Why Do Christians Feel The Need To Bother People?

[Bree]

I just heard a sigh of relief from your husband

haha yeah well it mostly stays at the farm lol

 

[BilliardsBall]

None of this is true. Reciting your religious beliefs is not adequate as a claim and argument.

Trying to argue that the Bible fulfills any prophesies is a huge stretch of generous interpretations, and all quite dubious.

And the Noah myth? There is no sound argument to suggest it happened. The facts from any science you care to name demonstrates the Noah flood never happened. No geological evidence of any global flood. Engineering shows there is no way a wood boat could be built to the size as claimed in the story. We see no genetic bottleneck in any animals dating back to this supposed flood. And we know humans often believe in all sorts of untrue and implausible things due to social influence.

You've made overly general statements since the Bible contains thousands of prophecies and you used the word "all". Quite a few can be proven to have occurred as prophesied. More specifically, it was said that the Jewish people would retain their identity and their language for thousands of years before receiving their land in a single day, surrounded by enemies who would attack continually until Christ's return--but never defeat or displace them--some of the DOZENS of prophecies Israel has fulfilled since 1948!

I understand and even appreciate your skepticism about the Noah claims--I felt the same way before trusting the Bible and Jesus for salvation--and although there are good points to be made, for example, the last and largest wooden vessels in the modern era were almost exactly the dimensions of the ark but with sails added--start with the easier claims--Israel prophecies proven in modern news media--and then tackle more difficult subjects.

Healthy skepticism is good--but try to balance between skepticism and wider research. There are great materials out there about Israel and prophecy and the ark--your objections show you've not read many of them.

Please know I hear you--people believe nonsensical claims due to social pressures--but I would say I'm quite skeptical and logical by nature but also well read and studied.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You've made overly general statements since the Bible contains thousands of prophecies and you used the word "all". Quite a few can be proven to have occurred as prophesied. More specifically, it was said that the Jewish people would retain their identity and their language for thousands of years before receiving their land in a single day, surrounded by enemies who would attack continually until Christ's return--but never defeat or displace them--some of the DOZENS of prophecies Israel has fulfilled since 1948!

I understand and even appreciate your skepticism about the Noah claims--I felt the same way before trusting the Bible and Jesus for salvation--and although there are good points to be made, for example, the last and largest wooden vessels in the modern era were almost exactly the dimensions of the ark but with sails added--start with the easier claims--Israel prophecies proven in modern news media--and then tackle more difficult subjects.

Healthy skepticism is good--but try to balance between skepticism and wider research. There are great materials out there about Israel and prophecy and the ark--your objections show you've not read many of them.

Please know I hear you--people believe nonsensical claims due to social pressures--but I would say I'm quite skeptical and logical by nature but also well read and studied.

No. The Bible does not contain "thousands of prophecies". What it has are verses where Christians after the fact said "Hey, this could be referring to Jesus if you look at it the right way". Those are not prophecies. That is cheating after the fact. A well know one is the supposed "prophecy" of Jesus' birth in Isaiah. When read in context it is not about Jesus at all.

 

[metis]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,

But you glossed over this part: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...".

Sounds very religious to me

Again, we have no official religion, and frankly I'm glad about that as theocracies generally don't have a very good track record.

And if we were a truly "Christian country", why in the world would we ever have elected Trump as his words and behavior in general are the polar opposite of Christ's. And if you think for one minute that this is just hyperbole on my part, reread the Sermon On the Mount in Matthew and compare that to any of Trump's rally speeches in terms of general tone and how people are supposed to be treated.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

First Amendment


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Sounds very religious to me

You are not allowed to interfere with anyone else's free exercise of their religion, even if it's a minority religion or one without political power. No religion is favoured, and no religion gets to suppress any other religion.

Sounds pretty secular to me.

 

[F1fan]

You've made overly general statements since the Bible contains thousands of prophecies and you used the word "all". Quite a few can be proven to have occurred as prophesied. More specifically, it was said that the Jewish people would retain their identity and their language for thousands of years before receiving their land in a single day, surrounded by enemies who would attack continually until Christ's return--but never defeat or displace them--some of the DOZENS of prophecies Israel has fulfilled since 1948!

There have been claims and arguments by Christians over these ideas, and none are accepted as being credible.

I understand and even appreciate your skepticism about the Noah claims--I felt the same way before trusting the Bible and Jesus for salvation--and although there are good points to be made, for example, the last and largest wooden vessels in the modern era were almost exactly the dimensions of the ark but with sails added--start with the easier claims--Israel prophecies proven in modern news media--and then tackle more difficult subjects.

Healthy skepticism is good--but try to balance between skepticism and wider research. There are great materials out there about Israel and prophecy and the ark--your objections show you've not read many of them.

Please know I hear you--people believe nonsensical claims due to social pressures--but I would say I'm quite skeptical and logical by nature but also well read and studied.

It's not skepticism, facts are such that the Noah flood did not happen. To claim otherwise is to ignore facts, and that is not rational. The story is impossible to interpret literally. Bible literalists cannot overcome the facts. I don't know why you all keep trying.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There have been claims and arguments by Christians over these ideas, and none are accepted as being credible.


It's not skepticism, facts are such that the Noah flood did not happen. To claim otherwise is to ignore facts, and that is not rational. The story is impossible to interpret literally. Bible literalists cannot overcome the facts. I don't know why you all keep trying.

Over the years I would first refute a very literal interpretation of the Noah's Ark Myth. Far too often creationists would try to claim my version is a strawman. Now to avoid that I usually ask for their version so that I could show that it is wrong. And this is the response that I get:










< . . . crickets . . .. >

 

[Kenny]

But you glossed over this part: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...".

Again, we have no official religion, and frankly I'm glad about that as theocracies generally don't have a very good track record.

And if we were a truly "Christian country", why in the world would we ever have elected Trump as his words and behavior in general are the polar opposite of Christ's. And if you think for one minute that this is just hyperbole on my part, reread the Sermon On the Mount in Matthew and compare that to any of Trump's rally speeches in terms of general tone and how people are supposed to be treated.

Why did Jesus select a traitor for his team? Why did the people select Saul as King when God was King? Why did the first set of Israelites enter into unbelief? We can never know all the "why's". But did that change who Jesus is, who YHWY is or that we are a Christian nation without establishing a particular denomination as the official belief system?

If the US is a composite of the parts, all we have to do is look at "the parts" to see what the whole is...
Constitutions:

Florida: We, the people of the State of Florida, being grateful to Almighty God

New York: We The People of the State of New York, grateful to Almighty God for our Freedom, in order to secure its blessings,

Penn: WE, the people of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and humbly invoking His guidance

California: "We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure and perpetuate its blessings,

Delaware: Through Divine goodness, all men have by nature the rights of worshiping and serving their Creator according to the dictates of their consciences,

AND ALL THE OTHER STATES.

Question....

Does that sound secular? If not, does it sound Buddhist? Hindu? Muslim?

Nope... it is definitely a Christian nation IMHO

 

[Kenny]

You are not allowed to interfere with anyone else's free exercise of their religion, even if it's a minority religion or one without political power. No religion is favoured, and no religion gets to suppress any other religion.

Sounds pretty secular to me.

#128

 

[metis]

Nope... it is definitely a Christian nation IMHO

Again, the U.S. is not officially a Christian nation per the 1st Amendment as it plainly says there in black & white. Whether we are culturally one can be debated both ways.

IMO, I believe we're a mixture, and I certainly don't have a problem with that as I don't believe in a "one size fits all" approach.

 

[Kenny]

Again, the U.S. is not officially a Christian nation per the 1st Amendment as it plainly says there in black & white. Whether we are culturally one can be debated both ways.

IMO, I believe we're a mixture, and I certainly don't have a problem with that as I don't believe in a "one size fits all" approach.

But I did make a strong case.

 

[Subduction Zone]

But I did make a strong case.

No, it was weak. You only referenced powerless poetic phrases in state constitutions. When it comes to whether the US is secular or not the First Amendment reigns supreme. When states tried to write laws based upon those weak phrases they were found to be unconstitutional. They were mere platitudes at best.

 

[F1fan]

Nope... it is definitely a Christian nation IMHO

Well the USA is a product of European imperialism that justified many atrocities against indigenous people via the righteousness of Christianity. This was how these crimes against humanity were acceptable and tolerable when people back home read about it at their breakfast. Tribes of those living in southern Africa, the Maya of South America, the Native Americans of North America all were obliterated because Christians had a presumption of moral superiority.

So yes the USA has a majority of Christians, and the founding fathers knew that religion was not a moral basis to create and exercise government policy. The USA acted on this anyway, and used Manifest Destiny as an excuse. Today we see a great deal of unethical policies being forced on Americans through Christian fundamentalists, and these acts are certainly constitutionally questionable.

The question is whether Christians have the moral tolerance for other religions. The bullying and force through political policy suggests they are not.

 

[Brian2]

Even if they don't want, don't believe. That is not fair. It is unnecessary interference in someone else's affairs. You are not entitled to it, whatever you claim your God to have said about it. Who are you to judge their need?

A lot of the time we can see the needs of others without asking and at other times we can ask what they would like or what they need.
We can't take care of the needs of everyone we see however.
Jesus spoke of someone who had been beaten by thieves and left on the road and of various people who saw the man and passed by and of one person who stopped to help and who made sure that the medical needs of the person were taken care of.
The other people were too busy or did not want to interfere or etc.
God asked Cain, "where is your brother Abel" and Cain said "am I my brother's keeper"
No we aren't out brother's keeper but all people are our brothers and sisters and we are to take care of them when and if it is appropriate.
Maybe in India where what happens to people is seen as their Karma, that caring for others can be shrugged off more easily.

 

[Brian2]

We don't have any actual God coming forth and saying this, only fallible mortals, like yourself, claiming this without evidence.

If there is a God it is clear that God is not forcing people to do anything.

Moderate and liberal Christians are usually pretty tolerant of others and their diverse beliefs. It is only conservative Christians that have problems with the freedoms of others. Look at your subtle bullying. You write posts as if you speak for God, but you can't show any God actually exists, nor that if it did that it agrees with you. That is quite arrogant.

To my mind if Christians really believed in their vengeful God they would bend over backwards being careful what they say. Right wing Christians are often sloppy and careless about how they speak of their version of God and it implies they aren't afraid, and don't really believe it exists.

OK then I guess I am arrogant to your way of thinking. Thanks for that comment, maybe it's true.

Funny how often Christians disagree but never think they are wrong in their interpretation. Someone is wrong, but it's never admitted. You guys ought to stop and think about what you believe.

Maybe all us Christians are arrogant and all think that the others are wrong. If we hold a belief that is how it usually is. But of course it is good to be open to change. It is unfortunate to an extent that our teachers in the various churches and up forming a whole group to their way of thinking and that can make being open to change harder.

 

[Aupmanyav]

No we aren't out brother's keeper but all people are our brothers and sisters and we are to take care of them when and if it is appropriate.

The Christian help includes mass murders in various continents, forced removal of children from their parents. At least Hinduism did not do that.
And to me as an atheist, it is just replacement of one lie with another.

 

[Kenny]

Well the USA is a product of European imperialism that justified many atrocities against indigenous people via the righteousness of Christianity. This was how these crimes against humanity were acceptable and tolerable when people back home read about it at their breakfast. Tribes of those living in southern Africa, the Maya of South America, the Native Americans of North America all were obliterated because Christians had a presumption of moral superiority.

So yes the USA has a majority of Christians, and the founding fathers knew that religion was not a moral basis to create and exercise government policy. The USA acted on this anyway, and used Manifest Destiny as an excuse. Today we see a great deal of unethical policies being forced on Americans through Christian fundamentalists, and these acts are certainly constitutionally questionable.

The question is whether Christians have the moral tolerance for other religions. The bullying and force through political policy suggests they are not.

A beautiful creation of the rewriting of history. A modern day phenomena in full display.

I thank you!

 

[metis]

But I did make a strong case.

In your dreams!

 

[F1fan]

A beautiful creation of the rewriting of history. A modern day phenomena in full display.

I thank you!

False. We can see your intent to see the USA as dominated by Christian authority, and that is not consistent with the US Constitution. Christian extremists are imposing their beliefs on the USA through judges and representatives, but that is only creating a counter movement in the USA, as we saw in Kansas. I voted to allow women the freedom of reproductive rights along with the majority of Kansas citizens who do not want Christian extremists to govern us.

Christian extremists keep trying to force their religious beliefs onto America, and they have no respect for the Constitution or freedom from religion.

 

[F1fan]

If there is a God it is clear that God is not forcing people to do anything.

Right, nothing suggests any God exists. The lack of anything happening tells us we shouldn't assume any God exists. You can pretend one does, but that is bad faith, irrational belief, and an illusion.

OK then I guess I am arrogant to your way of thinking. Thanks for that comment, maybe it's true.

It's another vice that Christians are confused about. It illustrates how Christianity fails to make believers moral and better people. Christianity does reveal the true nature of people, the good and the bad. It certainly doesn't help bad people become good.

Maybe all us Christians are arrogant and all think that the others are wrong.

there are many humble and honorable Christians who understand the world is populated with a diversity of religious traditions. The good Christians accept others, and the bad Christians assume they have the only true faith. The irony is that this attitude betrays what Jesus taught.

If we hold a belief that is how it usually is. But of course it is good to be open to change. It is unfortunate to an extent that our teachers in the various churches and up forming a whole group to their way of thinking and that can make being open to change harder.

This is the whole point. If you indoctrinate children they can only become confused and in distress if they don't believe what they were taught is true. It is vastly better for the child to not indoctrinate them in a set of concepts that are dubious once subjected to reason.