• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why can't Religious people take Criticism?

RamaRaksha

Active Member
We can discuss and criticize everything under the sun - politics, Science, art, life - well almost everything except religion. We have to be careful not to offend religious sensitivities - i have never heard of anyone saying
"you offended my scientific sensitivities or my political sensitivities" - why should religion be exempt?

Is it because religion, at its core, is empty? It has no facts or evidence to back it up except for fervent belief? A belief that rests on fear of death and greed for the good, easy life which religions are happy to promise that awaits members?

This is not that hard - it is quite easy to figure out - If you had ever cornered a Bernie Madoff making tall claims of wonderful returns and asked him to show you what his system was and how he is able to beat the market, and since all he has is a ponzi-scheme, would he not respond with threats? Isn't that what we see from religions? Threats of hell to non-believers? Talk of not offending religious sensitivities etc?
 

Kori

Dark Valkyrie...what's not to love?
Well Zealotry is most of it. Also people just starting my just like it and can't handle the "work" they have done so far is being asked some tough questions. That's all there is too it.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Religion based on emotion is empty and when you show that emptiness up for what it is, people get angry because they can't back up their feelings with solidly based beliefs.
Their faith is in rituals and empty performance, not on knowledge.

Belonging to a church and knowing what that church teaches is a whole lot different to knowing what the Bible as a whole teaches.

What is the point of being offended if you can't defend what you believe?
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
So far as I can see, there are plenty of religious people who can take criticism of their religion. And while there are also plenty who can't, an inability to take criticism is not limited to religious people. There are people who can't take criticism of their politics, there are people who can't take criticism of their children, people who can't take criticism of their spouses, people who can't take criticism of their dogs, people who can't take criticism of themselves, etc., etc.

If there's a common thread that runs through everyone who can't take criticism of something perhaps it's this: They are all relatively unskillful at managing their egos.

But having said that, there's also a slightly different issue here. That's the fact that our cultures discourage religious criticism in ways, and to an extent, that they don't discourage, say, criticism of political beliefs. But I see that as changing -- at least in the West -- and largely thanks to the so called New Atheists.
 

Baladas

An Págánach
Well, this isn't true of all religious people, or even all Christians (who I suspect this was mostly aimed at).
That said, there are quite a few who are this way.

In our culture, religious criticism is still almost taboo. Certainly moreso than most other subjects.
I've noticed though that many people's sense of identity is very deeply rooted in their religious beliefs and/or traditions.
To many, if you attack their religion, you are attacking the core of who they are.

Basically, they (in my view) have a misplaced sense of self-worth, and take themselves too seriously.
Like Sunstone said, it comes down to the Ego.
 

psychoslice

Veteran Member
In my of thinking I believe many get upset because they don't truly know how to live their life, they need something to cling to that becomes a crutch, deep down they are afraid of life and having a big daddy to look after them makes them feel secure. Its like a child that clings to their security blanky, they may let their blanky go, but they then replace that blacky with a belief system such as religion, try taking a blanky away from a child and they will scream and cry, try to take away the belief of the so called grown up, and they will also scream and cry, and may even kill over their treasured beliefs.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Well, this isn't true of all religious people, or even all Christians (who I suspect this was mostly aimed at).
That said, there are quite a few who are this way.

In our culture, religious criticism is still almost taboo. Certainly moreso than most other subjects.
I've noticed though that many people's sense of identity is very deeply rooted in their religious beliefs and/or traditions.
To many, if you attack their religion, you are attacking the core of who they are.

Basically, they (in my view) have a misplaced sense of self-worth, and take themselves too seriously.
Like Sunstone said, it comes down to the Ego.

You just said what I was trying to say, but better, clearer, and with fewer words! :)
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
The problem is that religion is treated too much like politics and not as someone's identity. Religion (or the morals one lives their lives by) is the core of that persons being. So when someone critizes the religion, they critize the heart of its inheritants.
Is it because religion, at its core, is empty? It has no facts or evidence to back it up except for fervent belief? A belief that rests on fear of death and greed for the good, easy life which religions are happy to promise that awaits members?

Religion isnt empty. I use me as an example since its hard for a lot (honestly) to see past the gold walls of indoctrination.

A lot of you know, I believe in my family--as in blood and ancestral connected family. They are my religion. They are my life. Yes, we have some criminals, some this and some that in our large family, but then we have the ones that bless and the ones that take care of their chidlins. (Spelling intentional).

If a person came to me and said your family is sh/, I would be insulted.

My religion involves my prayers, my offerings, spending time with my family (both living and deceased), trying to reconnect, and so forth. So thats like punching me in the stomach.

Same as, say, Christians. Catholics light candles just as protestants may hold their hands up in prayer. JW go house to house while many Baptist Churches have home bible studies (not sayign others dont) but one of many unique things in Southern Baptist Churches--family and lots of food.

If someone came up to a Christian and say the Eucharist/Jesus is sh/ or to another Christian and say, this food at your Church taste like mess, then thats a punch in the chest. You basically tore out that person identity: with their family, their faith, their savior, their god, their communion.

Politics, science, sports, etc isnt like that. Writing, sports, music, etc can be ones life but I rarely hear someone say it is ones actual identity and that without it, they would not exist.

Threats of hell to non-believers? Talk of not offending religious sensitive

This I think the OP is more geared towards organized religions.

In general, religions are just not like that. They are spiritual practices that nature one in finding his or her identity and answers to his or her true self and questions about life. Its the action behind the belief. The charity behind the unconditional love.

Religions (in the sense Im using) do not threat people to hell and all that nonesense.

That is the people. Yes, each persons doctrine will say something negative about those who dont follow it but why take it personally if that is not your belief system? People do because many times its the people who push it on them not necessarily the belief itself.

Many religious can probably take criticisms if they didnt see it as attacks to themselves. But that is just not possible. I mean, really. If my family is the foundation of my life, why would I just brush it aside if someone insults them. Insulting them is insulting me.

Christianity, Islam, Judaism to Hindu, Zoranism, Pagan, to Atheist, Humanist, Scientologist are no different in this regards.

We respect people for who they say they are. If respect goes both ways, then there shouldnt be criticism but shared differences between two or more parties.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
It is because religion effects our very core beliefs. On the other side I see many atheists that recoil at anything that smacks of God or the paranormal. It is natural defense mechanisms in place.
 

eiskalt

Member
We can discuss and criticize everything under the sun - politics, Science, art, life - well almost everything except religion. We have to be careful not to offend religious sensitivities - i have never heard of anyone saying
"you offended my scientific sensitivities or my political sensitivities" - why should religion be exempt?

Is it because religion, at its core, is empty? It has no facts or evidence to back it up except for fervent belief? A belief that rests on fear of death and greed for the good, easy life which religions are happy to promise that awaits members?

This is not that hard - it is quite easy to figure out - If you had ever cornered a Bernie Madoff making tall claims of wonderful returns and asked him to show you what his system was and how he is able to beat the market, and since all he has is a ponzi-scheme, would he not respond with threats? Isn't that what we see from religions? Threats of hell to non-believers? Talk of not offending religious sensitivities etc?
It matters more HOW you criticize instead of what you criticize. People dont want to be personally insulted for their goals, faith, religion and prospect in life. Its personal, so if you criticize somebody, you dont just simply call him "hey you punk, you havent showered for 2 weeks", you put it in a polite manner. So it is with faith, you dont simply say "hey you muslim your prophet was a child-molester", you put the matter in a polite manner.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Why cant they take criticism?

Because

1. The faith is weak
2. The doctrine is based on faith alone
3. They dont know why they actually believe in their theology
4. Scientifically there are weaknesses and they are in denial

Peace.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
It matters more HOW you criticize instead of what you criticize. People dont want to be personally insulted for their goals, faith, religion and prospect in life. Its personal, so if you criticize somebody, you dont just simply call him "hey you punk, you havent showered for 2 weeks", you put it in a polite manner. So it is with faith, you dont simply say "hey you muslim your prophet was a child-molester", you put the matter in a polite manner.

As a Christian, Jew, Muslim or Atheist, this is what you should do.

1. If someone says "Your prophet was a child molester" I will say he was not. That is based on a hadith or story narrated 8 generations later. Muhammed, if he wrote the Quran says that women are of maritable age upon maturity. And he will not contradict his own scripture. Also, this story cannot have passed through 8 generations from father to son, nephews, neighbours via verbal communication. Impossible. In the Quran it says that the earth revolves around its own axis and a hadith says some utter crap bull ****. So, it is impossible that Muhammed will contradict himself. Thus, you must also take this side of the story and analyse it.
2. If I told you that Jesus killed a child because he knocked him. Thats one of the most egoistic, dirty things to do. Murder a child like a thug. But thats in the infancy gospel of Thomas, very doubtful right? I dont believe it. It's the same thing. But if I want to be stupid in my head I can insist that happened, just to find an excuse to defame Jesus. But I must also learn to listen to analysis.

Peace.
 

eiskalt

Member
As a Christian, Jew, Muslim or Atheist, this is what you should do.

1. If someone says "Your prophet was a child molester" I will say he was not. That is based on a hadith or story narrated 8 generations later. Muhammed, if he wrote the Quran says that women are of maritable age upon maturity. And he will not contradict his own scripture. Also, this story cannot have passed through 8 generations from father to son, nephews, neighbours via verbal communication. Impossible. In the Quran it says that the earth revolves around its own axis and a hadith says some utter crap bull ****. So, it is impossible that Muhammed will contradict himself. Thus, you must also take this side of the story and analyse it.
2. If I told you that Jesus killed a child because he knocked him. Thats one of the most egoistic, dirty things to do. Murder a child like a thug. But thats in the infancy gospel of Thomas, very doubtful right? I dont believe it. It's the same thing. But if I want to be stupid in my head I can insist that happened, just to find an excuse to defame Jesus. But I must also learn to listen to analysis.

Peace.
Yeah not bad, Jesus was also a child when he killed the other child. Perhaps it shows the immaturity, that even Jesus lived through? But honestly, when people like this try to protect a topic, they dont believe in themselves, makes me want to silence them, its hypocritical. Stand for your own agenda where your heart lies, not a lie.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Yeah not bad, Jesus was also a child when he killed the other child. Perhaps it shows the immaturity, that even Jesus lived through? But honestly, when people like this try to protect a topic, they dont believe in themselves, makes me want to silence them, its hypocritical. Stand for your own agenda where your heart lies, not a lie.

Lol. Im sorry I really dont understand your post.

But again, as a child or adult Jesus would not use his divine power vested in him to kill a child for merely knocking on him. And this book may not be authentic at all.

I apologise if you said this "When people like this try to protect a topic" to me and if I came across like that.

I was not protecting a topic, I was only telling you a fact. Hope you understand what I say.

Peace brother. Errm I assume youre a brother.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
On the other side I see many atheists that recoil at anything that smacks of God or the paranormal.
So would you, had you seen half as many crimes and abuses attempt to justify themselves with those concepts as I did.

Going back to the OP and some of the early responses such as @Sunstone and @Baladas , allow me to point out that while it is true that most of the cause of that difficulty is a lack of skill at managing the perceived attacks at their senses of identity, it should be acknowledged that to a large, significant extent the reliance on so-called religious beliefs to sustain one's sense of worth is a design feature, even a requisite of the belief in the first place.

Complaining about it and attempting to heal it is all well and good. But it will only be fruitful if we decide to allow it to happen, which is no small sacrifice. It involves reconsidering our collective expectations and perceived duties so that, for instance, those in greater financial hardship are no longer expected to resort to alcohol in order to avoid criminality, or to some specific beliefs in order to "keep busy" and avoid alcohol.

Reliance on supernaturalism in order to maintain a modicum of emotional stability is so expected and socially accepted in some circles that many people flat out assume it of everyone, while others count on it to keep the social order, presumably because it would be too much effort to actually pursue integration and respect for the believers. I have actually seem people argue that, say, UCKG is of course not a true Church (and it is true, it actually isn't), but that is all right, because it still fulfills an useful and necessary purpose for "some" people.

In other words, since it is too much of a bother for me to treat "those" people as full human beings, I don't have reason to complain if they are kept busy with mishappen beliefs that are "compatible" with them. It may even be helpful in keeping one's own, "more respectful" beliefs safe from the noise and dubious habits of the rifraf.

As long as we keep expecting "religion" to be less than respectable because it is something of a personal convenience for us to look the other way while it becomes a necessary crutch for so many people, it is on us that it does indeed become an unhealthy crutch for many.
 

Erebus

Well-Known Member
We can discuss and criticize everything under the sun - politics, Science, art, life - well almost everything except religion. We have to be careful not to offend religious sensitivities - i have never heard of anyone saying
"you offended my scientific sensitivities or my political sensitivities" - why should religion be exempt?

Is it because religion, at its core, is empty? It has no facts or evidence to back it up except for fervent belief? A belief that rests on fear of death and greed for the good, easy life which religions are happy to promise that awaits members?

This is not that hard - it is quite easy to figure out - If you had ever cornered a Bernie Madoff making tall claims of wonderful returns and asked him to show you what his system was and how he is able to beat the market, and since all he has is a ponzi-scheme, would he not respond with threats? Isn't that what we see from religions? Threats of hell to non-believers? Talk of not offending religious sensitivities etc?

Speaking only for myself, you eventually get tired of saying "that's not what I believe," "my gods don't do that," and "I don't want to convert people" when faced with the same apparently universal criticisms of theism and religion time and time again. It becomes very tempting to tell people to go forth and have rough intercourse with themselves.

So, next time somebody lashes out when you (I'm using you in the general sense here) criticize religion and/or theism, take a moment to ask yourself how many times they may have seen that same criticism already.
 

eiskalt

Member
But again, as a child or adult Jesus would not use his divine power vested in him to kill a child for merely knocking on him. And this book may not be authentic at all.

I apologise if you said this "When people like this try to protect a topic" to me and if I came across like that.

I was not protecting a topic, I was only telling you a fact. Hope you understand what I say.

Peace brother. Errm I assume youre a brother.
Nope im a 13 year old blonde african eskimo girl from hong kong with a chihuahua as pet. The lesson in the apocryphic gospel narrative was: Jesus had divine powers, even as a child and he used them accordingly. The human nature was very much in line with the divine nature. This is why Jesus was fully human and fully divine. If his human nature is immature, his divine nature will be equal. But many churchmen & authorities probably rejected the story, since they think, that the divine cant in any shape or form be childish.
 

Madhuri

RF Goddess
Staff member
Premium Member
We can discuss and criticize everything under the sun - politics, Science, art, life - well almost everything except religion. We have to be careful not to offend religious sensitivities - i have never heard of anyone saying
"you offended my scientific sensitivities or my political sensitivities" - why should religion be exempt?

The reason seems obvious to me. Unlike science, art etc. religion becomes a huge part of a person's identity. So when you criticise a person's religion, it feels like a personal attack. You may as well be criticising their culture, race, sexuality or anything else that's a big part of their identity.
 
Top