why reject christianity

[Marvin L. Zinn]

I can only speak for myself, but I personally rejected Christianity because I came to the conclusion that it had nothing to do with Christ or God. That it is no more than a theological counterfeit. And yes I do expect a returning Christ to offer an absolute 'proof for faith' that is a one way street to the confirmation of ultimate reality and a return to the original covenant, 'as in the beginning'.

Basically you are correct because most people who call themselves "Christian" do not follow the teaching and example of Jesus with his disciples. Jesus never started any organization. never built a special "church" and never collected money for what he taught.
However, in 20 countries where I worked there is fellowship between people who follow Jesus's example and "preachers" sent by God do not need any college degree or title, they just follow the example Jesus lived by. No special building is needed; no money is ever collected in any meeting, but all needs are met.
Any human document or title will ever lead to heaven, only truth and love just as Jesus lived.

 

[loverofhumanity]

why many people reject christianity? is there a problem with the teachings and messages? the crucifixion of christ means nothing to them? don't they like a religion based on love? many people want proof. but, if there was proof, ''believing'' would be an one-way street and faith would be pointless. if there was undeniable proof, how would we choose christ as our saviour?

I think people reject the man made dogmas of Christianity not the message of love Jesus taught.

I fully accept Jesus and the Bible but I would never join a man made Christian Church because they do not base their religion on what Jesus taught but on their own ideas and they spread so much disunity.

Many of the laws, dogmas, rituals and traditions of churches go directly against what Jesus taught. True Christianity is to follow what Jesus taught not what the preachers preach.

Often preachers preach hate against other Faiths. I have no time for these people who seek to create disharmony between religions. We should always seek peace and reconciliation not hostility and antagonism which the clergy often foster.

Christ taught love. Anything less is not Christianity and unacceptable.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That's where you're wrong. Creation science looks for evidence and provides the evidence.

Great. Provide any example where creation "science," backed up by evidence, arrives at a conclusion that's contrary to actual science.

It's science the way it was done in the past.

No, it isn't. "Creation science" is a political movement, not a scientific one. It's a response to mostly-American court rulings that stopped creationism from being taught in public schools. "Creation science" was an attempt mostly in the 1960s to remove the parts from creationism that couldn't survive a court challenge in order to push religion in schools as much as they thought the law would allow. They failed.

A few decades later, the Intelligent Design movement arose as an attempt to rework "creation science" so that it would pass legal challenge... but they failed too.

So none of it is about science at all.

 

[Debateable]

when there are many alternatives, you take a pick.

Or you chose none because you realize that they are all made up, like they always have been.

 

[soma]

Religion encourages us to join a church or group, but the spirit encourages us to experience the divine consciousness that is within and surrounding us. To commit our self to Christ consciousness opens our Christian mind to a new awareness that helps us make a deep-rooted contribution to life on Earth. We don’t create this experience, but we allow it to happen then love, joy, generosity, tolerance and compassion emanate from our soul.

 

[Palehorse]

why many people reject christianity? is there a problem with the teachings and messages? the crucifixion of christ means nothing to them? don't they like a religion based on love? many people want proof. but, if there was proof, ''believing'' would be an one-way street and faith would be pointless. if there was undeniable proof, how would we choose christ as our saviour?

Christianity is a religion based on Judaism. Judaism believes in the crucification of CHRIST then and whenever chrIst... returns. Although Catholicism is being devoured by Christianity many Catholics are surcoming to the evils of Christianity. And according to the Christian teachings in accordance with the rapture the Catholic church is the last to be surcomed.

 

[Michael1981]

I can only speak for myself, but I personally rejected Christianity because I came to the conclusion that it had nothing to do with Christ or God. That it is no more than a theological counterfeit. And yes I do expect a returning Christ to offer an absolute 'proof for faith' that is a one way street to the confirmation of ultimate reality and a return to the original covenant, 'as in the beginning'.

Hi Robert,

I'm a bit confused by your message. Are you saying that nominal Christendom has nothing to do with Christ or God, or are you saying that true Christianity has nothing to do with Christ or God? Do you know which is which?

What sort of proof are you looking for? Didn't Jesus Christ say to the apostle Thomas, "Blessed is he who believes but does not see"? What do you think that means?

 

[Palehorse]

Hi Robert,

I'm a bit confused by your message. Are you saying that nominal Christendom has nothing to do with Christ or God, or are you saying that true Christianity has nothing to do with Christ or God? Do you know which is which?

What sort of proof are you looking for? Didn't Jesus Christ say to the apostle Thomas, "Blessed is he who believes but does not see"? What do you think that means?

I am not replying to your own words but I do have to reply to your scripture. "He is not GOD he is what GOD created read genesis or otherwise use thy word GOD in vain [out of context]

 

[Michael1981]

I am not replying to your own words but I do have to reply to your scripture. "He is not GOD he is what GOD created read genesis or otherwise use thy word GOD in vain [out of context]

Not sure what you mean, Palehorse. If you're saying that Jesus Christ isn't God, well that just isn't correct. Jesus Christ is the Father come in the flesh; the Scriptures plainly testify to this, if you're given to see it. And He certainly wasn't created:

"All things were made by Him; and without him was not any thing made that was made." (John 1:3)

 

[Palehorse]

Yes you are correct but the point I am trying to make in regards to written scripture is the words he, him, who, this, that, me,....... these are words that refer to entities that are not GOD. Those words are in reference to entities CHRIST was referring to. Christ told "he" to stop crucifying . "He" is the name of an oriental. Do you know people whos first name is "he"? The truth dwells within the word. But people are limited to the knowledge of the english language created by GOD. GOD created HE. Genesis.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Because it's a fabricated lie?

 

[jmt09]

Love is simple, but the details are complicated. In my opinion Christianity is rejected when it becomes brittle, too inflexible to allow multiple points of view. Brittle Christianity results in the rise of political power in its membership, and whoever has the strongest argument gains influence while whoever starts the argument also benefits. Everyone else loses. One person says the others are wrong, deluded and so forth. There is no trust that God will guide the other people. When Christians become concerned about who is right about what, that is when cracks develop in the love that holds everything together. There is a very long term war inside of Christianity between love and this tendency to clamp down on truth.

I’m curious: is making truth claims inconsistent with loving someone, on your view? I’m unclear as to how you mean

 

[Boris56]

I don't believe such a person as Jesus Christ ever existed. The stories are ridiculous and written in the style of fiction.

 

[Rival]

Judaism believes in the crucification of CHRIST then and whenever chrIst... returns.

Nope.

 

[joelr]

Because it's mythology.
The standard opinion in the historicity field is that Jesus was a man but the supernatural aspects are mythology.

Archeology, -why the bible is not history - William Dever, Professor Emeritus at the University of Arizona, has investigated the archeology of the ancient Near East for more than 30 years and authored almost as many books on the subject. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/archeology-hebrew-bible.html

Debunking historical claims -http://www.truthbeknown.com/pliny.htm


most importantly: PHd historian Richard Carrier -

I've seen over 20 hours of Carrier debating Christian scholars and fundamentalist historians and no one has even come close to proving him wrong. His recent book on the historicity of Jesus is still waiting peer review but it's likely to be the field standard. All of his debates are online. Carrier covers the entire spectrum of evidence, all gospels in or outside the bible, all historical mentions of Jesus and all of the similar mystery religions.

 

[scott777]

why many people reject christianity? is there a problem with the teachings and messages? the crucifixion of christ means nothing to them? don't they like a religion based on love? many people want proof. but, if there was proof, ''believing'' would be an one-way street and faith would be pointless. if there was undeniable proof, how would we choose christ as our saviour?

This question implies that you can only be a good, caring person if you are a Christian, which is utter nonsense and very prejudice against atheists and generally against other religions too. Did it not occur to the poster that people surely were capable of being good even before Christianity?

 

[Tumah]

Judaism believes in the crucification of CHRIST then and whenever chrIst... returns.

No, no, I'm afraid that's wrong. That's all wrong. Terribly, terribly wrong.

 

[Rival]

No, no, I'm afraid that's wrong. That's all wrong. Terribly, terribly wrong.

How wrong is it? I'm not sure you're clear.

 

[Tumah]

The stories are ridiculous and written in the style of fiction.

I don't disagree with the first part, but I believe the second half, while true isn't completely accurate. The stories seem to be written with the intent of appealing to it's Jewish readers - and I'd guess more specifically, it's less learned Jewish readers. You'll find stories where Jewish beliefs are portrayed and then ridiculed (without of course presenting the logic behind the belief when accurately portrayed). You'll find stories where the main character seems to be confirming concepts in Judaism. You'll find stories where the main character seems to be re-enacting events from the lives other personalities in the Tanach. And of course you'll find stories where the saintly main character ridicules Jewish leaders for unsubstantiated crimes against the nation.

This is definitely a polemic in the strongest sense of the word.

 

[Tumah]

How wrong is it? I'm not sure you're clear.

Quite wrong.

I just hope before the poster moves on, he becomes aware of just how wrong. I'm expecting an argument along the lines of "the Jews in those days did". But with G-d's help, he'll be able to move on from that terribly wrong nonsense.