Why do some Atheists say Christianity is harmful?

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yeah, because you shouldn't trust anyone until proven trustworthy. It's nothing to do with being Christian or not. That's my point - not allowing past traumas to cause you to view every member of a group in a negative light.

It would depend though....

If the trauma is a direct result of the ideology of the group the individual belonged to, then that's quite different from the individual acting from personal motivation or even better: counter the group ideology.


For example, anyone associating with Nazi's, KKK, al-qaida, ISIS, etc is -and should be- instantly distrusted. Right?

Now suppose you are a gay person who's been traumatised by homophobic christian actions... Why wouldn't you distrust christians in general unless individual christians give you reasons not to by demonstrating they distance themselves from the christian ideology of homophobia?
I mean, homophobia IS pretty much christian ideology. It's right there in their central doctrine called the bible: it calls homosexuality an abomination and even flat out states in Leviticus that men who sleep with men should be executed.


So while I certainly agree that one should not judge an entire group for the actions of individuals... you can't say this as an asbolute. Because the actions of individuals can be very much in line with the general ideology of said group. And then it really is a different story.

This is why association with a terror group like Al-qaida is by itself more then enough to put you on the radar of authorities and in many countries also already enough to get arrested.

 

[LuisDantas]

Whatever. Everyone's just venting their negativity in this thread. Not much room for understanding here. They should just lock this thread.

A thread asking for reasons why a doctrine is perceived as harmful will of course draw appropriate answers.

That is no reason to lock anything.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Paul didn’t write the Gospels. And neither Christ nor Buddha committed a word to paper, so all we have of the teachings of either, is what their followers recorded at the time, and down the centuries since.

i am talking of the teachings. is there any evidence of god, soul and the related things. what jesus taught is not true.

 

[RestlessSoul]

i am talking of the teachings. is there any evidence of god, soul and the related things. what jesus taught is not true.

Are you actually familiar with Christ’s teachings? Have you read the Gospels for yourself? How would you summarise them, what would you say is the essence of his message? And when did you become the arbiter of truth?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Are you actually familiar with Christ’s teachings? Have you read the Gospels for yourself? How would you summarise them, what would you say is the essence of his message? And when did you become the arbiter of truth?

my contention is very simple. what evidence those people have who talk about god, soul, heaven, hell, end of the days, judgment, resurrection?

 

[RestlessSoul]

my contention is very simple. what evidence those people have who talk about god, soul, heaven, hell, end of the days, judgment, resurrection?

So all of that stuff is the essence of Christ’s teaching, as you understand it? Fair enough, but I’d call that a superficial and selective reading of the Gospel message.

What evidence is there for all the magic and mysticism associated with dharmic religions? And would it be reasonable to dismiss all of Eastern religious thought and insight because it is often wrapped in superstition?

 

[PureX]

Whatever. Everyone's just venting their negativity in this thread. Not much room for understanding here. They should just lock this thread.

It is what the thread is asking for.

 

[LuisDantas]

And when did you become the arbiter of truth?

We are all arbiters of the truth of scriptures that purport to have religious validity.

Unless we are somehow put into the role of passive recipients of those scriptures, I suppose. Which would be offensive.

 

[LuisDantas]

So all of that stuff is the essence of Christ’s teaching, as you understand it? Fair enough, but I’d call that a superficial and selective reading of the Gospel message.

What evidence is there for all the magic and mysticism associated with dharmic religions? And would it be reasonable to dismiss all of Eastern religious thought and insight because it is often wrapped in superstition?

Yeah, that is a key difference between Dharmic and Abrahamic. Dharmic is much less vulnerable.

 

[RestlessSoul]

We are all arbiters of the truth of scriptures that purport to have religious validity.

Unless we are somehow put into the role of passive recipients of those scriptures, I suppose. Which would be offensive.

We are all free to decide what we believe; that does not make even the most grandiose of us 'arbiters of truth' for all our fellows, though of course many do aspire to cast themselves in this light.

 

[LuisDantas]

We are all free to decide what we believe; that does not make even the most grandiose of us 'arbiters of truth' for all our fellows, though of course many do aspire to cast themselves in this light.

You are utterly mistaken here, sorry.

You demand credentials where none can reasonably ever be demanded.

It is not even necessary to justify judging the merits or lack thereof of Christianity when one is not a Christian, because Christianity presumes to be applicable to every human being and thereby gives everyone the authority needed.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Yeah, that is a key difference between Dharmic and Abrahamic. Dharmic is much less vulnerable.

All religions are by their nature prone to superstition, rigid doctrine, the promotion of hierarchies, accusations of heresy etc. The question is whether on balance, they do more harm than good.

 

[RestlessSoul]

You are utterly mistaken here, sorry.

You demand credentials where none can reasonably ever be demanded.

It is not even necessary to justify judging the merits or lack thereof of Christianity when one is not a Christian, because Christianity presumes to be applicable to every human being and thereby gives everyone the authority needed.

I'm not demanding anything; I'm merely insisting on the right to remain sceptical, whenever anyone anywhere proclaims a universal truth (or untruth).

 

[PureX]

All religions are by their nature prone to superstition, rigid doctrine, the promotion of hierarchies, accusations of heresy etc. The question is whether on balance, they do more harm than good.

But those who are anti-religious (anti-Christian) can't judge that, as they aren't focused on, or even aware of the good religions can do in people's lives. They may recognize it abstractly, but they have no real sense of it. And so for them it mostly doesn't exist.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

If you want to condemn a religion based on 2000+ year old views on homosexuality that may or may not have be advocated by Jesus, that's your prerogative.

Of course we judge the religion for those views. They are also the modern view of a large number of Abrahamics. It also doesn't matter what people claim or believe Jesus said. What matters is what present day Christians are taught

Everyone's just venting their negativity in this thread. Not much room for understanding here.

Really? There's not much room for understanding? Not if you reduce it all to venting negativity. Perhaps you should pay more attention to the answers. You don't have to like them or what they portend for the future of Christianity, but you might benefit from understanding those objections and why they're so widespread.

So while I certainly agree that one should not judge an entire group for the actions of individuals... you can't say this as an asbolute. Because the actions of individuals can be very much in line with the general ideology of said group. And then it really is a different story.

I suspect that' you would agree that it is valid to judge an ideology independent of the degree of penetration it has on its adherents. This religion teaches homophobia. That every Christian is not homophobic doesn't matter to that judgment. It's also valid to judge somebody for being willing to be included among the group and to hold them accountable for silently condoning the harm that ideology does.

when did you become the arbiter of truth?

As soon as he was able to make judgments. We're all arbiters of the truth.

We are all free to decide what we believe; that does not make even the most grandiose of us 'arbiters of truth' for all our fellows, though of course many do aspire to cast themselves in this light.

You've moved the goalposts when you added, "for all our fellows." That's not the question you asked.

would it be reasonable to dismiss all of Eastern religious thought and insight because it is often wrapped in superstition?

It's reasonable to dismiss all of the superstition and any conclusions based in it. It's also reasonable to judge the remaining philosophy on its merits, and decide which parts of it are relevant to oneself.

If you're making the argument through analogy that it's not reasonable to reject Christianity because of its superstitions, rest assured that there is more reason than that to reject it. The lack of empirical support for its god is good reason to reject it. The flaws in its moral theory (hell theology, sin intolerance, homophobia, misogyny, atheophobia) tell us not to go there for life advice.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The thread is entitled

Why do some Atheists say Christianity is harmful?​

I believe the question is being answered. Obviously not to your liking but non the less, various reasons have been put forward.

And i see you venting at anyone you don't agree with.

No, I criticized a form of behavior. I am not venting at "anyone" I don't agree with in this thread, which is most people posting here. I moved on, can you? But thanks for proving my point. This is just another thread for antitheists to bash Christianity. That's all it is now. Have a wonderful time, and Merry Christmas to all. I hope you all enjoy your gifts of bitterness and resentment. Lol.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Of course we judge the religion for those views. They are also the modern view of a large number of Abrahamics. It also doesn't matter what people claim or believe Jesus said. What matters is what present day Christians are taught

Would is surprise you to know that 70% of Catholics think homosexuality should be accepted?

Religious Landscape Study

Explore the geographic distribution and demographics of America's major religious groups.

www.pewresearch.org

 

[ChristineM]

No, I criticized a form of behavior. I am not venting at "anyone" I don't agree with in this thread, which is most people posting here. I moved on, can you? But thanks for proving my point. This is just another thread for antitheists to bash Christianity. That's all it is now. Have a wonderful time, and Merry Christmas to all. I hope you all enjoy your gift of bitterness. Lol.

I have moved on, thanks for your response

Note it was a theist who started this thread. What would you expect from such an OP, that all the non theists lay back so you can tickle their belly?

So tell me, have you moved on from griping about how horrendous your life is? As i remember most people, including atheist were quite sympathetic to your plight.

BTW, we don't do Christmas but you please enjoy yours

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

This is just another thread for antitheists to bash Christianity.

That's disengenous imo.
The OP asked why people who say christianity is harmful, actually think it is harmful.
To then accuse people of "bashing christianity" when people then answer that question, is pretty improper imo.

Obviously no answer is going to be putting christianity in a good light. Obviously, every answer is going to put a spotlight on negative aspects of christianity.

The OP is literally ASKING people to do just that.
To then complain that people are doing what they are asked to do is not correct.

That's all it is now.

It's all it is supposed to be, by invitation in the OP.

Have a wonderful time, and Merry Christmas to all. I hope you all enjoy your gifts of bitterness and resentment.

Sounds like you are the one here drowning in bitterness and resentment though.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I have moved on, thanks for your response

Note it was a theist who started this thread. What would you expect from such an OP, that all the non theists lay back so you can tickle their belly?

So tell me, have you moved on from griping about how horrendous your life is? As i remember most people, including atheist were quite sympathetic to your plight.

BTW, we don't do Christmas but you please enjoy yours

I'm not going to carry on with you.