What is the appeal of attacking Christianity?

[Lazul]

I forgot where it says it in the Bible, But Jesus said, "The world will hate me and those who believe in me".

Yeah but I might add that most people just dont have a trubble with Christianity (me only if they try ot teach and interfer with politics) but also Islam (like many of you americans for example) and Hinduism, Judeaism (sp?) and so on and so on.
Its not like its Only christianity I have a problem with but just about every religion ive come in contact with.

[Pindar]

That comes closest to my own objection. I don't object to religiously inspired ideas or rules of behaviour as long as they are justified in rational terms, not religious ones. For instance I agree with Christians that killing my neighbour is bad, but I do not agree that it is bad because of a divine proscription. It is bad because its ultimate consequence is the disintegration of the society I live in.

My daily life is guided by many notions and rules that have religious origins and so is the life of the society I live in. l do not mind a bit because the large majority of those rules and notions are perfectly reasonable and even -- 'God forbid' -- civilised. I would mind, though, if my government decided to introduce laws because 'God wants us to'. I would demand to see God's affidavit.

Any system that makes coercive appeal needs to be able to justify the claim. In a secular society referencing God alone as the basis for legislation does not pass muster.

Attacks on faith typically reveal more about the labeler than what they attempt to label.

That is so true. And the same can be said about attacks on 'the left'.

The standard doesn't apply when the system's advocates don't bath regularly, hold a stable job or have an accent.
Bohemianism and the nanny state are there own refutation.

[Moros]

Well then as the smartest man in the world maybe you can enlighten the rest of us poor bastards.

well I could try but you all probably wouldn't understand me but you avoided the question: Can you proof what you believe.
you said we couldn't prove we're wrong but so can't you. I just posted this not because I was waiting for an awsering but to show you this is't a good argument.
It's like saying: can you prove that only one line can go trough 2 certain points.

finnaly my intellect gets credit

[sharrukin]

well I could try but you all probably wouldn't understand me but you avoided the question: Can you proof what you believe.
you said we couldn't prove we're wrong but so can't you. I just posted this not because I was waiting for an awsering but to show you this is't a good argument.
It's like saying: can you prove that only one line can go trough 2 certain points.

finnaly my intellect gets credit

The difference is that Christians admit it is just a matter of faith.

Is what you believe nothing more than a matter of faith?
If so, then how is that different from a religion?

If on the other hand, you think it is different from a religion, then step forward with some proof for your claims.

[bmolsson]

Religions, with few exceptions, are judging outsiders harshly and doesn't allow external criticism. The undemocratic approach to powerstructure also doesn't allow any practical way of reformation, which would allowing the religion adapt to changes. In many cases religion is used as an excuse to commit crimes, atrocities and violent actions against the outside society.
These facts makes a democratic and secular viewer less tolerant against the religion and it's follower.

[Strike For The South]

Because people like thinking there being cool or bad ass and sticking it to the man. When in reality there just assholes Imo religon is a persanol thing and shouldnt be pushed on others

[Gawain of Orkeny]

well I could try but you all probably wouldn't understand me but you avoided the question:

Yeah Im too stupid. Was this addressed to you. Someone said that there is no god and that everything is random. He said your only fooling yourself if you believe in God. I countered that its just as big a leap of faith to believe everything camre from nothing as it is to belive in god. He said he could prove what he belived. I say he cant. Can you? I never claimed to ne able to prove what I belive because thats not the meanng of the word. If its proven I KNOW it I dont have to believe it.

[Papewaio]

Christianity is your personal relationship with God. "God doesn't have grandchildren."

I never liked people trying to set me up on dates, telling me who I should like or dislike or any other form of heavy handed relationship coercion. Hence I am not a great fan of organised religions aspect of trying to force a spiritual relationship on me.

I'm not sure if I am counted in those who attack Christianity, but I am certainly one of those who debates concepts people try and attach to it like Intelligent Design.

[aleh]

See, that's why I prefer spirituality. To me, religion is basically the regulated and regimented version of spirituality, its political aspect and it just doesn't work. The concept of religion isn't bad, but most examples I've seen of it is...unappealing.

[AntiochusIII]

Self-centered admittedly selfish individualists like me need no gods to justify my existence.

Admittedly, I too wonder what awaits me in the afterlife. Theories abound, mostly in religious traditions, but the most plausible, and, in my megalomaniac opinion, worst possibility is the loss of my very existence. (Crap, that kind of thing is actually THE goal of Buddhism: the Nirvana!!! - Also, a lot of people are probably as uncomfortable as I am that they won't exist once they died that the concept of "heaven" (hell is for other purposes ) comes into being) Others turn to religion for answer, either in the form of ancient scriptures (man-made, I'm sure ;p), ancient institutions (organized religion, where millions believe in the same divine thingy), or mysticism as personal spirituality. I've heard rumors that hippies are quite good in the last, though they probably need the help of addictive, dangerous smoking plants for that...

The problem is (and why there are so many religion bashers) that the religious institutions, thanks to the fact that the justification that their "God" is the real one makes them especially self-righteous and delicately sensitive to all sorts of criticism, caused many harms throughout history and continue to influence (I'd rather use "disturb", but in fear of being torched...) politics. Many of us are pissed by their self-righteousness. So the reaction is negative. The faithful are also quite angry at each other and the godless, "God must be pissed off by these unbelievers!" The result is a lot of bickering, and, thanks to the fact that the people who disagree with a particular religion (or religion as a whole) don't quite unite (they don't have a real reason to do so, do they? Until...), things also often got violent, and organized religions managed to get their hands on the faithless and torture, kill, torch, cut, tickle them.

[Spetulhu]

It has always struck me as odd that some of (not all) the folks who doubt the existence of God take such joy in attacking defenders of that belief, and Christians in particular.

Because people in the west are mainly christians, and we have the kind of living standard where you can let go of old superstitions? The drug-induced dreams of today are better than those of some hashish-smoking guys dead for 2000 years? People LIKE to tell others how superior they are, no matter what they base that feeling on?

[ichi]

Wow

So when did you stop beating your wife?

The whole premise of this is so fundamentally flawed that I don't know where to begin. Like the question above, the whole idea that non-believers must attack religion for some unknown reason just perpetuates the persecution complex.

First, to lump science and religion together as though science is just another myth is a big part of the problem. Science can provide many deeper answers, eventually it will, unless it is derailed by theologians (as occurred in the dark ages).

Second, most folks that I know of don't go about attacking religion. In my experience they are reacting to some religious imperative. Like this thread.

The 'threat' as you put it, is when fundamentists from any religion assume that the light shines brighter on them then the rest of us, and try to control the lives of others.

Look, if you want to believe that some guy sits on high passing judgment on all of us and will someday return and make things all better, go ahead. Just don't try to foist your beliefs on the rest of us.

This persecution thing seems to be part of the whole deal.

ichi

[Crazed Rabbit]

For instance I agree with Christians that killing my neighbour is bad, but I do not agree that it is bad because of a divine proscription. It is bad because its ultimate consequence is the disintegration of the society I live in.

So, if you could kill your neighbor without consequences for yourself, it wouldn't be bad?

Religions, with few exceptions, are judging outsiders harshly and doesn't allow external criticism. The undemocratic approach to powerstructure also doesn't allow any practical way of reformation, which would allowing the religion adapt to changes. In many cases religion is used as an excuse to commit crimes, atrocities and violent actions against the outside society.
These facts makes a democratic and secular viewer less tolerant against the religion and it's follower.

One of those exceptions is Catholicism, in that they do not say that everyone who isn't Catholic is going to burn in hellfire. As to reform, ever heard of Vatican II? And in the past hundred years (at least) Christianity has not been used as a basis for any crimes.

The only reason secular gov'ts don't like it is because they want to claim supreme authority, that they can decide what is best.

Christianity--indeed most if not all organized religion--promotes ignorance. As a man of knowledge, I find that loathesome.

Ah...dur..that must explain people like St. Thomas Aquinas and Pope John Paul II.

Many of us are pissed by their self-righteousness.

You're pissed because people believe strongly in something that you don't? Or because Christianity states that man is not all knowing, incapable of finding truth alone, and you don't want to have your judgement questioned?

Crazed Rabbit

[AntiochusIII]

You're pissed because people believe strongly in something that you don't? Or because Christianity states that man is not all knowing, incapable of finding truth alone, and you don't want to have your judgement questioned?

Because Christianity (and some other religions) states that their divine being is all knowing, capable of being truth alone in themselves, and don't want their judgement questioned...which is fine for your own faith but really cause much irritation when this is being used in secular "issues" in a secular society as reasons/motives/etc.

[Soulforged]

[QUOTE=Crazed Rabbit]

So, if you could kill your neighbor without consequences for yourself, it wouldn't be bad?

It has real concequences by real penalties. And anyway the main consequence is the degradation of humanity. That's what means:"Every time that a man is killed, is like killing humanity itself" (though as always i don't know if the translation is certain).

One of those exceptions is Catholicism, in that they do not say that everyone who isn't Catholic is going to burn in hellfire. As to reform, ever heard of Vatican II? And in the past hundred years (at least) Christianity has not been used as a basis for any crimes.

Yes indeed. That was one of the best tactics of Catholicism. Just make all the Gods your God, and you'll extend your power. But don't missunderstand me, of course i'm talking about organized religion wich acts like a politic group of pressure.

The only reason secular gov'ts don't like it is because they want to claim supreme authority, that they can decide what is best.

You're right here. But if you reflex on it a little you'll see that secular governments swear the Constitutions on God to legitimate it. So paradoxicaly the same religion helps to give that authority that they seek, and that i don't like. That's the principal reason why religion should be totally out, so the state decreases it's power to a minimum, preferably not exist at all.

Ah...dur..that must explain people like St. Thomas Aquinas and Pope John Paul II.

That was some time ago, in those times they kept the science, premitive and original. Today they keep the dogmatics teachings and most of the old unimproved science.

You're pissed because people believe strongly in something that you don't? Or because Christianity states that man is not all knowing, incapable of finding truth alone, and you don't want to have your judgement questioned?

Well i think that human can achieve truth by science and not by religion. But besides that i don't care what everybody thinks.

[Al Khalifah]

The question I would put to the non-believer camp is this. If you don't believe in a religion as a higher cause, what do YOU believe in? What is your reason to be?

[bmolsson]

The question I would put to the non-believer camp is this. If you don't believe in a religion as a higher cause, what do YOU believe in? What is your reason to be?

Why does there have to be a reason ? Why not just enojoy the fact....

[Al Khalifah]

If your existance is pointless, why does it continue? Something that has no purpose has no reason to exist. It could even be argued that it has no right to exist.

[Phatose]

Existence is it's own purpose.

[Adrian II]

If your existance is pointless, why does it continue? Something that has no purpose has no reason to exist. It could even be argued that it has no right to exist.

Yes, existence is quite unreasonable. I've always wondered why I was doomed to exist. It is not as if I have done anything wrong, have I?

[Sjakihata]

Yeah Im too stupid. Was this addressed to you. Someone said that there is no god and that everything is random. He said your only fooling yourself if you believe in God. I countered that its just as big a leap of faith to believe everything camre from nothing as it is to belive in god. He said he could prove what he belived. I say he cant. Can you? I never claimed to ne able to prove what I belive because thats not the meanng of the word. If its proven I KNOW it I dont have to believe it.

dude, I never said anything like that, re-read my initial post.

[Al Khalifah]

Yes, existence is quite unreasonable. I've always wondered why I was doomed to exist. It is not as if I have done anything wrong, have I?

Nah, your parents did.

[Ser Clegane]

Existence is it's own purpose.

Seemingly this is not the case for a lot of people - thus the attraction of religion. "Knowing" that one is part of a "greater purpose/plan" (even if the details are not known) can certainly be soothing.

Note that it is not my intention to ridicule religion - as I personally would rather tend towards agnosticism (although I don't have the feeling that the term precisely describes my feelings with regard to God and religion)

However, I noticed that a lot of people who went from non-religeous to religeous specifically point out the satisfaction gained from "knowing" that their life has a purpose.

[Adrian II]

Nah, your parents did.

[Moros]

Yeah Im too stupid. Was this addressed to you. Someone said that there is no god and that everything is random. He said your only fooling yourself if you believe in God. I countered that its just as big a leap of faith to believe everything camre from nothing as it is to belive in god. He said he could prove what he belived. I say he cant. Can you? I never claimed to ne able to prove what I belive because thats not the meanng of the word. If its proven I KNOW it I dont have to believe it.

1)the parts: "well I could try but you all probably wouldn't understand" and "finnaly my intellect gets credit" were a joke note: the

2)yes, you don't have to believe it if it's prooved but usually somethings that are proven are true.

3)I bet he can't prove it or he's one **** of a genius. yes it was stupid of him to say he could prove it. but you can't prove god either so therefor I think at the moment it's a draw between Science and religion.

4)yes my English is bad, I know.

The difference is that Christians admit it is just a matter of faith.

well then I can say it's just a matter of not enough prove, logical thinking,...

now, the question why do atheists like attacking Christians. One of the verry things wich are common for humans; humans have always attacked people wich were in one way or another different from them. is it religion, colour, opinion,... This is also the case with Christians. there are a lot of cases in history but there are a lot of examples now too.

[Paul Peru]

The question I would put to the non-believer camp is this. If you don't believe in a religion as a higher cause, what do YOU believe in? What is your reason to be?

I am because I am.
And I try to have a good time and make a difference for the good.

If you can't relate to existence being without inherent purpose, you need to grow up.
Religion just puts anoother turtle under the one the elephants are standing on, and you are still left with explaining that turtle.

A nice crutch for the near-sighted.
(lovely mixed metaphor )

I attack religion because I'm provoked by so many people letting obvious BS control their lives, and because they are so loud and conspicuous about it.
It needs to be said, IMO, that all religion is obviously utter nonsense, based on varying mixtures of lies, delusions and manipulations.

We ought to be at a point today where we can look at religion, have a good laugh and move on.

[Al Khalifah]

I am because I am.
And I try to have a good time and make a difference for the good.

How do you make a difference for the good? What does your effort matter for at the end of it all?

[Paul Peru]

How do you make a difference for the good? What does your effort matter for at the end of it all?

My effort matters to those who get some joy or use from it here and now.
Life is what's happening to you, and a lot of other people, right now!

At the end of it all it doesn't matter, like everything else.
Grow, wake, and wisen up!

The whole thing is so patently infantile, so
foreign to reality, that anyone with a
friendly attitude toward humanity
must be pained to think that the great
majority of men will never be able to
rise above this view of life.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I have stayed out of this since posting it in order to listen rather than "speak."

A few posts have done little more than exemplify the kind of "attack" to which I referred.

Most, as expected, have tried to take on the substance of the discussion -- and I have enjoyed the interplay.

Ichi here, has attacked the premise, so I feel constrained to respond, at least in the interest of clarity.

So when did you stop beating your wife?

The whole premise of this is so fundamentally flawed that I don't know where to begin. Like the question above, the whole idea that non-believers must attack religion for some unknown reason just perpetuates the persecution complex.

A bit harsh. My question ackowledged that "christian-bashing" was not the choice of all non-believers, I am well aware that many (most?) who hold such views are more than willing to "live and let live." The subtext of the question was meant to get those who ARE prone to such a persecution response to consider whether or not such a response is valuable and productive. Does the question itself also represent a continuing sense of persecution on my part? Perhaps, though I do not consciously believe that to be the case.

First, to lump science and religion together as though science is just another myth is a big part of the problem. Science can provide many deeper answers, eventually it will, unless it is derailed by theologians (as occurred in the dark ages).

I very purposefully did not label science as "just another myth." I have, among other things, TAUGHT the scientific method at the university level. The principles of science: sound ethical behavior, measurement, validity, reliability, hypothesis-testing and the like, are one of the most powerful tools developed by mankind. I also recognize it as a "belief system" -- not a myth. Those who embrace science as a belief system come to view it as a sort of ultimate tool for intellectual progress, that it will, in the fulness of time, lead us to all the answers. Or, as you put it:

Science can provide many deeper answers, eventually it will, unless it is derailed by theologians.

This is an expression of belief. By the way, I agree, science has and will continue to provide many "deeper" answers. I am not attacking science or seeking to belittle it with this label.

Regrettably, some theologians have "derailed" science (and learning in general) for a time. I would suggest that many such efforts were made in order to preserve their temporal power, and may well have been in contravention of their own spiritual teachings. For example, the Church's opposition to the writings of Galileo and Copernicus may well have been motivated more by a desire to maintain the extant power structure rather than for spiritual concerns. It is instances such as these that leave a "sour taste" in the mouths of GelCube and others...and me. The Church has, of course, changed its stance on the works of both of these brilliant men.

Second, most folks that I know of don't go about attacking religion. In my experience they are reacting to some religious imperative. Like this thread.

Most of the folk I know don't either, but...This thread had no religious imperative. It posed a question and explained the conditions leading to that question. If I am "preaching" here, it is only to the extent of trying to get you to think about the issue. Your conclusions, your beliefs are -- and should be -- your own.

The 'threat' as you put it, is when fundamentists from any religion assume that the light shines brighter on them then the rest of us, and try to control the lives of others.

I whole-heartedly agree -- except I did not use the term religion. Be it Nazism, Islamo-fascism, Conservatism or some judge legislating from the bench, all such efforts are wrong. In fact, my belief (religion in this case) suggests that such efforts are doomed to fail. You simply cannot force anyone to believe as you believe. You can only live your life the best you can and MAYBE get them to think about sharing that belief for themselves.

Look, if you want to believe that some guy sits on high passing judgment on all of us and will someday return and make things all better, go ahead. Just don't try to foist your beliefs on the rest of us..

I have not, I will not, and I believe I would be wrong to do so. As to some of the other posts, they must answer for themselves.

This persecution thing seems to be part of the whole deal.

This last issue is easily the most compelling you raise. It is food for thought as to whether my post, and other similar sentiments expressed on this thread and others, reveal more of a sense of persecution being self-imposed rather than enacted from without. I will think on this for a time -- and would enjoy any expansions on this theme you or others would care to add.

Seamus

[Al Khalifah]

At the end of it all it doesn't matter, like everything else.
Grow, wake, and wisen up!

It's not immature to ponder the nature of existance. Some of the world's greatest thinkers have spent their entire lives trying to find hummanity's raison d'etre. It's also central to this debate. So perhaps you should do likewise, but add the word shut.

If everything doesn't matter, then this existance of Christianity shouldn't matter to non-Christians, therefore they shouldn't attack it, its principles and its followers.