Surprising lack of knowledge among theists.

[lilithu]

The problem is that you hear Christianity compared to a virus, and you immediately shut down. You don't want to hear why, the statement's enough for you. Then you respond to the "insult", when in reality it's not really an insult, which you would have realized had you taken the time to understand the analogy.

I was a biologist. I'm pretty sure I understand the analogy.

It is amazing to me that Dawkins' supporters dare say that people are closed-minded for not wanting to continue listening to the justifications for the insult. And even more amazing that people dare say that it's not an insult. YOU don't find it insulting because you agree with him. Just like any number of statements that I and others have listed in order to show the level of disrespect shown, only to have people say "That's not disrespectful; it's the truth."

 

[science_is_my_god]

I think this is standard for most Christians, particularly young ones. All they can really rely, on early in their Christian walk, is the words of others - the leaders or the other Christans who are acting as mentors.

It takes a lot of effort to go beyond that, to start studying the bible for yourself and coming up with your own interpretations. It's not easy, even when you claim to have the Holy Spirit guiding you. It took me about 15 years looking at scripture carefully and trying to bring my own interpretations on it. You have to drop the study books that try to guide you to a particular way of thinking and start to think for yourself. It takes a lot of that to actually be confident enough to start questioning what is being preached and what other Christians are claiming based on their interpretations.

Thinking for myself and coming up with my own interpretations of the "Word of God" is exactly how I came to the conclusion that it's a bunch of gibberish. Some of it could be historically accurte, in fact I believe some parts are, but I think most of it are misunderstandings of primative people. Not to metion a lot of third and fourth hand accounts made like 50 years after Jesus' death. So if this is my interpretation, it seems to me like the lord wants me to doubt him.

 

[lilithu]

So then, blind faith makes you happy.

At least now I know where you stand.

:biglaugh:

I stand on respecting the various faith traditions based on their own merit, and not trying to impose my own view of how they should be. Christianity is a religion of the heart. And I love it for its egalitarian accessibility.

That said, you should understand that I'm NOT Christian. Honestly, I'm continually amazed when people assume that I'm Christian just because I don't disdain the religion the way that you do.

 

[science_is_my_god]

:biglaugh:

I stand on respecting the various faith traditions based on their own merit, and not trying to impose my own view of how they should be. Christianity is a religion of the heart. And I love it for its egalitarian accessibility.

That said, you should understand that I'm NOT Christian. Honestly, I'm continually amazed when people assume that I'm Christian just because I don't disdain the religion the way that you do.

If Christianity is a religion of the heart, then atheism is a religion of the mind. Of course, I'm sure all those Christians were "just using thier hearts" when they killed all the "witches" during the Blair Witch Trials, or I'm sure they were "looking out for thier neighbors" when they slaughtered them all during the crusades. Everyone is capable of evil, including Christians.

 

[Yerda]

Everyone is capable of evil, including Christians.

No-one has suggested that this is untrue.

 

[lilithu]

If Christianity is a religion of the heart, then atheism is a religion of the mind. Of course, I'm sure all those Christians were "just using thier hearts" when they killed all the "witches" during the Blair Witch Trials, or I'm sure they were "looking out for thier neighbors" when they slaughtered them all during the crusades. Everyone is capable of evil, including Christians.

Your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired. Either that, or you're just looking for another excuse to criticize Christianity. I wasn't saying that Christians never do anything wrong. That's not what "religion of the heart" means.

 

[Poisonshady313]

:biglaugh:

I stand on respecting the various faith traditions based on their own merit, and not trying to impose my own view of how they should be. Christianity is a religion of the heart. And I love it for its egalitarian accessibility.

That said, you should understand that I'm NOT Christian. Honestly, I'm continually amazed when people assume that I'm Christian just because I don't disdain the religion the way that you do.

I know you're not Christian. I've always known that you're not Christian. Blind faith making you happy doesn't necessarily mean that you have blind faith... it just means you find it an appealing way to go for others who indulge in it.

I personally would hope that people have some minimum understanding of what it is they say they believe in.

You don't seem to believe that's necessary for other people to have.

 

[science_is_my_god]

Your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired. Either that, or you're just looking for another excuse to criticize Christianity. I wasn't saying that Christians never do anything wrong. That's not what "religion of the heart" means.

Then please elaborate as to why Christianity is a "Religion of the Heart." And seriously, now you just insult my reading comprehension? Seriously, dude, I know you like to take cheap shots, but don't forget that this is a violation of forum rules. I "bash" religion, but I never attack people outright.

 

[Yerda]

I "bash" religion, but I never attack people outright.

Seriously, dude, I know you like to take cheap shots


That looks like an attack to me.

 

[science_is_my_god]

Seriously, dude, I know you like to take cheap shots


That looks like an attack to me.

When I get hit, I hit back.

 

[lilithu]

Then please elaborate as to why Christianity is a "Religion of the Heart." And seriously, now you just insult my reading comprehension? Seriously, dude, I know you like to take cheap shots, but don't forget that this is a violation of forum rules. I "bash" religion, but I never attack people outright.

Either you misunderstood what I wrote, in which case your reading comprehension was poor, or you understood me but intentionally responded as if you hadn't. Which one is it?

Several people have already elaborated as to why Christianity is a religion of the heart. it is not based on knowledge, but rather a relationship with Christ.

 

[fantome profane]

When I get hit, I hit back.

When I get hit I turn the other cheek. And I am not a Christian either.

 

[lilithu]

I know you're not Christian. I've always known that you're not Christian. Blind faith making you happy doesn't necessarily mean that you have blind faith... it just means you find it an appealing way to go for others who indulge in it.

As far as I'm concerned, "blind faith" is what people call other people's beliefs in order to insult them.

As I have said at least twice now, what is appealing to me about Christianity - or one of the things that's appealing - is that it's egalitarian. It's accessible to anyone who follows Jesus regardless of education level. I also like other religions that emphasize learning. But there is a part of them that is elitist, perhaps not intentionally so, but functionally so.

 

[lilithu]

I appreciate the support, truly. But I'd rather not have this thread become an argument about that.

SIMG,
I agree that my comment was unnecessary and unproductive. I apologize.

Being a "religion of the heart" is not a claim that the adherents of the religion are always good. It simply means that it is more based on emotion than reason. And no, that doesn't mean it's hostile to reason, only that reason is not the basis.

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Thinking for myself and coming up with my own interpretations of the "Word of God" is exactly how I came to the conclusion that it's a bunch of gibberish. Some of it could be historically accurte, in fact I believe some parts are, but I think most of it are misunderstandings of primative people. Not to metion a lot of third and fourth hand accounts made like 50 years after Jesus' death. So if this is my interpretation, it seems to me like the lord wants me to doubt him.

I can fully understand. I think Christians make a mistake when they see the bible as the infallible word of God. Basically is was still inscribed by men who make mistakes. I don't believe God violated their freewill by forcing them to write what he wanted. Man wrote what they thought God was revealing to them and as a result of that made mistakes, I believe. It's us to up to filter out the truth from the fiction.

 

[Poisonshady313]

As far as I'm concerned, "blind faith" is what people call other people's beliefs in order to insult them.

That's all well and good... but at least in this case, you're wrong. "blind faith" is what I call someone's beliefs that seem to come from nowhere, except for someone else saying "believe in this".

When it's normal for someone to never ask "why"... that's blind faith.

 

[Magic Man]

I was a biologist. I'm pretty sure I understand the analogy.

If you did, you wouldn't find it so offensive.

It is amazing to me that Dawkins' supporters dare say that people are closed-minded for not wanting to continue listening to the justifications for the insult. And even more amazing that people dare say that it's not an insult. YOU don't find it insulting because you agree with him. Just like any number of statements that I and others have listed in order to show the level of disrespect shown, only to have people say "That's not disrespectful; it's the truth."

That's probably because there's no insult. I don't find it insulting because it's not. It might be inflammatory, but the analogy makes sense. I don't recall these other statements you're talking about, but it goes back to the idea of ideas not being respected. Just because someone doesn't speak respectfully about an idea doesn't mean they're insulting the people who hold the idea. That has been said many times, and it's still true. Take the criticism as criticism of the idea, not the person, and respond to it as such.

 

[Smoke]

Several people have already elaborated as to why Christianity is a religion of the heart. it is not based on knowledge, but rather a relationship with Christ.

Is that why, in the vast majority of Christian churches throughout history and, throughout the world to this day, the faithful recite, "I believe in ... "?

Belief -- that is, intellectual assent to the doctrines of the church -- is central to almost all expressions of Christianity, as evidenced by the fact that even the most liberal Protestant churches that no longer require assent to the historic creeds still say the historic creeds, and the newer churches that say they reject the idea of creeds still have detailed statements of belief that they expect their members to adhere to.

I'll grant you that intellectual assent isn't exactly the same as knowledge, but the fact remains that Christianity wants your head as well as your heart, and even more than your heart.

The idea of a "relationship with Jesus," on the other hand, is relatively novel and relatively rare compared to creeds and statements of belief, and in most cases is a shallow and superficial notion not comparable to theosis, or union with the divine, or any of the great apophatic mystic traditions of Christianity. Just because an Evangelical says, "The Lord told me ... " or "The Lord laid it on my heart ... " that doesn't mean we're talking about Richard Rolle or Seraphim of Sarov.

Usually, when a person says that his faith is not about knowledge but about a relationship with Jesus, he's revealing that he is neither a dogmatic theologian nor a mystic, but a person who is quite literally carrying on a relationship with an imaginary friend.

 

[lilithu]

If you did, you wouldn't find it so offensive.

"If you understood, then you would agree with me. If you don't agree with me, it means you don't understand."

 

[lilithu]

Is that why, in the vast majority of Christian churches throughout history and, throughout the world to this day, the faithful recite, "I believe in ... "?

"I believe in..." is not "I intellectually assent," as you put it. It's "I have faith in...", "I put my trust in..."

Usually, when a person says that his faith is not about knowledge but about a relationship with Jesus, he's revealing that he is neither a dogmatic theologian nor a mystic, but a person who is quite literally carrying on a relationship with an imaginary friend.

And I take it that kind of sentence it not meant to be insulting either. :sarcastic