Wirey
Fartist
I know it to be fake. It's like what turns me away from embracing a magical teapot that farts unicorn babies. It's not real.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
what turns you off from Christianity?
- Thread starter truelight Mike
- Start date
I know it to be fake. It's like what turns me away from embracing a magical teapot that farts unicorn babies. It's not real.
Demonslayer
Well-Known Member
As a devout fartist, I'm surprised you're not on board with this belief.
Demonslayer
Well-Known Member
Jesus and the misappropriation of Jewish scripture.
Yes.
Assuming an historical Jesus, I assume that he was an honest voice for social change.
I see Christianity as a fabrication.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
One of the reasons I don't really doubt there probably was someone who inspired the Jesus mythos is the simple fact that people who get vocal about peace and tolerance tend to wind up executed or assassinated. Everything else seems more-or-less like a typical shaman from any other culture.
So, you think it 'probable' because it is not improbable. Seriously?
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
No, I'm saying it's possible that someone who inspired the Jesus stories may have existed, and it wouldn't surprise me if he did, based on the fact we list off people who were very pro-peace who were killed or at least had an attempt on their life, and his methods, down to throwing his voice, are things that shamans do. I'm saying it's probable that such a person did exist, not the Messiah and son of god part, but a healer who taught peace, and got enough attention to have him killed off.
Fine. I'm simply noting that
I don't really doubt there probably was someone who inspired the Jesus mythos ...
and
I'm saying it's possible that someone who inspired the Jesus stories may have existed, and it wouldn't surprise me if he did, ...
strike me as different positions.
Kartari
Active Member
Demonslayer,
I wouldn't want to be in the same room as one for too long. But at least a fartist preacher sounds more entertaining.
I wouldn't want to be in the same room as one for too long. But at least a fartist preacher sounds more entertaining.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
Their self righteous attitude, their arrogance of believing they know all, and I hate their big noses stuck in everything that has nothing to do with them.
Let's just say there is nothing there that has turned me on. I have found much more of value in secular philosophies (Epicureans, Stoics, secular humanism, Confucians) and Eastern thoughts like Buddhism and Hinduism (my native culture) than in the ideas from monotheistic worldviews. i read the NT and parts of the OT and did not find anything much there that impacted me. The rise and spread of Christianity as an event in history is very interesting and I follow the historical studies relating to it, but in terms of ideas and inspiration I find Socrates, Aristotle, Buddha's writing and some Hindu writings (Gita, Upanisads, Nyaya writings) more compelling in every which way.
You may differ in your views of course, though I am not sure how many people have actually read all these works I mentioned. Not many by my experience, which makes checking my impressions with others difficult.
Jesus was probably a desert tramp, but good at heart.
Peter told tales about J's preaching about town.
Matthew and his friends got old and some died,
Ahhhhh....the stories they told.....
Saul heard them and inflated them, and killed Jesus.
That didn't really work until the Catholics took over.
That changed everything, the Catholics had the bigger fires,
and later....the bombs !
I see that everything is changing again, watch the towels !!
~
'mud
Peter told tales about J's preaching about town.
Matthew and his friends got old and some died,
Ahhhhh....the stories they told.....
Saul heard them and inflated them, and killed Jesus.
That didn't really work until the Catholics took over.
That changed everything, the Catholics had the bigger fires,
and later....the bombs !
I see that everything is changing again, watch the towels !!
~
'mud
Demonslayer
Well-Known Member
Big knowsesNow your confusing the Christians with the Jews.
Sand Dancer
Currently catless
After spending almost half of my life as a Christian, I decided that I couldn't continue to make up excuses for a literal and inerrant Bible. I just can't do those types of gymnastics anymore. I still like Jesus though, and although there are conflicting quotes, I like the positive ones better.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
Ha, that hit me just after I wrote it, your on the ball.Now your confusing the Christians with the Jews.
Personally, I see the emphasis on sin as 'realism'.
Human beings often do horrible and insensitive things to each other. Human beings have an innate tendency to act in their own interest and even against the guidance of their own conscience, despite retaining dignity and original purity as creatures made in God's Image.
But the Christian message is, "its OK, there is a better way and through the saving grace of God you can be reborn as a new person".
Without Paul, Christianity would likely have remained a marginal Jewish sect that may have perished following the collapse of the Second Temple. Paul enabled it to become a global religion. Take Paul out of the mix and Christianity probably wouldn't exist at all. Plus, his Letters are probably the most eloquent sections of the entire Bible.
That's true, this did lamentably occur.
Yet "forced conversion" has always been against the Law of Christ, as understood by the majority of denominations. These were deviations, when zeal for one's faith exacerbated due bounds and led to inhumanity - religious fundamentalism, zealotry. That is not unique to Christianity.
Indeed, you only have to consider a few episodes - largely unknown, unlike the Inquisition for instance - to see a very different image. I'll give you one - FULLY sourced.
It is 866 AD.
The story concerns Khan Boris, the Prince of the Bulgars - a nomadic, warrior people of mixed Turkic-Slavic origin. They practised a pagan religion called Tengriism and roamed the steppes around the Sea of Asov, near the Byzantine Empire, with their hordes of wild horsemen: looting and bounty-hunting.
In 865, Khan Boris had converted to Christianity and baptised many of his tribesmen into the new religion.
A group of boyar, aristocrats among the Bulgars, were not happy with this change of religion - not happy at all. They sought to depose Khan Boris, murder him and reinstate a new Khan who would restore the old faith. And so an uprising began against him.
In response, Khan Boris slaughtered not only the 57 rebellious, pagan boyars but there entire families along with them. The survivors were then tortured to extort confessions of guilt.
In 866 Khan Boris sent a letter to Pope St. Nicholas the Great, asking him a series of questions about Christian faith and morals (since he hadn't even, as of yet, read the Bible). He also inquired about this episode and whether it was moral under 'the Christian law'.
The Pope told him, in no uncertain terms, that this was against divine law and he would have to adopt fresh, civilised and humane tactics from now on if he wanted to remain right with the God he had just baptised himself and much of his people under. The Pope explicitly said that confessions to suspected crime could not be "violently extorted" by means of torture, any form of physical compulsion, that non-combatants could not be killed or made to suffer along with the guilty and that even the guilty rebels who took up arms should be spared, out of Christian clemency, capital punishment and be allowed to live. Moreover, the Pope stressed that pagans could not be forced to embrace the Christian religion - only voluntarily come to it.
Consequently, Boris would have to repent of these sins. He eventually did this by becoming a monk and abandoning power, that is freely giving up his Khananate and abdicating as Khan of the Bulgars. Presumably the Pope's criticism must have weighed heavily on his soul.
Here is Pope St. Nicholas I's actual reply:
http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/866nicholas-bulgar.asp
Chapter XVII.
Now then, you have told us about how you received the Christian religion by divine clemency and made your entire people be baptized, and how these people, after they had been baptized, rose up unanimously and fiercely against you, claiming that you had not given them a good law and also wishing to kill you and establish another king; and how you, having been readied against them with the help of divine power, conquered them from the greatest to the least and held them captives in your hands, and how all the leaders and magnates along with every one of their children were slaughtered by the sword, though the mediocre and lesser persons suffered no evil. Now you desire to know whether you have contracted any sin on account of those who were deprived of their lives. Clearly what you did not escape without sin nor could have happened without your fault, was that a child who was not privy to their parents' plot nor is proven to have born arms against you, was slaughtered along with the guilty, although innocent. For after the Psalmist said: I shall not go to my seat in the counsel of vanity and with people who do iniquitous deeds, I have hated the gatherings of the wicked and I shall not sit with the impious, [Ps. 25:4-5] he says a little while later in this regard, while praying to the Lord: Do not destroy my soul with the impious nor my life with the men of blood.[Ps. 25:9] Furthermore, the Lord declares through the prophet Ezechiel, saying: Just as the soul of the father is mine, so, too, the soul of the son: only the soul that has sinned shall perish;[Ez. 18:4]...You also should have acted with greater mildness concerning the parents who were captured, that is, [you should have] spared their lives for the love of the God Who delivered them into your hands. For thus you might be able to say to God without hesitation in the Lord's prayer: Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.[Mt. 6:12] But you also could have saved those who died while fighting, but you did not permit them to live nor did you wish to save them, and in this you clearly did not act on good advice; for it is written: There shall be judgment without mercy for the person, who does not exercise mercy;[James 2:13]...
Chapter XVIII.
You indicate that you wish to know what you should do concerning those who reject the Christian law...The Church should persuade him like a mother, like a teacher...
Chapter XLI.
Concerning those who refuse to receive the good of Christianity and sacrifice and bend their knees to idols, we can write nothing else to you than that you move them towards the right faith by warnings, exhortations, and reason rather than by force, proving that what they know in vain, is wrong: [cf. Jer. 1:16] namely that, although they are people with capable intellects...Violence should by no means be inflicted upon them to make them believe. For everything which is not voluntary, cannot be good; for it is written: Willingly shall I sacrifice to you,[Ps. 53:8] and again: Make all the commands of my mouth your will,[Ps. 118:108] and again, And by my own will I shall confess to Him.[Ps. 27:7] Indeed, God commands that willing service be performed only by the willing.
Chapter CII.
We have taught above that violence should not be inflicted upon the pagan in order to make him become a Christian.
Chapter LXXXVI.
If a thief or a robber is apprehended and denies that he is involved, you say that in your country the judge would beat his head with lashes and prick his sides with iron goads until he came up with the truth. Neither divine nor human law allows this practice in any way, since a confession should be spontaneous, not compelled, and should not be elicited with violence but rather proferred voluntarily. But if it just so happens that you find nothing at all which casts the crime upon the one who has suffered, aren't you ashamed and don't you recognize how impiously you judge? Likewise, if the accused man, after suffering, says that he committed what he did not commit because he is unable to bear such [torture], upon whom, I ask you, will the magnitude of so great an impiety fall if not upon the person who compelled this man to confess these things falsely? Indeed, the person who utters from his mouth what he does not hold in his heart is known not to confess but to speak.[cf. Mt. 12:34] Therefore leave such practices behind and heartily curse the things which you have hitherto done foolishly. Indeed, what fruit shall you have in those practices, of which you are now ashamed. Finally when a free man is caught in a crime, unless he is first found guilty of some wicked deed, he either falls victim to the punishment after being convicted by three witnesses or, if he cannot be convicted, he is absolved after swearing upon the holy Gospel that he did not commit [the crime] which is laid against him, and from that moment on the matter is at an end, just as the oft-mentioned Apostle, the teacher of the nations, attests, when he says: an oath for confirmation is an end of all their strife.[Heb. 6:16]...
Far be it from your minds that you, who have acknowledged so pious a God and Lord, now judge so harshly, especially since it is more fitting that, just as hitherto you put people to death with ease, so from now on you should lead those whom you can not to death but to life. For the blessed apostle Paul, who was initially an abusive persecutor and breathed threats and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord,[cf. Acts 9:1] later sought mercy and, converted by a divine revelation, not only did not impose the death penalty on anyone but also wished to be anathema for the brethren [cf. Rom. 9:3] and was prepared to spend and be spent most willingly for the souls of the faithful.[cf. II Cor. 12:15] In the same way, after you have been called by the election of God and illuminated by his light, you should no longer desire deaths but should without hesitation recall everyone to the life of the body as well as the soul, when any opportunity is found. [cf. Rom. 7:6] And just as Christ led you back from the eternal death in which you were gripped, to eternal life, so you yourself should attempt to save not only the innocent, but also the guilty from the end of death, according to the saying of the most wise Solomon: Save those, who are led to death; and do not cease freeing those who are brought to their destruction. [Prov. 24:11]
Now then, you have told us about how you received the Christian religion by divine clemency and made your entire people be baptized, and how these people, after they had been baptized, rose up unanimously and fiercely against you, claiming that you had not given them a good law and also wishing to kill you and establish another king; and how you, having been readied against them with the help of divine power, conquered them from the greatest to the least and held them captives in your hands, and how all the leaders and magnates along with every one of their children were slaughtered by the sword, though the mediocre and lesser persons suffered no evil. Now you desire to know whether you have contracted any sin on account of those who were deprived of their lives. Clearly what you did not escape without sin nor could have happened without your fault, was that a child who was not privy to their parents' plot nor is proven to have born arms against you, was slaughtered along with the guilty, although innocent. For after the Psalmist said: I shall not go to my seat in the counsel of vanity and with people who do iniquitous deeds, I have hated the gatherings of the wicked and I shall not sit with the impious, [Ps. 25:4-5] he says a little while later in this regard, while praying to the Lord: Do not destroy my soul with the impious nor my life with the men of blood.[Ps. 25:9] Furthermore, the Lord declares through the prophet Ezechiel, saying: Just as the soul of the father is mine, so, too, the soul of the son: only the soul that has sinned shall perish;[Ez. 18:4]...You also should have acted with greater mildness concerning the parents who were captured, that is, [you should have] spared their lives for the love of the God Who delivered them into your hands. For thus you might be able to say to God without hesitation in the Lord's prayer: Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.[Mt. 6:12] But you also could have saved those who died while fighting, but you did not permit them to live nor did you wish to save them, and in this you clearly did not act on good advice; for it is written: There shall be judgment without mercy for the person, who does not exercise mercy;[James 2:13]...
Chapter XVIII.
You indicate that you wish to know what you should do concerning those who reject the Christian law...The Church should persuade him like a mother, like a teacher...
Chapter XLI.
Concerning those who refuse to receive the good of Christianity and sacrifice and bend their knees to idols, we can write nothing else to you than that you move them towards the right faith by warnings, exhortations, and reason rather than by force, proving that what they know in vain, is wrong: [cf. Jer. 1:16] namely that, although they are people with capable intellects...Violence should by no means be inflicted upon them to make them believe. For everything which is not voluntary, cannot be good; for it is written: Willingly shall I sacrifice to you,[Ps. 53:8] and again: Make all the commands of my mouth your will,[Ps. 118:108] and again, And by my own will I shall confess to Him.[Ps. 27:7] Indeed, God commands that willing service be performed only by the willing.
Chapter CII.
We have taught above that violence should not be inflicted upon the pagan in order to make him become a Christian.
Chapter LXXXVI.
If a thief or a robber is apprehended and denies that he is involved, you say that in your country the judge would beat his head with lashes and prick his sides with iron goads until he came up with the truth. Neither divine nor human law allows this practice in any way, since a confession should be spontaneous, not compelled, and should not be elicited with violence but rather proferred voluntarily. But if it just so happens that you find nothing at all which casts the crime upon the one who has suffered, aren't you ashamed and don't you recognize how impiously you judge? Likewise, if the accused man, after suffering, says that he committed what he did not commit because he is unable to bear such [torture], upon whom, I ask you, will the magnitude of so great an impiety fall if not upon the person who compelled this man to confess these things falsely? Indeed, the person who utters from his mouth what he does not hold in his heart is known not to confess but to speak.[cf. Mt. 12:34] Therefore leave such practices behind and heartily curse the things which you have hitherto done foolishly. Indeed, what fruit shall you have in those practices, of which you are now ashamed. Finally when a free man is caught in a crime, unless he is first found guilty of some wicked deed, he either falls victim to the punishment after being convicted by three witnesses or, if he cannot be convicted, he is absolved after swearing upon the holy Gospel that he did not commit [the crime] which is laid against him, and from that moment on the matter is at an end, just as the oft-mentioned Apostle, the teacher of the nations, attests, when he says: an oath for confirmation is an end of all their strife.[Heb. 6:16]...
Far be it from your minds that you, who have acknowledged so pious a God and Lord, now judge so harshly, especially since it is more fitting that, just as hitherto you put people to death with ease, so from now on you should lead those whom you can not to death but to life. For the blessed apostle Paul, who was initially an abusive persecutor and breathed threats and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord,[cf. Acts 9:1] later sought mercy and, converted by a divine revelation, not only did not impose the death penalty on anyone but also wished to be anathema for the brethren [cf. Rom. 9:3] and was prepared to spend and be spent most willingly for the souls of the faithful.[cf. II Cor. 12:15] In the same way, after you have been called by the election of God and illuminated by his light, you should no longer desire deaths but should without hesitation recall everyone to the life of the body as well as the soul, when any opportunity is found. [cf. Rom. 7:6] And just as Christ led you back from the eternal death in which you were gripped, to eternal life, so you yourself should attempt to save not only the innocent, but also the guilty from the end of death, according to the saying of the most wise Solomon: Save those, who are led to death; and do not cease freeing those who are brought to their destruction. [Prov. 24:11]
Last edited:
That's what I find contradictory. I don't understand how we can be the image of God, yet have an inherently sinful nature. As a Hindu who is pan[en]theistic (my feeling is you can be both), I'm not only the image of God, I am part of God. According to some schools, Advaita (literally "not two", non-dualism) being the most prominent school with this belief: we are God.
Does the end justify the means? If Christianity did not survive, then I'd say it wasn't meant to survive. There are certainly some reasons I am glad it did, if only for what Jesus taught. And Paul did write some eloquent things, especially about love, but I think to a too-large degree he interjected a lot of personal opinion.
Now, I will give him the benefit of the doubt in that maybe he's been misquoted and mistranslated. I've read that in some of the things he wrote he used phrases in Greek that were arcane even for his time.
But in the end, it all just doesn't work for me. In the same way Buddhism and even Heathenry (despite what I initially thought) don't work for me. Nothing inherently wrong, just that certain things don't make sense.
Demonslayer
Well-Known Member
One thing that turns me off about Christianity is when Christian posters cut and paste pages of Bible verse.
Many things.
First off, I find it illogical. The Trinity is a mess and makes no sense. How exactly Christ's Passion is supposed to have a salvific effect on us is never really explained. How one species sinning apparently caused the disruption of the entire cosmos is not really explained and it doesn't seem fair because of all the other lifeforms who have to suffer here with us. Why are non-human animals here, suffering with us? Did they sin, too? Did the plants sin?
Second off, I find its teachings to be pretty negative and dangerous. It's dualistic (good vs. evil, matter/flesh vs. spirit, Heaven vs. Hell, God vs. Satan, etc.), whereas reality isn't black and white. It sets absurdly high standards that no human could ever hope to live up to (Jesus and Mary don't count because Jesus was the sinless Son of God/God incarnate and Mary was also sinless due to an act of Divine will, according to Catholicism and Orthodoxy - the rest of us aren't so special). This creates a vicious cycle of guilt, shame and self-hate. You feel like a piece of **** and are obsessed with avoiding sins, even when it comes to your very thoughts. You thought someone was sexy and had sexual thoughts about them? That's a sin. You ate red meat on Friday during Lent? That's a sin. You went shopping on Sunday during Lent? That's a sin. You masturbated, even without porn or erotica? That's a sin and you'll go to Hell if you don't confess it. You're openly LGBT and aren't celibate or change sex? That's a mortal sin (trans people can't even be godparents in the Catholic Church). You read, watched or listened to something that's less than pure? That's a sin. Etc.
Catholicism, especially, is extremely sadomasochistic. It's been a popular practice for centuries for Christian ascetics to torture themselves ("redemptive suffering"). They would whip themselves bloody, starve themselves, wear hairshirts, wear a cilice, lick the sores of lepers and whatever else think could think of to make themselves suffer. Many of the most celebrated saints and monastics were into this and many of them were driven to hysteria due to their deprivations. Many of the mystics, such as St. Teresa of Avila, had very sexual religious visions about angels and Christ because of their sexual repression. Many of the male saints and visionaries had vivid visions of having homosexual marriage ceremonies with Christ, as well.
Along with the sadomasochism, there's a real morbid death worship aspect, too. The iconography is extremely gory. Corpses and body parts are displayed in churches around the world and venerated, including fondled and kissed.
More about this stuff here, along with much more besides:
http://www.badnewsaboutchristianity.com/gfj_sadomasochism.htm
http://www.badnewsaboutchristianity.com/gfk_necrophilia.htm
Third, the history of Christianity is quite awful. Fanatical Christians have been committing cultural and physical genocide since the beginning of the religion. They played a large role in destroying my beloved Greco-Roman civilization. They destroyed the temples, defaced the beautiful sacred statues, made worship of the old Gods punishable by death and closed the great ancient schools of learning. They burned countless books and falsified history. They murdered great figures of science and learning like Hypatia, and later tried to whitewash her into a Christian saint! They lied about much of the early history of Christianity, creating a fable of persecution and martyrdom. Most of those ancient saints and martyrs didn't exist in the first place.
They plunged Europe into about a millennia of stagnation, filth (literally), superstition and perverse brutality. While this was going on, Islamic civilization was carrying the torch of civilization that was bequeathed by the Hellenes. Spain was much better off under the Muslims, for example.
They took this sickness around the globe, forcing it on the native peoples all over the planet. They wiped out civilizations, destroyed indigenous knowledge, erased peoples from history. They destroyed the heritage of millions of peoples. They enslaved millions of Africans and indigenous Americans. They lost their names and their families. They completely wiped out multiple peoples, such as the native Tasmanians. There's none of them left.
The crimes of Christians are manifold. Far too much to go into in order to do the victims justice. My heart breaks over it.
Anyway, as for Jesus - I don't have a high opinion of him. I think most people have a rosy view of Jesus because they don't bother to actually read the Gospels and we've been feed a dumb, sanitized view of him.
As I posted before:
"...Jesus isn't all that kind in the NT, himself. He makes demons go into a herd of pigs which run off a cliff (animal cruelty), he curses a fig tree (that's just mean), he's rude to his mother, he tells a parable that ends with a command to bring disobedient people to him and kill them in front of him, he encourages self-mutilation, he encourages apocalyptic end of the world beliefs, he tells his followers that they must love him more than their own parents and children (that's extremely dysfunctional), he encouraged his followers to leave their families behind and follow him (that's abandonment), he told a person who had to bury his father to forget about that and join his traveling cult, he's racist towards non-Jews who approach him for help and only helps them after they degrade themselves before him, etc.
The actual Jesus of the Gospel stories is more akin to Charles Manson, David Koresh or Jim Jones than the sanitized, romanticized version we're used to hearing about. No surprise that many of these modern cult leaders either claim to be the second coming of Christ or are heavily influenced by him. He's a prototypical narcissistic charismatic cult leader with a megalomanical bent who encourages his followers to disassociate from society and their own families and formed a sort of traveling commune (creates an insular setting of reinforcement of belief that often turns into a trap), the world outside of the cult is to be shunned as it is viewed as being under the influence of an evil force (promotes paranoia and distrust of outsiders and outside points of view), he taught that the end of the world is nigh and was supposed to have happened at any moment (promotes more paranoia and fanaticism), malevolent spiritual beings are believed to be around every corner (promotes delusion), sick or ill people were believed to be possessed by demons (promotes delusion and a shunning of actual medicine), etc.
If Jesus was wandering around today, we'd think he was a crank. Most of us would, anyway.
It makes me recall a funny memory. One time I was in line at the store and I was wearing one of my Charles Manson shirts and this dude says to me "Jesus loves you". I just chuckled. I should've responded with "Jesus is just the world's best known cult leader" and/or "Charlie and Jesus are more far more alike than you think"."
http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/how-much-of-this-info-is-true.186787/page-2#post-4727125
I highly doubt that there ever was an historical Jesus in the first place. Jesus is whatever you want him to be. He's a one size fits all best friend (savior).
So I don't have a high opinion of either Jesus or Christianity. I can respect that it's a powerful narrative and it meets certain emotional needs. I can appreciate the power and beauty of it. But when it comes to analyzing the historical record and judging its theology, I can't help but take a dim view of it. Personally speaking from my experiences, it caused me emotional harm as as well as wasted time. It was also a matter of wasted effort, trying to be accepted by a bunch of self-righteous hypocrites.
That's my honest opinion, in brief, and I don't mean to offend. If Christianity works for you and is a positive influence in your life, that's wonderful and I encourage you to stick with it. It just didn't work for me and I could not, in good conscience, continue to affiliate with such a belief system.
First off, I find it illogical. The Trinity is a mess and makes no sense. How exactly Christ's Passion is supposed to have a salvific effect on us is never really explained. How one species sinning apparently caused the disruption of the entire cosmos is not really explained and it doesn't seem fair because of all the other lifeforms who have to suffer here with us. Why are non-human animals here, suffering with us? Did they sin, too? Did the plants sin?
Second off, I find its teachings to be pretty negative and dangerous. It's dualistic (good vs. evil, matter/flesh vs. spirit, Heaven vs. Hell, God vs. Satan, etc.), whereas reality isn't black and white. It sets absurdly high standards that no human could ever hope to live up to (Jesus and Mary don't count because Jesus was the sinless Son of God/God incarnate and Mary was also sinless due to an act of Divine will, according to Catholicism and Orthodoxy - the rest of us aren't so special). This creates a vicious cycle of guilt, shame and self-hate. You feel like a piece of **** and are obsessed with avoiding sins, even when it comes to your very thoughts. You thought someone was sexy and had sexual thoughts about them? That's a sin. You ate red meat on Friday during Lent? That's a sin. You went shopping on Sunday during Lent? That's a sin. You masturbated, even without porn or erotica? That's a sin and you'll go to Hell if you don't confess it. You're openly LGBT and aren't celibate or change sex? That's a mortal sin (trans people can't even be godparents in the Catholic Church). You read, watched or listened to something that's less than pure? That's a sin. Etc.
Catholicism, especially, is extremely sadomasochistic. It's been a popular practice for centuries for Christian ascetics to torture themselves ("redemptive suffering"). They would whip themselves bloody, starve themselves, wear hairshirts, wear a cilice, lick the sores of lepers and whatever else think could think of to make themselves suffer. Many of the most celebrated saints and monastics were into this and many of them were driven to hysteria due to their deprivations. Many of the mystics, such as St. Teresa of Avila, had very sexual religious visions about angels and Christ because of their sexual repression. Many of the male saints and visionaries had vivid visions of having homosexual marriage ceremonies with Christ, as well.
Along with the sadomasochism, there's a real morbid death worship aspect, too. The iconography is extremely gory. Corpses and body parts are displayed in churches around the world and venerated, including fondled and kissed.
More about this stuff here, along with much more besides:
http://www.badnewsaboutchristianity.com/gfj_sadomasochism.htm
http://www.badnewsaboutchristianity.com/gfk_necrophilia.htm
Third, the history of Christianity is quite awful. Fanatical Christians have been committing cultural and physical genocide since the beginning of the religion. They played a large role in destroying my beloved Greco-Roman civilization. They destroyed the temples, defaced the beautiful sacred statues, made worship of the old Gods punishable by death and closed the great ancient schools of learning. They burned countless books and falsified history. They murdered great figures of science and learning like Hypatia, and later tried to whitewash her into a Christian saint! They lied about much of the early history of Christianity, creating a fable of persecution and martyrdom. Most of those ancient saints and martyrs didn't exist in the first place.
They plunged Europe into about a millennia of stagnation, filth (literally), superstition and perverse brutality. While this was going on, Islamic civilization was carrying the torch of civilization that was bequeathed by the Hellenes. Spain was much better off under the Muslims, for example.
They took this sickness around the globe, forcing it on the native peoples all over the planet. They wiped out civilizations, destroyed indigenous knowledge, erased peoples from history. They destroyed the heritage of millions of peoples. They enslaved millions of Africans and indigenous Americans. They lost their names and their families. They completely wiped out multiple peoples, such as the native Tasmanians. There's none of them left.
The crimes of Christians are manifold. Far too much to go into in order to do the victims justice. My heart breaks over it.
Anyway, as for Jesus - I don't have a high opinion of him. I think most people have a rosy view of Jesus because they don't bother to actually read the Gospels and we've been feed a dumb, sanitized view of him.
As I posted before:
"...Jesus isn't all that kind in the NT, himself. He makes demons go into a herd of pigs which run off a cliff (animal cruelty), he curses a fig tree (that's just mean), he's rude to his mother, he tells a parable that ends with a command to bring disobedient people to him and kill them in front of him, he encourages self-mutilation, he encourages apocalyptic end of the world beliefs, he tells his followers that they must love him more than their own parents and children (that's extremely dysfunctional), he encouraged his followers to leave their families behind and follow him (that's abandonment), he told a person who had to bury his father to forget about that and join his traveling cult, he's racist towards non-Jews who approach him for help and only helps them after they degrade themselves before him, etc.
The actual Jesus of the Gospel stories is more akin to Charles Manson, David Koresh or Jim Jones than the sanitized, romanticized version we're used to hearing about. No surprise that many of these modern cult leaders either claim to be the second coming of Christ or are heavily influenced by him. He's a prototypical narcissistic charismatic cult leader with a megalomanical bent who encourages his followers to disassociate from society and their own families and formed a sort of traveling commune (creates an insular setting of reinforcement of belief that often turns into a trap), the world outside of the cult is to be shunned as it is viewed as being under the influence of an evil force (promotes paranoia and distrust of outsiders and outside points of view), he taught that the end of the world is nigh and was supposed to have happened at any moment (promotes more paranoia and fanaticism), malevolent spiritual beings are believed to be around every corner (promotes delusion), sick or ill people were believed to be possessed by demons (promotes delusion and a shunning of actual medicine), etc.
If Jesus was wandering around today, we'd think he was a crank. Most of us would, anyway.
It makes me recall a funny memory. One time I was in line at the store and I was wearing one of my Charles Manson shirts and this dude says to me "Jesus loves you". I just chuckled. I should've responded with "Jesus is just the world's best known cult leader" and/or "Charlie and Jesus are more far more alike than you think"."
http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/how-much-of-this-info-is-true.186787/page-2#post-4727125
I highly doubt that there ever was an historical Jesus in the first place. Jesus is whatever you want him to be. He's a one size fits all best friend (savior).
So I don't have a high opinion of either Jesus or Christianity. I can respect that it's a powerful narrative and it meets certain emotional needs. I can appreciate the power and beauty of it. But when it comes to analyzing the historical record and judging its theology, I can't help but take a dim view of it. Personally speaking from my experiences, it caused me emotional harm as as well as wasted time. It was also a matter of wasted effort, trying to be accepted by a bunch of self-righteous hypocrites.
That's my honest opinion, in brief, and I don't mean to offend. If Christianity works for you and is a positive influence in your life, that's wonderful and I encourage you to stick with it. It just didn't work for me and I could not, in good conscience, continue to affiliate with such a belief system.