Christian Bashing... A Question

[phee]

I (as well as some others) have been recently accused of being a person whom partakes in "Christian Bashing"

I have not pictured myself as doing such, simply discussing, researching, questioning and making an attempt to understand other peoples beliefs... If I have given the impression that I "Christian Bash" first of all I apologize, and second I would very much like to know if this the case, how I do so, and how I can discuss these questions without being offensive in the future.

Thanks

[HipsterDufus]

I think it's pretty obvious where I stand on fundamentalist Christians. I have no problem bashing them whatsoever. However, anyone who's willing to have a rational, logical discussion on religion is fine in my book, no matter what they believe. Still, it seems that those willing to have rational discussions are practically never fundamentalist Christians. Go figure. To the best of my knowledge, we don't have any fundamentalists on the board...

**edit**

Oh, and by the way, Phee, I've never seen you bash anyone, much less Christians.

[phee]

I think it's pretty obvious where I stand on fundamentalist Christians. I have no problem bashing them whatsoever. However, anyone who's willing to have a rational, logical discussion on religion is fine in my book, no matter what they believe. Still, it seems that those willing to have rational discussions are practically never fundamentalist Christians. Go figure. To the best of my knowledge, we don't have any fundamentalists on the board...

**edit**

Oh, and by the way, Phee, I've never seen you bash anyone, much less Christians.

Kewl... I appreciate what you are saying as well as the feedback... I never want to come accross as intolerent... But I admit that I have an intolerence for the intolerence....

[Troy Spiral (13)]

I think typcially at least in the west, questioning a person's relgious convictions is "impolite". If you publicly seem a bit too flippant toward chrstianity in particular, its very rapidly viewed as negative. Soon after, given any additional provocation you may elicit hardcore emotional hatred for questioning such deeply held ideas.

Just the act of questioning the validity of christianity , in and of itself can be viewed as "attacking" it. For some its easy to see this connection, for others they have no clue why this would be the case. Trying to make a case for atheism for instance, could be taken by some (unfairly im currently thinking) as being "bashing christianity".

Wise-assed jokes at the expense of christian icons is probably another good way to get that reputation.

I'm not saying that this is nesssiarly logical or illogical. Not nessisarly right or wrong. Just an observation where what you might see as an unfair simplification of your views could stem from.

Then theres the people (especially within the goth community) that are openly "against christianity" and often you can get guilt by association.

Religion and Politics two of best ways to get people irritated quick and get people to stop thinking and start reacting emotionall. I'd say 80% of all the personality conflicts on the whole board are associated in one way or another with this forum.

[kellygrrrrrl]

I didn't know you bashed the Christians?

Dammit Phee, how many times do I have to tell you not to bash the Christians!

I'm taking away your large hitting stick.....

Ok,....

I thought it was just a conversation too.

[Msterbeau]

If I come across as negative when discussing Christianity it's from the perspective of personal experience and being raised Catholic. They obviously weren't good experiences.

Phee, on the other hand, bashes them because they make a nice crunching sound.

[phee]

I think typcially at least in the west, questioning a person's relgious convictions is "impolite". If you publicly seem a bit too flippant toward chrstianity in particular, its very rapidly viewed as negative. Soon after, given any additional provocation you may elicit hardcore emotional hatred for questioning such deeply held ideas.

Just the act of questioning the validity of christianity , in and of itself can be viewed as "attacking" it. For some its easy to see this connection, for others they have no clue why this would be the case. Trying to make a case for atheism for instance, could be taken by some (unfairly im currently thinking) as being "bashing christianity".

Wise-assed jokes at the expense of christian icons is probably another good way to get that reputation.

I'm not saying that this is nesssiarly logical or illogical. Not nessisarly right or wrong. Just an observation where what you might see as an unfair simplification of your views could stem from.

Then theres the people (especially within the goth community) that are openly "against christianity" and often you can get guilt by association.

Religion and Politics two of best ways to get people irritated quick and get people to stop thinking and start reacting emotionall. I'd say 80% of all the personality conflicts on the whole board are associated in one way or another with this forum.

So is that a yes you do Phee, or a no not really but others could take it that way?

[Homicidalheathen]

Do you use a bat or club?

[Paper Hearts]

I think maybe some people like to pretend they're persecuted...because it makes it seem more passable to them to be forcefull in trying to silence everyone not associated with their beliefs. Regardless, no matter how intolerant a culture a religion has, there's nothing wrong with stating opposing views and there's nothing wrong with beginning that sort of discussion. It could just as easily be called non-Christian bashing to make that sort of arguement...but most people are more accepting than that, and you'll notice no one else has tried to impose such an idea.

[Steven]

I suppose it all depends on what you would classify as a "bash".....

on this board we've many times seen (of which I too am guilty) back and forth banter that amounts to basically "Everything was fine till you got PERSONAL and attacked me".

and I'd gather that many times the offending parties are not even aware that they are in offense mode. Or that their points of view have seemignly been received as a hostile advance.

What we beleive, hopefully to some degree - should carry some passion with it. And all of us are personally attatched to our own ideals. that alone, makes it extremely difficult to either not deliver a racy point of view or to not receive one as such.

but we have to keep on with this. Cutting out topics of conversation is obviously no solution.

so do you guys Christian bash? (not jsut talking to Phee here)

sometimes.

and I don't think your aware of it. I understand your points of view on the subject - and that for some of you to some degree its an irritable issue. This carries across in your conversations from time to time. And I know that although some of you exclude me from those blanket observations, you still take turns occasionally painting a picture of how clueless and brain dead and misinformed all of these zealouts are.....of which...I am one. And so yes, i feel it. Of course I do.

For example, you sometimes have a tendency to introduce some seemingly understood (on the surface) bread and butter christian concepts - yet you discuss it with optimul sarcasm and often with only a partial understanding of that which you rebuke. You make stements about what Christians beleive, and yet very rarely do any of you ever ask me in particular to illustrate why I beleive what I do as it may or may not apply to that which you introduce as a flawed example. You have a chance here to go a little deeper, but you dont. Instead you rest on your laurels, your studies, your own methods of context arrangement.

And I say partial understanding because taking a class, studying a book as literature, doing model theology comparisons, etc., does not bring you into the inside of the culture itself, one who's very nature as possibly a bit different than is commonly understood as has been illustrated by, well...me.

in addition you quote out of context. You cite certain apparent biblical mandates without introducing the history of it and how it does or does not apply to the subject at hand. you literally never unpeel the Greek, Aramaic, or Hebrew translation of certain words or ideas that you seem to feel you have exposed. You sometimes ignore the culture of the time that the peice was written, or the history of the people it surrounds, or the covenent overshadowing that particular scriptural referance point or the passing of leadership and the provisions that accompany that and how it is or is not reflected in the text. And you quote or refer to biblical text to make your points, and then dismiss or disregard my own as no longer being sound because the text itself is subject to intepritive corruption, therefore I do not have the same allowances with these things that you do.

All of this stuff....goes on here constantly.

[Guest Game of Chance]

I don't think its a matter of bashing christians personally as much as it is bashing christianity (or any other dogmatic philosophy) generally.

[phee]

Believe me I could... if you would like... quote the original greek (as I do have it) if it would give more credibilty.

But is "questioning"... "bashing?" I have been asked by missionary Chirstians "Why are you not a christian?" and a discussion ensues... I don't feel bashed until the discussion ends up in the usuall "Don't you care that because of this you are going to hell?" That is when the bashing starts...

As far as my "own contexts and studies".... well what else do I have? I cannot be another person with there education and context that is impossible.

And I will have to disagree with the quoting out of context... when someone quotes the bible as "and such and such said" that in and of itself is out of context by it's very nature... (as there is no record what so ever of what the original context actually is)

I guess if you had to pinpoint where you feel the most "disrespected" what part of the way I/others talk to you make you feel that way?

[phee]

I don't think its a matter of bashing christians personally as much as it is bashing christianity (or any other dogmatic philosophy) generally.

That's the thing... Dogmatic or not... I like to not bash ... even when these religions by there very nature bash me... (as the planes bashed into the world trade center, or as the campus chrusade for christ did in a samller manner when I was in school). I like to question... to make people think about where they are comming from... just as I hope others do for me... If after thinking through all of the facts and information (such as the fact that the bible has been changed tens of thousands of times by accident as well as politcal reasons) and still come back to the same conclusion... so be it, not saying it's wrong. Or if you associate yourself with a group that has been responsible for mass murder, and despite this label remain... OK that is your choice.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

You just compared Christianity to the World Trade Center attack... You don;t see how people could be offended by that?

[Guest Game of Chance]

I don't disagree with making people question their viewpoints.

But I don't look at things the same way as you. I feel that christian (and muslim, judaic, etc...) dogmas are restricting society's advancement (culturally, scientifically and otherwise). Therefore, I consider them (the dogmas) the enemy.

Restriction, to me, is the only sin.

I'll do anything I can to fight the empire of the slave-gods until my dying breath.

[Steven]

Believe me I could... if you would like... quote the original greek (as I do have it) if it would give more credibilty.

But is "questioning"... "bashing?" I have been asked by missionary Chirstians "Why are you not a christian?" and a discussion ensues... I don't feel bashed until the discussion ends up in the usuall "Don't you care that because of this you are going to hell?" That is when the bashing starts...

As far as my "own contexts and studies".... well what else do I have? I cannot be another person with there education and context that is impossible.

And I will have to disagree with the quoting out of context... when someone quotes the bible as "and such and such said" that in and of itself is out of context by it's very nature... (as there is no record what so ever of what the original context actually is)

I guess if you had to pinpoint where you feel the most "disrespected" what part of the way I/others talk to you make you feel that way?

Good reply.

and I agree that those who try to tell you that yoru going to hell or any of that shit have just bashed you.

a favor.....go back and re read my post. It seems I'm not getting thru...... some breif review:

A) quoting scripture to make an anti Christian point.

B) then refuting scripture that makes a pro-christian point.

A) the tone or "color" if you will of many blanket anti christian statements made.

B) the inclusion of one of "them" (me) ...among all of you.

A) the "context" of certain anti christian or anti biblical points of view being introduced in partiality.

B) the (seemingly) lack of reciprical invitations in said discussion to ensure a balanced review or to facillitate an understanding of why an alternative point of view may exist.

A) the unpeeling of original translation. You said you've got the Greek. I think that's cool. And yes please do include that, perhaps we'll all learn something.

B) bringing along also, the hebrew and Aramaic perspectives as well. Do some unpacking. Try. TO put thigns in spme sort of discussional perpective that allows for alternative points of view. Consider the tone of said statement - is it inviting, or corrosive?

fair enough?

I'm not going after anybody Phee.

I'm simply making a very obvious statement, that for a man like me, in a place like this, i am definately the one outside, definately the one under the most scrutiny, and definately the one who has to take it on the chin with some regularity. I'm not complaining. but you asked - do I bash? And I'm saying that as a whole, yes, i beleive some bashing goes on in here. Intended or not.

[phee]

You just compared Christianity to the World Trade Center attack... You don;t see how people could be offended by that?

I didn't compare Dogmatic religions to the world trade center attack.... Christianity and Islam are dogmatic religions, and in the case of the muslims in question claimed that their dogmatic religion was the reason...

I suppose I compared Christianity to Islam.

If by compare you mean: "consider or describe as similar, equal, or analogous" then no... the religion in and of it self and the action are not comparable...

As religion as I understand it is: "a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny"

And the attacks on the world trade center are people hijacking plains and slaughtering innocents... the correlation that I see is the dogmatic religion.

[Steven]

I don't disagree with making people question their viewpoints.

But I don't look at things the same way as you. I feel that christian (and muslim, judaic, etc...) dogmas are restricting society's advancement (culturally, scientifically and otherwise). Therefore, I consider them (the dogmas) the enemy.

Restriction, to me, is the only sin.

I'll do anything I can to fight the empire of the slave-gods until my dying breath.

yeah, i know.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

That's the thing... Dogmatic or not... I like to not bash ... even when these religions by there very nature bash me... (as the planes bashed into the world trade center, or as the campus chrusade for christ did in a samller manner when I was in school).

Then just what the hell is that?

[phee]

Good reply.

and I agree that those who try to tell you that yoru going to hell or any of that shit have just bashed you.

a favor.....go back and re read my post. It seems I'm not getting thru...... some breif review:

A) quoting scripture to make an anti Christian point.

B) then refuting scripture that makes a pro-christian point.

A) the tone or "color" if you will of many blanket anti christian statements made.

B) the inclusion of one of "them" (me) ...among all of you.

A) the "context" of certain anti christian or anti biblical points of view being introduced in partiality.

B) the (seemingly) lack of reciprical invitations in said discussion to ensure a balanced review or to facillitate an understanding of why an alternative point of view may exist.

A) the unpeeling of original translation. You said you've got the Greek. I think that's cool. And yes please do include that, perhaps we'll all learn something.

B) bringing along also, the hebrew and Aramaic perspectives as well. Do some unpacking. Try. TO put thigns in spme sort of discussional perpective that allows for alternative points of view. Consider the tone of said statement - is it inviting, or corrosive?

fair enough?

I'm not going after anybody Phee.

I'm simply making a very obvious statement, that for a man like me, in a place like this, i am definately the one outside, definately the one under the most scrutiny, and definately the one who has to take it on the chin with some regularity. I'm not complaining. but you asked - do I bash? And I'm saying that as a whole, yes, i beleive some bashing goes on in here. Intended or not.

Very good response Steven... and point(s) taken

[phee]

Then just what the hell is that?

Can you be more specific?

That is my examples of religions people "bashing" others... if i understand you

[HipsterDufus]

I think that basically what we're finding here is that the Christians on the board may feel attacked simply because they're in a minority, much the same way that an atheist will feel attacked when he visits a fundamentalist Christian church. When a worldview is the minority in a given social setting, it's no surprise that the person following that worldview will feel offended/attacked at some point in time or another. I suppose I don't really understand why someone would put themselves in such a situation, but it's not my place to explain it for the Christians on the board.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Yes... and in your example you compare Dogmatic religions (that you name as Christian and Islam) to the attack on the world trade center.

and somehow you don't see how people could be offended by that.

[Steven]

I think that basically what we're finding here is that the Christians on the board may feel attacked simply because they're in a minority, much the same way that an atheist will feel attacked when he visits a fundamentalist Christian church. When a worldview is the minority in a given social setting, it's no surprise that the person following that worldview will feel offended/attacked at some point in time or another. I suppose I don't really understand why someone would put themselves in such a situation, but it's not my place to explain it for the Christians on the board.

no, not simply because I'm a minority. Give me a wee bit of credit on this one bud.

can you go back and re read my two posts?

[phee]

Yes... and in your example you compare Dogmatic religions (that you name as Christian and Islam) to the attack on the world trade center.

and somehow you don't see how people could be offended by that.

I think that the offensive part is that someone uses religion as a weapon don't you? The offensive part is that they have taken religion and used it as an exuse to murder...

In answer to your question... why be offended by a person who stated that dogmatic religion such as Christianity and Islam were used in this way as a fact? It is true... redirect the offense to those who gave the religions a bad name to many...