permanent, until they are made temporary.

Negative. Death is to be the point of no return. This point is not a constant, nor a point, but a variying sliding scale, making some people seemingly to be brought back to life.

Well I assume if you can revive someone with severe body degradation, it could be called raised from the dead. Restoring the degradation would fall under ressurection.

For the topic at hand. I'm guessing social pressure. For that missionary, telling the truth would be worse than the lie (and with some after-rationalisation, was it really a lie? Wasn't just a more subtile miracle?). For God, he's an understanding God, of course he can see and forgive you for the sin of lying in this exceptional case.

[HoreTore]

For the topic at hand. I'm guessing social pressure. For that missionary, telling the truth would be worse than the lie (and with some after-rationalination, was it really a lie? Wasn't just a more subtile miracle?). For God, he's an understanding God, of course he can see and forgive you for the sin of lying in this exceptional case.

I can buy that.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Evil? I created this thread because I'm having trouble finding an explanation for this behaviour. And for the record, "evil" isn't one of my assumptions, try "con artist" instead. Or "blinded by faith". As for me thinking you're "evil", that's just silly.

I haven't commented on your "miracle"(or whatever it was), have I? I have noted that you don't believe they raised the dead, and as such you don't believe anything I would call absurd. The "smaller miracles" are quite different to the outrageous ones like raising the dead. The motivations of those believing in one but not the other is obviously quite different to the ones believing god raises the dead.

And finally, my mother is quite the New Age-woman, and while I do not believe what she does, I don't view her negatively. Just like I don't view you negatively for your faith, Philipvs.

I'm sorry - I don't really buy it. The way you talk about religious people indicates a great deal of loathing. Not that that measn you're lying to me, you could just as easily be lying to yourself.

Never assume malice when stupidity is a simpler explanation, but you always seem to anyway.

[Sarmatian]

That's just because religious people believe in God. If it weren't for that, I'd be totally ok with religious people.

Unless they believe in Thor. Thor's cool and then it's okay.

[HoreTore]

I'm sorry - I don't really buy it. The way you talk about religious people indicates a great deal of loathing. Not that that measn you're lying to me, you could just as easily be lying to yourself.

Never assume malice when stupidity is a simpler explanation, but you always seem to anyway.

There's not much for me to say to that, really.

Anyway, you seem to be under the impression that I regard "lying cheats" as a bad/evil. I don't. I don't have I holy book saying that lying is bad. Saying the missionaries are lying cheats is not a moral judgement that they're bad people. Instead, I am much more interested in knowing what motivates them to lie, and how they rationalize their lie with their supposed gods damnation of such acts.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

There's not much for me to say to that, really.

Anyway, you seem to be under the impression that I regard "lying cheats" as a bad/evil. I don't. I don't have I holy book saying that lying is bad. Saying the missionaries are lying cheats is not a moral judgement that they're bad people. Instead, I am much more interested in knowing what motivates them to lie, and how they rationalize their lie with their supposed gods damnation of such acts.


You are making an assumption of dishonesty, and how can dishonesty not be negative?

You default to the negative judgement about religions and religious people, always.

[HoreTore]

You are making an assumption of dishonesty, and how can dishonesty not be negative?

Whether it's positive, negative or neutral to lie(or "be dishonest" if you prefer) is based on the context. In this context, I'd say it's neutral and more of an interesting feature than good or bad.


You default to the negative judgement about religions and religious people, always.

I see no reason to respond to this statement.

[ajaxfetish]

Your problem, HoreTore, is that you're equating credulousness with stupidity (or perhaps ignorance would be more accurate). On one level, that's fine; you're welcome to think that someone must be daft to believe in something without satisfactory evidence. But on another level, it's simply wrong. Very intelligent people can end up believing in things without evidence, whether it be religion, the benefits of organic produce, some of the more questionable claims regarding climate science, or whatever. The point is, a person doesn't have to be stupid to be irrational.

Yet you're relying on the (false) premise that only stupid people can believe in irrational things. Your argument seems to be: believing these miracles occurred is irrational, western missionaries are not all stupid, only stupid people can believe in irrational things, therefore, the missionaries do not believe these miracles occurred. Then from that, you further deduce that the missionaries must be lying, and since the very religion they espouse is opposed to lying, you find yourself stuck with a paradox: how can people opposed to lying lie so cheerfully? But the whole problem goes back to that one incorrect premise.

Ajax

[classical_hero]

Doesn't their bible say it's wrong to do so?

Almost every missionary report I've read contains accounts of how their god has healed people. Blind people ciuld see again, cancer withdrawing, and even raising people from the dead (http://www.midnightministries.org.uk/raised_1.htm).

Almost all of these stories come from africa or some isolated community somwhere in the himalayas, the amazon, etc. Needless to say, they can never be confirmed from other sources. And how could they? Raising people from the dead is, unless you're some mad professor with a doomsday machine, quite impossible...

What is the purpose of these gigantic lies? Where is the morality of the people who manufacture and spread them? Why on earth would any sane person believe them?

And why doesn't other missionaries speak out against this nonsense? Are there no sane missionaries, or are they all lying bastards?

You seem to be talking about "faith" healers. They are charlatan the lot of them.

A lot of things that happen in Africa is basically adding "Christianity" to traditional religions of the region, to make them sound like they are, but it has nothing to do with Christianity.

[HoreTore]

Your problem, HoreTore, is that you're equating credulousness with stupidity (or perhaps ignorance would be more accurate). On one level, that's fine; you're welcome to think that someone must be daft to believe in something without satisfactory evidence. But on another level, it's simply wrong. Very intelligent people can end up believing in things without evidence, whether it be religion, the benefits of organic produce, some of the more questionable claims regarding climate science, or whatever. The point is, a person doesn't have to be stupid to be irrational.

Yet you're relying on the (false) premise that only stupid people can believe in irrational things. Your argument seems to be: believing these miracles occurred is irrational, western missionaries are not all stupid, only stupid people can believe in irrational things, therefore, the missionaries do not believe these miracles occurred. Then from that, you further deduce that the missionaries must be lying, and since the very religion they espouse is opposed to lying, you find yourself stuck with a paradox: how can people opposed to lying lie so cheerfully? But the whole problem goes back to that one incorrect premise.

Ajax

Very good post.

So, then the question becomes: how can a medial proffessional discard everything he knows about medicine and "jump on the miracle bandwagon", so to speak?

How fully functional, sane and intelligent people can believe the most absurd things(raising the dead, ET rectal exams, enlightened masters living under the himalayas, etc) is a question that has puzzled me for a very long time.

[HoreTore]

There's a problem with your post though, ajax.

I don't think just the miracle part isn't true. I think its more likely than not that the entire story is a fabrication. Why? Two things(I've already explained the first, but I'll repeat it):

1. Imagine you're a missionary. Of the kind that believes that the way to get people to believe, and thus be saved, is to have them see miracles performed. Then, you see an incident which you for some reason(see the discussion above) take as a miracle. Not just a regular one either, god has raised someone from the dead! What would you do about it? Of course the only logical answer is "spread the story to as many people as possible". After all, not doing so would condemn people to hell, and you've made it your lifes mission to prevent that. But has this happened in this alleged case? Nope. The only mention of it is on their own website. One would assume that if such an event had taken place, the boy raised from the dead would've been a poster boy for gods work on earth. But we have no knowledge of him, he has not been used in that way.

2. This story (http://www.midnightministries.org.uk/mc/mc12.htm) is one I have seen before. With slight modifications. It was printed in the newspaper Norge IDAG (http://www.idag.no). It was translated, of course, but that wasn't all. Instead of being raised from the dead, the norwegian version only had her cured from some disease that made her paralyzed(can't remember what it was though). So, for both stories to be true, two nuns living in New South Wales were both visited by a couple in the 50's. Both had been miraculously cured 30 years ago, and their healing had been written in a book, which both couples happened to have with them. They also chose to reveal that it was them the book was about in the same way. The likelyhood of that being true is incredibly low, of course. Thus, we must conclude that one or both stories is a fabrication. I'd say it's most likely both are fabrications. As we now know that this organization has tried to pass fabrications off as truth, this ultimately improves the likelyhood of their other stories to be complete fabrications as well.

So in conclusion: in all likelyhood, the entire story is a complete fabrication.



Which again leads to the question of why they choose to lie when lying is forbidden by their religion.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

So you have one fake - does this story have copies?

And anyway, who said it was OK?

[Fragony]

It's stupid but you only care because it is stupidity that is non-islam, you would be walking on eggs if it wasn't, out of respect. You have respect. You would probably use this as an example that other religions suck as well.

[HoreTore]

And anyway, who said it was OK?

So far, I believe I'm the only one.

[rory_20_uk]

The previous Pope is going through to Sainthood at a rate of knots with a similar amount of "and he appeared to me in a dream, and now I feel better" as cast-iron evidence of a miracle.

Religion is a product. Missionaries are the sales force. You sell by providing what people want. The Catholic Church has set up new orders of Monks when the existing lot became too rich / corrupt for the poor, they slaughtered opposition and they preach poverty and humility whilst accruing wealth and power.

Constantine whose Christianity as it would forgive him whereas other religions refused. Many were converted in the Dark Ages ashaving a powerful God on one's side was a good idea. One Germanic tribe converted after the Missionary cut down Wodin's sacred tree and nothing happened which apparently was sufficient proof.

The Crusades? Leaving aside the murder and pillaging of whoever was in the way, be they Christian or other, there were more events of relics appearing at convenient times..

On the back of this I am frankly incredulous that you ask the question of whether Missionaries can lie. Why would they stop now?

~:smoking:

[ajaxfetish]

There's a problem with your post though, ajax.

I don't think just the miracle part isn't true. I think its more likely than not that the entire story is a fabrication.

I suspect you're right that these sort of stories usually start as the fabrications of charlatans, but the people who make them up and the people disseminating them may be quite distinct. Just because somebody else lies and a missionary (perhaps foolishly) believes them, doesn't mean the missionary is also lying. And I think it's probably an aspect of human nature that we tend to be less critical of things we hear that agree with the beliefs we already have. If you believe miracles are possible, and you're trying to convince others of this, and you hear a story of a bona-fide miracle that a friend of a friend of a friend witnessed, it's all too easy to just accept it at face value, since it seems to lend support to what you believed in the first place. On the other hand, if many respectable scientists collect a mountain of evidence in favor of natural selection, and that same person believes deeply that this is in conflict with their faith in God, then they may spend tons of effort trying to debunk the rational, well-sourced claims, in spite of credulously accepting the irrational, poorly-sourced miracle.

As to why the charlatans would fabricate the story in the first place, well, not all Christians, or people who proclaim to be Christians, walk the walk, so to speak. I'd expect these folks are more concerned with self-promotion than with being good Christians. The religion is probably more of a convenient medium to call for attention than an actually held belief (which may be true for some of the missionaries as well, though I suspect most are honest in their motives).

Ajax

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

So far, I believe I'm the only one.

Then may I suggest that the answer to your OP is "it isn't"?


The previous Pope is going through to Sainthood at a rate of knots with a similar amount of "and he appeared to me in a dream, and now I feel better" as cast-iron evidence of a miracle.

Religion is a product. Missionaries are the sales force. You sell by providing what people want. The Catholic Church has set up new orders of Monks when the existing lot became too rich / corrupt for the poor, they slaughtered opposition and they preach poverty and humility whilst accruing wealth and power.

Constantine whose Christianity as it would forgive him whereas other religions refused. Many were converted in the Dark Ages ashaving a powerful God on one's side was a good idea. One Germanic tribe converted after the Missionary cut down Wodin's sacred tree and nothing happened which apparently was sufficient proof.

The Crusades? Leaving aside the murder and pillaging of whoever was in the way, be they Christian or other, there were more events of relics appearing at convenient times..

On the back of this I am frankly incredulous that you ask the question of whether Missionaries can lie. Why would they stop now?

~:smoking:

Rory, where to you get this Bollocks, seriously?

Leaving aside your general point the specifics are - frankly - malicious falshoods at best.

Constantine did not convert to Christianity because "it would forgive him", nor did he abandon other Gods - such a concept as Monotheism was far too Alien too him.

Now, the Crusades are noted for the discrimination with which the Crusaders slew Muslims and sometimes Jews whilst leaving the Christians largely unmolested, especially during the sack of Jerusalem. The same Christian sources which note that the horses (shamefully) had to wade through blood and gore report that the Catholics protected the Orthodox Christians during the sacking.

You could dispute that, of course, but then you'd have to equally dispute the claimed acts of brutality.

[HoreTore]

Then may I suggest that the answer to your OP is "it isn't"

it's obvious that those who manufacture and spread such lies have no problem with it. Nor does the ones reading it, but who remain silent about it, have any problems.

Yet they have a commandment from their god which specifies that such activity is NOT okay. As they do it anyway, I'm interested in knowing why.

[Kralizec]

One Germanic tribe converted after the Missionary cut down Wodin's sacred tree and nothing happened which apparently was sufficient proof.

Bonifacius tried that with the Frysians. Before that he had converted some other tribes by cutting down sacred trees and other acts which were considered blasphemous by pagan standards, following Elijah's example. When he travelled to the pagan Frysians, he was ambushed and murdered - and they were only converted after Charlemagne conquered them all.

Allthough not exactly a considerate approach, you can't doubt the logic behind it. I've often wondered wether christians and muslims who vehemently protest against blasphemous or sacriligious acts do so out of an unconscious fear that Baal, Wodan and their friends are not the only false gods.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

it's obvious that those who manufacture and spread such lies have no problem with it. Nor does the ones reading it, but who remain silent about it, have any problems.

Yet they have a commandment from their god which specifies that such activity is NOT okay. As they do it anyway, I'm interested in knowing why.

The people who read it and have no problem with it most likely believe it.

The people who make it up aren't very good Christians, but as already noted, some of the stories (like the one about the African boy) are probably true, it's just that the boy was never actually dead.

Or... maybe he was.

I mean, come on, we're talking about a religion founded on the belief that you CAN do these things. What sort of Christians would we be if we didn't believe it was possible?

For the record - yes, I believe it is possible for God to raise someone from the dead, it must be if he is Omnipotent - but that's not going to be my first answer to a given question.

[HoreTore]

After reading "maybe he was", I can't be bothered anymore.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

After reading "maybe he was", I can't be bothered anymore.

A closed mind is a little-used one.

[Centurion1]

hore tores inability to accept certain facts, i.e. the possibility of an omnipotent God or even to allow it to be a used base for any sort of argument makes this entire argument moot and a waste of time.

[Major Robert Dump]

The problem with religion is that every time a religious text was written, The Man would step in and edit the hell out of it. How omnipotent is a god if The Man can thwart him? The Bible, the Koran, the Book of Mormon, Dienetics, 101 Tastey Spaghetti Recipes, and Buddhas Big Book of Happy... all of these I am sure were much better, with more tits and more liquor, before The Man came in with his scissors and giant eraser.

[Tuuvi]

The problem with religion is that every time a religious text was written, The Man would step in and edit the hell out of it. How omnipotent is a god if The Man can thwart him? The Bible, the Koran, the Book of Mormon, Dienetics, 101 Tastey Spaghetti Recipes, and Buddhas Big Book of Happy... all of these I am sure were much better, with more tits and more liquor, before The Man came in with his scissors and giant eraser.

The Book of Mormon was only edited to fix grammatical mistakes (I've looked at a reproduction of the first edition of the Book of Mormon and it had some Huckleberry Finn speech in it). At any rate the church publishing company has put out reproductions of the original Book of Mormon so it's not like they're worried about people making comparisons. Just sayin'.

[Ironside]

hore tores inability to accept certain facts, i.e. the possibility of an omnipotent God or even to allow it to be a used base for any sort of argument makes this entire argument moot and a waste of time.

Meh, last time someone got resurrected, he was God (in a way). So it's either more or less a lie or the second greatest thing ever happening in Christianity. If people doesn't treat it as the later, they suspect it's the former.


The Book of Mormon was only edited to fix grammatical mistakes (I've looked at a reproduction of the first edition of the Book of Mormon and it had some Huckleberry Finn speech in it). At any rate the church publishing company has put out reproductions of the original Book of Mormon so it's not like they're worried about people making comparisons. Just sayin'.

The Book of Mormon treats chunks of King James bible as original canon. Ergo, the first correct version according to Mormons, is considered a poor translation written about 1600 years after the fact, by the rest of the world.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Meh, last time someone got resurrected, he was God (in a way). So it's either more or less a lie or the second greatest thing ever happening in Christianity. If people doesn't treat it as the later, they suspect it's the former.

Christ is neither the first nor the last reported instance of razing from the dead. That doesn't make this story true, but it should place it within context. According to Christian theology you are supposed to be able to raise someone from the dead with sufficient faith.

Now, as has been noted, HoreTore refuses to accept the existence of any form of God, that's fine. what isn't fine is that he refuses to accept that anyone else accepts that.

Ergo, he assumes every "religious" person is practicing congnative dissonance in claiming to believe in God.

HoreTore, we aren't and the continued insinuation is irritating.

[HoreTore]

I think you should stop trying to figure out what other people may or may not insinuate, you aren't very good at it.

I do not believe that there is anything wrong with religious people at all. I do not in any way understand why a religious person believes, but I accept that they do withiut there being any negative aspects making them do so.


However.

Believing a bogus story about someone raised from the dead in a random village deep in Africa is something quite different than that. I'd rate it at the same level as Blavatsky.

[Fragony]

Christ is neither the first nor the last reported instance of razing from the dead. That doesn't make this story true, but it should place it within context. According to Christian theology you are supposed to be able to raise someone from the dead with sufficient faith.

Now, as has been noted, HoreTore refuses to accept the existence of any form of God, that's fine. what isn't fine is that he refuses to accept that anyone else accepts that.

Ergo, he assumes every "religious" person is practicing congnative dissonance in claiming to believe in God.

HoreTore, we aren't and the continued insinuation is irritating.

I am with the viking here, dispite him being very selective in his contempt for religion. I would probably be your perfect neighbour as long as you don't bring it up, live and let live thingie. Atheists are probably more intrusive nowadays than the religious, that much is probably true and it has a sadistic touch, but it is also kinda new. Something you should just deal with for the moment imho.

[HoreTore]

I am with the viking here, dispite him being very selective in his contempt for religion.

My feelings towards christians, muslims, buddhists, etc are all the same.

I do reserve a different treatment for those who cross the border into coocoo-land though, like Blavatksy, ariosophy or missionaries who say they raise the dead.

[Fragony]

My feelings towards christians, muslims, buddhists, etc are all the same.

Oh really, I'll just take your word for it. I can absolutely say they are for me, but I am less sure about you. Hope you don't mind.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I think you should stop trying to figure out what other people may or may not insinuate, you aren't very good at it.

I do not believe that there is anything wrong with religious people at all. I do not in any way understand why a religious person believes, but I accept that they do withiut there being any negative aspects making them do so.

I don't know, other seem to think I'm fairly good at reading people. Take another look at the topic you started - the one that assumes everyone repeating the story in the OP is either stupid or dishonest.

Hell, take a look at the question - the answer to which you have repeatedly been told "it isn't" and yet keep asking.


However.

Believing a bogus story about someone raised from the dead in a random village deep in Africa is something quite different than that. I'd rate it at the same level as Blavatsky.

What makes the story bogus?

I mean, what about the story other than someone being raised from the dead?

[Strike For The South]

The Book of Mormon was only edited to fix grammatical mistakes (I've looked at a reproduction of the first edition of the Book of Mormon and it had some Huckleberry Finn speech in it). At any rate the church publishing company has put out reproductions of the original Book of Mormon so it's not like they're worried about people making comparisons. Just sayin'.

May I borrow some underwear?

[HoreTore]

I don't know, other seem to think I'm fairly good at reading people. Take another look at the topic you started - the one that assumes everyone repeating the story in the OP is either stupid or dishonest.

I started the topic because I can't seem to figure out why they do it and how they justify their actions. The story is obviously fake, but that does not imply either stupidity or dishonesty, though they certainly seem to be strong suggestions. Other explanations can be hope(in that they really, really want it to be true) or social pressure, for example.


Hell, take a look at the question - the answer to which you have repeatedly been told "it isn't" and yet keep asking.

If the answer to "why is it okay to spread lies" is "it isn't", then we simply wouldn't see missionaries spread obvious lies. Yet they do it, so there must be some other answer. Note that your personal opinion isn't what I'm trying to figure out, I'm trying to figure out the opinions of the missionaries who spread the lies. I have no reason to believe you're one of them.


What makes the story bogus?

I mean, what about the story other than someone being raised from the dead?

Well, let me see.... Oh, yeah, they claim they raised someone from the dead. That's a start.

[Tuuvi]

Meh, last time someone got resurrected, he was God (in a way). So it's either more or less a lie or the second greatest thing ever happening in Christianity. If people doesn't treat it as the later, they suspect it's the former.



The Book of Mormon treats chunks of King James bible as original canon. Ergo, the first correct version according to Mormons, is considered a poor translation written about 1600 years after the fact, by the rest of the world.

The parts of the Old Testament that are in the Book of Mormon are said by the narrative to have been copied from scriptures the characters of the book took with them, and they don't follow the King James version word for word. As for the King James bible, it's considered to be a good enough translation, not a correct one.


May I borrow some underwear?

Sure. Do you like Hanes brand underwear? Because that's what I wear. And I hope you don't mind racing stripes.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Well, let me see.... Oh, yeah, they claim they raised someone from the dead. That's a start.

See - Christians are willing to believe that because we believe in an omnipotent God.

Why can't you just accept that and move on with your life?


You're either practicing deliberate hard headedness or you are just looking for "bad" religious people.

[HoreTore]

See - Christians are willing to believe that because we believe in an omnipotent God.

Why can't you just accept that and move on with your life?


You're either practicing deliberate hard headedness or you are just looking for "bad" religious people.

As I have already said, there are plenty of other reasons it's an obvious lie as well. I'll repeat two of them:

1. If it was true, the story would've been spread far harder, instead of being tucked away in small websites and organizational newsletters.
2. Other than their own testimony, there is nothing else supporting it. One witness account count for absolutely nothig when it comes to determine what is true.

And it's not like the majority of christians believe that god raises random people from the dead deep in Africa.

[Fragony]

See - Christians are willing to believe that because we believe in an omnipotent God.

Why can't you just accept that and move on with your life?


You're either practicing deliberate hard headedness or you are just looking for "bad" religious people.

All fine if you accept that we we don't, there is no special treatment for you so don't ask for any

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

As I have already said, there are plenty of other reasons it's an obvious lie as well. I'll repeat two of them:

1. If it was true, the story would've been spread far harder, instead of being tucked away in small websites and organizational newsletters.
2. Other than their own testimony, there is nothing else supporting it. One witness account count for absolutely nothig when it comes to determine what is true.

And it's not like the majority of christians believe that god raises random people from the dead deep in Africa.

1. Your own reaction gives the answer to this. Maybe they tried to publicise it and nobody listened, maybe they thought it wasn't being laughed at again.

2. And? That doesn't prove anything, other than the fact that there's only one missionary in an impoverished village.


All fine if you accept that we we don't, there is no special treatment for you so don't ask for any

I don't ask for special treatment - I do ask that people not question whether my beliefs are sincerely held or not. Like the time someone on this board diagnosed my religion as essentially baggage from a bad relationship.

[HoreTore]

1. Your own reaction gives the answer to this. Maybe they tried to publicise it and nobody listened, maybe they thought it wasn't being laughed at again.

So.... Not being laughed at is worse than not doing what your god has commanded you to(convert the masses)? I find it extremely hard to believe that someone who has pledged his life to spread the word of his god turns down an opportunity to convert thousands because there's a chance "he might get laughed at". No, there's zero logic in this. If that biy was raised from the dead, he would've spent the next years as a missionary poster boy, paraded around to spread the faith. No, this is an obviously fake story.


2. And? That doesn't prove anything, other than the fact that there's only one missionary in an impoverished village.

You're getting what needs to be proved all backwards. The one who is making the claim of course has the burden of proof. As there is nothing at all which suggest that this story is true, one must assume that it is false. If I claim that Hitler was an alien, I can't tell the ones who oppose my claim that they have to prove me wrong - I am of course the one who has to prove that Hitler was an alien.

I'm getting the feeling that you have thrown away your ability to think critically because you want to believe. Believing that your god can raise people from the dead and believing this particular story are two very different things.


I don't ask for special treatment - I do ask that people not question whether my beliefs are sincerely held or not. Like the time someone on this board diagnosed my religion as essentially baggage from a bad relationship.

Then may I suggest that you do the same yourself, and stop accusing those who do not believe what you believe of not having an open mind.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

So.... Not being laughed at is worse than not doing what your god has commanded you to(convert the masses)? I find it extremely hard to believe that someone who has pledged his life to spread the word of his god turns down an opportunity to convert thousands because there's a chance "he might get laughed at". No, there's zero logic in this. If that biy was raised from the dead, he would've spent the next years as a missionary poster boy, paraded around to spread the faith. No, this is an obviously fake story.

Sorry? OK - you get a WTF for this one.

A child? You expect a Christian missionary to parade a miracle child around? I wouldn't. Let's assume, for a second, that I was a missionary priest and this happened to me: I would leave the child to get on with his life adn write a letter detailing the events to my Diosean. I certainly wouldn't take a child away from his home village and use him as some kind of "proof" of a miracle. He would be no such thing anyway, people would just see a living child.

Anyone who has looked at religion sees that most people believe what they want to believe, the Gospel itself records that Christ said that people will believe when they see a miracle, and then try to explain it away later and forget about it. So what benefit would traumatising a small child do?

Your assumption is that the individual missionary is corrupt, hence why you believe he fabricated the story, and that is colouring your whole interpretation of the sequence of events.

God's commandment was "Love your God" and then "love your neighbour" not "get bums on pews".

As to not contacting major news outlets, I see you ignored my point that most of them wouldn't pick it - beyond that it does not behove the missionary to contact international media, he may have neither the means nor the inclination, or he may not consider it a worthwhile use of his time.


You're getting what needs to be proved all backwards. The one who is making the claim of course has the burden of proof. As there is nothing at all which suggest that this story is true, one must assume that it is false. If I claim that Hitler was an alien, I can't tell the ones who oppose my claim that they have to prove me wrong - I am of course the one who has to prove that Hitler was an alien.

I'm getting the feeling that you have thrown away your ability to think critically because you want to believe. Believing that your god can raise people from the dead and believing this particular story are two very different things.

I already told you what I believed about this story, that the events happened but the missionary interpreted the boy's recovery as a miracle when in fact he was not dead. Of course, he may never actually have been dead in the missionary's eyes - we don't know that the letter wasn't written in another language and then mistranslated (perhaps wilfully so).

You are the one not thinking critically - I have already pointed out that just this sort of thing used to happen in Europe, which is why you had an open casket Vigil.

Whether or not this boy was raised from the dead is a completely different question to whether the sequence of events reported happened. I am like you sceptical of any claim of miracles, but I see no reason to believe the letter is a falsehood. Sometimes there is only one witness to an event, that does not mean that, "one must assume that it is false" - one must first consider the plausability of the story. The only implausable part is the fact that the boy was ever dead.


Then may I suggest that you do the same yourself, and stop accusing those who do not believe what you believe of not having an open mind.

The equivilent of what I have to put up with would be me telling you you're stupid and deluded because you're an atheist, and that secretly you believe in God but can't admit it even to yourself.

I just say you're closed minded because I think you are, I know plenty of atheists who aren't.

[PanzerJaeger]

I think that most 'religious' people know, deep down, that it is a fantasy maintained for reasons of social cohesion. It's also nice to think that people once loved can be seen again. However, if people truly believed that their eternal souls were in jeopardy and following a specific set of tenants would save them, they would actually live by those tenants - all day, every day. The phenomenon of the casually religious would not exist.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I think that most 'religious' people know, deep down, that it is a fantasy maintained for reasons of social cohesion. It's also nice to think that people once loved can be seen again. However, if people truly believed that their eternal souls were in jeopardy and following a specific set of tenants would save them, they would actually live by those tenants - all day, every day. The phenomenon of the casually religious would not exist.

This is exactly the crap I'm talking about.

Screw off PJ - not everybody has the same way of viewing the world.

[PanzerJaeger]

Depends on your type of faith, honestly. Many christians take the view that man is a flawed creature, and that the bible itself is a flawed product of man, while the exploits and teachings of jesus himself (which makes up a relatively small portion of the bible anyway) suggest that if you're pure of heart and intention god will judge you accordingly. Its not so much about following the specifics as it is trying to 'do what jesus would do,' if you will.

That's not all christians, obviously, but many that you call 'casually' religious are in fact just skeptical of the establishment, but not the message.

But that's just it. Even if we eliminate everything from Christianity except the teachings of Jesus, the vast, vast majority of Christians do not even attempt to emulate some of his more inconvenient messages, such as those regarding the accumulation of wealth for example. If Christianity was anything more than a convenient moral code in which to indoctrinate children and maintain social ties, there would be no rich Christians, and none who would try to be rich.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

But that's just it. Even if we eliminate everything from Christianity except the teachings of Jesus, the vast, vast majority of Christians do not even attempt to emulate some of his more inconvenient messages, such as those regarding the accumulation of wealth for example. If Christianity was anything more than a convenient moral code in which to indoctrinate children and maintain social ties, there would be no rich Christians, and none who would try to be rich.

Jesus alos said everybody would fail to be a "good£ person, nevermind Christian, anyway.

We're all epic screwups, any other religion would try to change that - hell Communism basically fails because it tries to make people "behave".

You lack faith, that part of you that feels the sunshine and interprets that as God isn't as significant as the sceptical part of you. That's fine, but not everybody is like that.

I litterally spent years going "I can't hear you" even when I had a pretty good idea what I was hearing.

[PanzerJaeger]

I agree with you, but I don't think I made my point clear. Christianity is such a fractured mixture of different organizations, teachings, and establishments all competing with one another (and with other faiths) that the real message (Be good, be selfless, be humble, etc.) is often lost in the noise.

And even for those who do take it quite seriously, most understand that humans will err, and they will err often. The single largest message in the new testament is that Jesus offers redemption for the mistakes and imperfections of man, so that if you fail to live up to the standard you can repent and try again, so long as you are sincere.

Sincerity is certainly the issue. I would suggest that a man who goes to church on Sunday and to work on Monday to enrich himself is not sincere in his Christianity. There is a large difference between erring in the heat of the moment and structuring one's life in a manner that goes against the teachings of your god. Anyone who has an accurate understanding of Jesus' teachings understands that god's forgiveness is not a get out of jail free card. In fact, Christians at large should reject capitalism at its core, but the vast majority do not. Most people are willing to embrace a certain convenient Christianity as it comes with some significant social insurance in many parts of the world, but their actions do not suggest true belief.

[HoreTore]

It aint just the lutherans who spread these lies, the Catholics do it too (http://www.rationalistinternational.net/). And they get rather pissed when someone calls their bluff....

I'm sure Jesus is proud.

[Strike For The South]

This is exactly the crap I'm talking about.

Screw off PJ - not everybody has the same way of viewing the world.

He's more or less right. You are a different christian than most, you know that.

Many people do not think about there faith at all

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

He's more or less right. You are a different christian than most, you know that.

Many people do not think about there faith at all

PJ didn't start by criticising individual adherents, he led with a criticism of the basic idea and the belief system that has grown up around that idea.

Hypocracy is an acknowledged problem in Christianity as well as every other religions and all forms of philosophy.

[Husar]

So, that brings the missionaries up from "lying cheats" to "ignorant idiots". Assuming, of course, that they have no clue as to what's going on and turn to god to explain what they are too dumb to do(as well as being too dumb to seek help).

Now, I do not have educational statistics on western missionaries, but my impression is that they range from educated to very educated. Not ignorant. And their backers, the ones who read their reports, certainly contain a fair amount of highly educated people, including medical staff. And yet, knowing the truth, they still choose to spread the obvious lies.

Sorry, I'm sticking with "lying cheats" over "ignorant idiots".

You can explain your world however you want, freedom of belief applies to you as well, however dogmatic you want to be, it's okay. ~:pat:

Then again you may be a lying cheat sent by the devil, knowing very well that these missionaries fully believe what they say, yet portray them as evil fraudsters. Now that I think about it you couldn't possibly believe in that much human evil, after all you're a teacher and you should know a lot about humanity, so I'm going to stick with "agent of the devil" over "seriously concerned citizen". ~;)

[HoreTore]

Does "agent of the devil" come with some sort of uniform?

If so, I'm definitely sold!

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Does "agent of the devil" come with some sort of uniform?

If so, I'm definitely sold!

Yup, naked except for a pair of goat-skin chaps.

[Kralizec]

We're not hiring new staff at the moment, sorry.

If you're really interested I could suggest a few other jobs that might improve your chances in the future. We have a lot of former investment bankers on our payroll. There also used to be a lot of yellow journalists and some Tory politicians, but most of them were let go (into the lake of fire, that is) when we had to slash spending.

[Strike For The South]

I was under the impression it was impossible to be fired in Europe

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I was under the impression it was impossible to be fired in Europe


No, but you can be made redundant or given early retirement.