Is Christianity Inherently Immoral?

[viole]

If I were to make a list of the top 10 reasons why I lost all faith in the Christian narrative, I think the fundamental “fall of man & need for salvation” concept would be #1. Could this be the most immoral religious idea still in practice today? Having lived it, loved it, felt it, shared it for years, it’s strange to have to admit, I think it might be.

For those who don’t know, this is quick overview of the basic Christian salvation narrative:

- God creates the first man and woman.

- God gives two commands; multiply the earth (incest is required, since your children will need to have sex with each other) and do not eat fruit from a particular tree.

- God allows an evil fallen angel (in the form of a talking serpent ) to trick humans into breaking the fruit eating rule. The only rule. As a result, all future humans are born with a natural instinct to disobey god (sin).

- God chooses to punish them, their children, their grandchildren. In fact, every human born from that point on. Sparing the evil talking snake that caused it all.

- God changes his mind thousands of years later. He decides that he wants to give humans a chance to save themselves from his punishment, which they deserve, because our ancestors broke the fruit eating rule, and live for all of eternity in heaven with him.

- Rather than forgiving us, he decides the best way to offer salvation is to send himself to earth in human form (Jesus), then allow himself to be brutally, yet temporarily murdered. 3 days later, he came back to life and went back to heaven. This barbaric human sacrifice of himself, somehow allows himself to forgive us of the rules we break, based on the rule breaking nature we are born with.

- If you can be convinced this has happened, with nothing more than hearsay to go by, this vicarious redemption can save you from his punishment. If not, you will not be saved. It doesn’t matter what kind of person you are, what kind of honorable life you live, or how well you treat other humans or animals.

- Meanwhile…child rapists, murderers, and the worst scum of the earth can live forever in paradise with Jesus as well, earning salvation by simply believing the story and asking for forgiveness for all the child rape and murder.

- BTW, He loves you, that is why he is offering you this chance. Take it, or die.

Indoctrination is powerful! It’s not hard to come up with a creative interpretation that tells the same story in a way that makes you feel happy about this offer. It’s a wonderful gift to be born into these circumstances where he offers to save you from his punishment. He loves you, he’ll protect you in this life, and will reward you with eternal life in paradise after you die.

If I wasn’t born in a Christian home, with a Christian family, attending a Christian school, surrounded by Christian friends, I’m convinced that an unbiased look at this basic concept could have led me to believe this is nothing more than a cult of human sacrifice, born from a cult of barbaric animal sacrifice. Not so easy to see from the inside.

Can an idea like vicarious redemption be moral? I’m not convinced.

christianity is necessarily moral. Tautologically. If God is the source of morality, then whatever He does, including ripping pregnant women apart, as He commanded, must be necessarily moral.

since that sort of morality is tautologically defined by what God commands, it is also meaningless, unless there is an external source of objective morality God needs to follow too, a bit like the laws of logic.

but in that latter case, He has got a lof splaining to do, since He appears, prima facie, from Scriptures, more like a genocidal dictator, then an infinitely good and benevolent being.

just the opinion of someone who inherited knowledge of good and evil.

ciao

- viole

 

[Neuropteron]

For those who don’t know, this is quick overview of the basic Christian salvation narrative:


Hi Moonjuice,

It does not surprise me that you rejected Christianity if that is the narrative you were taught to believe in.

if only 50% of this story had any foundation in the truth, I would reject it as well.
I say 50% because it seems you've fallen victim to Christendoms tactic of a very effective way of telling lies namely half truths.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Well said. That’s exactly the part I find immoral. There’s no reward for being a good human being for the sake of basic human solidarity.

I disagree

 

[Moonjuice]

I disagree

Okay. Thanks for the feedback.

 

[viole]

Or perhaps, your real target is that Christian salvation is not earned at all. You can never merit it through virtuous action or righteous behavior. It is only

and that is immoral. And detestable. Since it is indistinguishable from requiring to kneel down, kiss the ring of the mafia boss, so that it can protect you. Or else.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Wildswanderer]

You hit the nail directly on the head. You can see in human history that it has always been whatever we think it is at any given moment. That’s how you get killing animals as a sacrifice to god was considered moral just a few thousand years ago. Killing girls for not being virgins on their wedding day was also a moral act as well. Killing those who refused to believe was still considered moral by Christians just 800 years ago. Human slavery was still considered moral by Christians, just a couple hundred years ago. Seems clear to me, we are getting better at it.

But we don't live in a godless universe.
I see all that as evidence for people not living by what Jesus said was the way. Except for animal sacrifice which was a shadow, a sign of things to come.
If we truly do to others what we want done to us, we certainly would not kill " infidels"
We certainly would not enslave anyone. There's no more divide between races in Christ, no more slave or free. All are one.
But if God isn't real, morality is just "whatever, Dude!" In fact, in a universe where God isn't real, all that matters is who is the biggest and toughest.

 

[Wildswanderer]

It has always seemed like the core tenets of Christianity are immoral. Granted, there are 30,000+ denominations of Christianity, and anyone can believe anything and self-identify as a Christian, but referring to the most common propositions:

1. It is immoral to create beings who don't yet understand right from wrong, and then tell them not to eat a fruit, and then when they eat the fruit because they didn't understand how or why it is wrong to disobey, to punish them for it. This holds especially true if god had the ability to create Adam and Eve however he wanted, and he chose to create them knowing in advance that they would disobey under the scenario that he orchestrated.

2. It is immoral to punish an innocent person for someone else's crimes. It is immoral to do so as a prerequisite for forgiveness. If you wronged me and I could only forgive you after I had first punched my daughter, I would be considered a psychopath.

3. It is immoral to torture anyone for eternity under any circumstances. Period. A loving being could never do such a thing, or else the term "love" becomes functionally meaningless.

4. It is immoral to punish people for not loving you, especially when you chose to create them knowing they would not love you. This seems like the intentional knowing creation of infinite(?) suffering and is the pinnacle of what I would call evil.

5. It is immoral to expect or demand to be worshipped. In my mind, anyone who does so is immediately unworthy of actually being worshipped.

I think I could come up with more, but I'm off to bed!

Is is silly to judge God with your human misunderstandings. Why should morality matter in a godless universe?

 

[Justanatheist]

But we don't live in a godless universe.
I see all that as evidence for people not living by what Jesus said was the way. Except for animal sacrifice which was a shadow, a sign of things to come.
If we truly do to others what we want done to us, we certainly would not kill " infidels"
We certainly would not enslave anyone. There's no more divide between races in Christ, no more slave or free. All are one.
But if God isn't real, morality is just "whatever, Dude!" In fact, in a universe where God isn't real, all that matters is who is the biggest and toughest.

And in a universe with a god, then he is the biggest and the toughest, so all you have done is swap might is right for mightier is righter.

 

[Wildswanderer]

What I experienced was the contrast between reality and fantasy.

Make believe only takes one so far before admitting that reality dictates the parameters of theology, and not the other way around.

Reality is this: God is real to those who truly seek him.

 

[Wildswanderer]

And in a universe with a god, then he is the biggest and the toughest, so all you have done is swap might is right for mightier is righter.

The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. But just the beginning. Once you know him, the friendship is better than the fear.

 

[Justanatheist]

The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. But just the beginning. Once you know him, the friendship is better than the fear.

Which has nothing to do with what I wrote, do you have a comment on my point which is this.

And in a universe with a god, then he is the biggest and the toughest, so all you have done is swap might is right for mightier is righter.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Which has nothing to do with what I wrote, do you have a comment on my point which is this.

It has everything to do with what you wrote. God is all powerful. There's a lot there to respect. Why wouldn't you?

 

[Justanatheist]

It has everything to do with what you wrote. God is all powerful. There's a lot there to respect. Why wouldn't you?

So god is the mightiest and rightest, I do not see why you disagree?

 

[Jainarayan]

I do not believe Christianity is inherently immoral, but one has to define Christianity. Is Christianity what Jesus taught, or is it what Paul and later writers and church leaders made it to be, adding to it with their interpretations?

I have no problem with Jesus or what he taught. What he taught is not unlike, not identical, but not unlike what the Buddha taught and what Krishna taught in the Bhagavad Gita. I’m convinced that much of Jesus’s philosophy comes from the Bhagavad Gita and Buddhism.

As far as as I’m concerned right from the start, starting with Paul, Christianity is Paulism, not Christianity, it’s not what Jesus taught. If we take the “red letters”, only the words of Jesus, leave out the miracles, leave out Paul, that and living as Jesus taught, I believe is Christianity.

All the churches have bastardized, twisted and corrupted it. So, Christianity as Jesus taught is not inherently bad. In fact, it’s about as close to being dharmic as any non-Dharmic philosophy can get, the Dharmic religions being my frame of reference. .

 

[AlexanderG]

Is is silly to judge God with your human misunderstandings. Why should morality matter in a godless universe?

You're free to make that argument, but then by the same argument you would have no justification to claim that your god is moral or good. "It is silly to judge god as moral with your human misunderstandings." If you think a god is good merely because it says it is good by its own standards, well, that also applies to literally anyone. Satan would presumably be good by his own standards. Charles Manson was good by his own standards, etc. When an argument or way of thinking can be equally used to justify contradictory statements, then it is fallacious, useless, and sheds light on nothing.

If you define morality as behavior in accordance with a god's will, then I agree that by this definition there would be no morality without said god. I don't define morality that way, though, so I'd have to disagree. In fact, the way I define morality I don't think you could have morality with a god, because I don't consider a set of commands enforced by violence to be a moral system. I consider morality to be a method for evaluating social interactions as desirable or undesirable with respect to the goal of advancing human wellbeing. With or without a god, that will always matter to me.

For these reasons, your response was simply unconvincing.

 

[AlexanderG]

But if God isn't real, morality is just "whatever, Dude!" In fact, in a universe where God isn't real, all that matters is who is the biggest and toughest.

It may be difficult for you to understand, but from an outsider perspective, we can (for example) compare the different beliefs of Catholics, Evangelicals, Quakers, and Progressive Christians, and your god's morality looks like just "whatever, Dude!"

This is even setting aside the other 30,000+ Christian denominations, and the exclusive moral claims of all the other religions. Every Christian claims they have the correct interpretation and that all the other denominations are objectively mistaken. There is no actual method to tell which of you is correct, or if any of you are. To us on the outside, it all looks like cultural influences plus shouting, charisma, and internal politics. I guarantee any Christian from 500 years ago would consider you to be a heretical false Christian. Any Christian 500 years in the future will likely look back and consider you a misguided, morally-backward proto-Christian. So yeah...whatever, Dude. Morality is messy, and it's changing, and we all need to talk about it and reach a moving consensus. Your faith solves none of those issues. In fact, it provides further evidence for the subjectivity of morality.

And I can't tell you how many times Christians have argued that the main reason I should be a Christian is because god is the biggest and toughest being, and that he'll hurt me if I don't do what he says. Your lack of self-awareness is remarkable.

 

[Moonjuice]

I suppose I use my own reasoning to decide what I think is good. Which is exactly what I think everyone tries to do. I don’t need any guidance if I’m capable of understanding the difference of a good action vs a negative action.

 

[Moonjuice]

If historical actions and consequences are factually accurate, how can they be said to be immoral?

The factual accuracy of actions in human history have no bearing on the morality of those actions, as long as you agree on the factual accuracy. It’s historically accurate to say Nazi’s killed Jews. We can prove this to be factually accurate. Do we think we can’t decide if those actions are immoral?

 

[Moonjuice]

You lived it, loved it, felt it and shared it for years, but you can't express it without significant departures from the actual idea?

I think the fact that you think I have made a significant departure from the actual idea illustrates a lager problem. I’m reading directly from the Bible and the words have different meaning to you than they do to me. I don’t think I’m departing from scripture at all, every statement I made I can back up with scripture to justify my position. You can easily interpret scripture to say the exact opposite. So the larger problem appears to be the method in which the “facts” are being given to us, since they are open to incredibly wild swings of opposing interpretation by two literate people, who speak the same language.

 

[Moonjuice]

You have mentioned a lot of immoral things Christians did. But do you blame it on Christianity? Do you really blame all the evil that you come across on the theology or whatever ideology? Also, do you practice the same attribution to the good stuff?

My comment had nothing to do with blaming Christianity for anything, I didn’t say that, nor did I imply that. I was illustrating the simple fact that what we all (Christians included) think is moral has changed over time.