Why Are People So Critical About Christian Beliefs

[Condunum]

*the one I've taken the form of shall not have done research on any positions he takes* I... It's... Well... Carbon dating?

HOLD IT! Ever heard of FORGED evidence?

Blasphemy! Shun! You are questioning the truth of the word of a believer? YOU WILL SUFFER IN HELLFIRE!

(I gotta go for the night.)

[Bluth Corporation]

And I say your brand because a majority of Christians would disagree with your definition, indeed most theologians and biblical scholars would disagree with your definition.

Roman Catholics, Protestants, Calvinists, Jesuits, etc.

I could call myself a "Bulgarian," but that wouldn't make it so.

[Bluth Corporation]

Please, when responding to a post, develop the habit of reading it in its entirety. It might prevent you from missing things like:

Translation: "I'll believe whatever I want and then claim a nonsense label to attach to it and denounce everyone else as LIARS!"

Please don't pretend to have special insight into my own thought processes that I myself do not possess. It's absurd.

[Bluth Corporation]

The first four quotes are by Paul from Tarsus' letters. The word of Jesus should always be taken over those. Also Paul of Tarsus is giving advice to women in the church for that historical time period. Nowhere does he say that God says women should be silent etc etc.
The last three quotes are from the Old Testament. Messages in the New Testament automatically take precedence over messages from the Old Testament.

Jesus said he did not come to destroy the Old Testament.

As I've explained already in this thread, Matthew 5:17 is perhaps the single most misinterpreted passage in the Gospels.

[Conserative Morality]

Please don't pretend to have special insight into my own thought processes that I myself do not possess. It's absurd.

Please don't pretend you have the right to abuse the English language. If the English language were a woman, they'd put you on the six o'clock news and start a nationwide manhunt for you.

[Conserative Morality]

As I've explained already in this thread, Matthew 5:17 is perhaps the single most misinterpreted passage in the Gospels.

That's one of your more ridiculous assertions. However, it's what I've come to expect from you. Egotistical rambling with little relevance to the reality of the topic.

[Big Jim P]

Please don't pretend to have special insight into my own thought processes that I myself do not possess. It's absurd.

Please don't pretend you have the right to abuse the English language. If the English language were a woman, they'd put you on the six o'clock news and start a nationwide manhunt for you.

Only if the grammar Nazis were in control.

[Bluth Corporation]

As I've explained already in this thread, Matthew 5:17 is perhaps the single most misinterpreted passage in the Gospels.

That's one of your more ridiculous assertions. However, it's what I've come to expect from you. Egotistical rambling with little relevance to the reality of the topic.

So what, pray tell, is erroneous about my interpretation of Matthew 5:17?

[Bluth Corporation]

Please don't pretend to have special insight into my own thought processes that I myself do not possess. It's absurd.

Please don't pretend you have the right to abuse the English language.

It's a good thing I'm not doing any such thing, then.

[Conserative Morality]

So what, pray tell, is erroneous about my interpretation of Matthew 5:17?

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

It's very clear he's not talking about Pseudo-Objectivism, but rather the law of the old testament.

So pretty much the whole thing is bullshit.

[Conserative Morality]

It's a good thing I'm not doing any such thing, then.

You see, there you go again. Here, let me fix that up for you...

It's a good thing I'm not doing any such a monstrous thing, then.

[Bluth Corporation]

So what, pray tell, is erroneous about my interpretation of Matthew 5:17?

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

It's very clear he's not talking about Pseudo-Objectivism, but rather the law of the old testament.

On the contrary, it's quite clear that he's talking about maintaining the Law that he himself has brought. After all, there is simply no reason he would come out in support of a code that so clearly contradicts what he himself has been teaching--it'd be absurd.

[Conserative Morality]

On the contrary, it's quite clear that he's talking about maintaining the Law that he himself has brought. After all, there is simply no reason he would come out in support of a code that so clearly contradicts what he himself has been teaching--it'd be absurd.

Yes, it would be absurd.

[Big Jim P]

On the contrary, it's quite clear that he's talking about maintaining the Law that he himself has brought. After all, there is simply no reason he would come out in support of a code that so clearly contradicts what he himself has been teaching--it'd be absurd.

Yes, it would be absurd.

When was the last time absurdity stopped any religious teacher?

[Mosasauria]

Yes, it would be absurd.

When was the last time absurdity stopped any religious teacher?

Sure didn't stop the pedophiliac priests.
*Nods*

[Dyakovo]

How is "lacking belief in a deity" as much of an assertion as theism?

It's the position that something is inherently false while admitting it is unfalsifiable and unverifiable.

Did you read the question before answering it? If so, do you need help with any of the polysyllabic words?

[Dyakovo]

However, Christianity actively advocates bigotry, which is a different thing entirely.

Ahem?

Well, the bible certainly does...

[Dyakovo]

Or quotes from the Bible taken out of context, or quotes from Bible versions whereby certain phrases have been written. The latter, of course, isn't the fault of said websites, but when they try to use said quotes as representing Christianity as a whole, then they are lying.

So, what atheist website is this?

He's probably referring to this.

[Samuraikoku]

As I've explained already in this thread, Matthew 5:17 is perhaps the single most misinterpreted passage in the Gospels.

That's one of your more ridiculous assertions. However, it's what I've come to expect from you. Egotistical rambling with little relevance to the reality of the topic.

And uncalled for trolling disguised as pedantism.

[Farnhamia]

That's one of your more ridiculous assertions. However, it's what I've come to expect from you. Egotistical rambling with little relevance to the reality of the topic.

And uncalled for trolling disguised as pedantism.

It's not trolling unless he's doing it to get a rise out of people. I never get that from Bluth's posts. I do get the feeling that he very much enjoys the "sound" of his own voice here, though.

[Taoshin]

Christians piss me off becuase they mock other religions but cant take a comment about theirs. >.>

I agree,
they talk sh** about other religions as if they are oh so perfect,
all religions are the same, it tells you that you have no power and that you have to depend on something outside yourself.

religions were created for control, helpless and to keep you locked in a little ball to keep you away from your true potential

google: self realization

[Samuraikoku]

And uncalled for trolling disguised as pedantism.

It's not trolling unless he's doing it to get a rise out of people. I never get that from Bluth's posts. I do get the feeling that he very much enjoys the "sound" of his own voice here, though.

Pedantism by itself, then.

[Farnhamia]

It's not trolling unless he's doing it to get a rise out of people. I never get that from Bluth's posts. I do get the feeling that he very much enjoys the "sound" of his own voice here, though.

Pedantism by itself, then.

That should be a warnable offense, except I often indulge in it myself.

[Samuraikoku]

That should be a warnable offense, except I often indulge in it myself.

Do not condemn yourself. From what I've seen you're not a zealot who believes in the sound of their own voice rather than the words that come out of it.

[Dusk_Kittens]

My motivations in criticism of Christian beliefs (in no certain order) are

• the attempts made by some supposed Christians to enforce their beliefs and practices on others via legislation
• the hypocrisy of some supposed Christians
• the pretense that the Christian religion is devoid of cultural baggage and can therefore be "universal"
• the religious and cultural imperialism encouraged by nearly every Christian sect (religious imperialism = proselytizing)
• the ignorance not only of the majority of the Christian laity, but also of many of the Christian clergy, concerning their own scriptures, the beliefs of their sect, the origins of their sectarian and personal beliefs, and the variant texts of their scriptures
• the biases of many Christians against education, logic, criticism, and freedom of intellectual inquiry, as well as biases against and intolerance of the practices and beliefs of those who live according to different perspectives -- even other Christians whose perspectives are different (which latter makes the prayer of Jesus in John XVII somewhat ... embarrassing for Christianity)
• the inconsistency of several of their sectarian doctrines and personal beliefs with their scriptures
• the contradictions within their scriptures
• the incoherence of multiple claims made by their clergy
• the incoherence of several teachings found in their scriptures