Those aren't REAL Christians!

[FlyingTeaPot]

Lately I have been noticing a trend among our religious friends here at RF.
Every time an atheist challenges Christians about the bloody history of Christianity, they say, "Well, those weren't real Christians. Real Christians are not violent and yada yada...

But these same Christians often blame all Muslims for the actions of a few. Just look at the Park 51 debate we had here. This in spite of a lot of our Muslim brethren affirming that real Muslims are not supposed to be violent and yada yada. For example, a nameless Christian member said that we should allow the Mosque at Ground Zero only if the Muslims agree to build a Jewish temple at the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, while reaffirming that it wasn't real Christians who carried out the crusades and the inquisition and so on.

Why is this double think in place with these individuals? Thoughts?

 

[Engyo]

When one decides on one's conclusion first, and then reasons backwards from there, this is the sort of results that generally occur.

 

[blackout]

When someone doesn't like another person's version
of THEIR thing,
they say that their version is the "real" or "true" one...
and often attempt to trounce the other version/s,
while fervently elevating, protecting and rationalizing their own.

When someone doesn't like another person's thing altogether
there's nothing to elevate,
so "trounce" becomes the entire trend in general.

Sadly, these things seem to happen,
no matter the path.

 

[Zadok]

Lately I have been noticing a trend among our religious friends here at RF.
Every time an atheist challenges Christians about the bloody history of Christianity, they say, "Well, those weren't real Christians. Real Christians are not violent and yada yada...

But these same Christians often blame all Muslims for the actions of a few. Just look at the Park 51 debate we had here. This in spite of a lot of our Muslim brethren affirming that real Muslims are not supposed to be violent and yada yada. For example, a nameless Christian member said that we should allow the Mosque at Ground Zero only if the Muslims agree to build a Jewish temple at the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, while reaffirming that it wasn't real Christians who carried out the crusades and the inquisition and so on.

Why is this double think in place with these individuals? Thoughts?

Interesting you criticize Christians. I believe in general anytime we find a person that is not willing to be the example of what they believe you have a pretender and not a "real" believer. Humanity has a rather bloody history. How much of that are you willing to take responsibility for - or do you think of "them" as another kind of humans?

Zadok

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

I guess my point is that religious folk are quick to take offence when we paint them with a broad brush. For example, if we point out that a Christian carried out some horrible act, they are quick to point out that the guy was not of their particular sub sect of Christianity. But when Muslim bashing is going on, they jump on the band wagon and blame all Muslims for what a particular sub sect of Islam (say Wahabbi) did.

The broader picture seems to indicate that religion is not really unifying people together, rather it seems to divide and conquer. Religious people live in fear of other religious folk. According to religion, the mantra seems to be " Agree with me and we will be unified, else I will kill you." This hypocrisy of religion is rather depressing.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

Interesting you criticize Christians. I believe in general anytime we find a person that is not willing to be the example of what they believe you have a pretender and not a "real" believer. Humanity has a rather bloody history. How much of that are you willing to take responsibility for - or do you think of "them" as another kind of humans?

Zadok

I am not criticizing Christians in particular. It was a demographic thing. I just gave an example of a Christian member. It is often true of other religious folk too.
Yes, humanity has had a bloody history. I willingly take responsibility for our past actions. We did not know better then and we don't seem to be doing any better now.

 

[tomato1236]

Totally retarded. Not real Christians? What's a real Christian? People say I'm not a real Christian. If real Christians are the ones who think it's a good idea to burn Qurans to get innocent people to move their place of worship, even though the real Christians go to chuch like 4 states away, fine. I'd rather be the kind of Christian who does his homework before casting blame. The kind of Christian who gives people the benefit of the doubt, and allows Americans to worship where and what they may.

Here is an article of faith from my "fake" Christianity:

#11 "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

Sounds American to me.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

Totally retarded. Not real Christians? What's a real Christian? People say I'm not a real Christian. If real Christians are the ones who think it's a good idea to burn Qurans to get innocent people to move their place of worship, even though the real Christians go to chuch like 4 states away, fine. I'd rather be the kind of Christian who does his homework before casting blame. The kind of Christian who gives people the benefit of the doubt, and allows Americans to worship where and what they may.

Here is an article of faith from my "fake" Christianity:

#11 "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

Sounds American to me.

Yes, all that is fine and dandy, but what's your point? And what does it have to do with this thread? And who are these people who say you are not a real christian?

 

[Man of Faith]

A real Christian is one who has been born again. But that aside, can we get over the crusades by now? We have killing in the name of certain religions and secularism going on today and people want to point way back to the crusades to compare them to Christianity. If that is all you got then the scales are way out of balance in favor of Christianity.

 

[sandandfoam]

Real Christians, real atheists, real fairies, real FSM's.....

No such thing. We are all unique and individual. As are our views.
A Crusader was not a Christian as I understand myself to be a Christian. We're both real Christians even though our views are opposed and contradictory.
The world is not black and white.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

A real Christian is one who has been born again. But that aside, can we get over the crusades by now? We have killing in the name of certain religions and secularism going on today and people want to point way back to the crusades to compare them to Christianity. If that is all you got then the scales are way out of balance in favor of Christianity.

You are very good at missing the point. And thank you for making my point in the process.

 

[tomato1236]

Yes, all that is fine and dandy, but what's your point? And what does it have to do with this thread? And who are these people who say you are not a real christian?

I guess you don't get it. I think it was relavent. Maybe one of the other posters can explain it to you.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

I guess you don't get it. I think it was relavent. Maybe one of the other posters can explain it to you.

If you had paid attention to my posts, you would notice that you are proving my point. Same as MoF.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

The "real" religion is defined by those who practice it. Religious people would be well-advised to keep this in mind if they are at all concerned with how their religion is viewed by outsiders.

 

[tomato1236]

If you had paid attention to my posts, you would notice that you are proving my point. Same as MoF.

Oh, I see. You're confused because you think I was trying to disagree with you. A summary of everything I said in response to the initial post could go something like this: I agree, and it's dumb.

Either that or you mean that I'm proving your point because I am, at present, killing people for not converting to my religion.

 

[beenie]

no one likes to admit the monstrous acts of people who share their faith, and they really don't like to embrace or recognize them as "one of them". people who kill others in the name of religion are getting their doctrine from somewhere...warped, but somewhere indeed.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

Oh, I see. You're confused because you think I was trying to disagree with you. A summary of everything I said in response to the initial post could go something like this: I agree, and it's dumb.

Either that or you mean that I'm proving your point because I am, at present, killing people for not converting to my religion.

Uh, no. I get that you are agreeing with me. But you are proving my point in the sense that religion divides people.

 

[beenie]

Uh, no. I get that you are agreeing with me. But you are proving my point in the sense that religion divides people.

and i agree here as well; religion divides people.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

no one likes to admit the monstrous acts of people who share their faith, and they really don't like to embrace or recognize them as "one of them". people who kill others in the name of religion are getting their doctrine from somewhere...warped, but somewhere indeed.

Yes, my point exactly. Frubals!

 

[allright]

Jesus life is the example of how a Christian should live.

Mohammed's life I assume would show how a Muslim should live.

Was Jesus violent?

Was Mohammed violent?