Christian concepts and behaviors that can/are offensive to others

[Epic Beard Man]

This is the kind of Christians that run rampant today:

 

[Jainarayan]

Example #1 "Jesus said nobody comes to the Father except through me....It does not matter if you're a good person if you don't know Jesus you will not go to heaven"

I don't believe that's at all what people think it means. I think he was saying that he knew God, he had "realization", that he would teach others, and that you can't really know God like Jesus knew him without learning from Jesus. I don't think it has anything to do with going to Hell. That's my take on it.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

sometimes the context in which the discussion about Jesus can be somewhat offensive.

You might like this:

=====

Eighteen offensive and disrespectful behaviors common among atheists

Adapted from 11 Ways to Kill a Conversation With an Atheist

[1] Telling us what it is that we believe, especially that we positively claim that there is no god

[2] Unsolicited (which is all of it) preaching and proselytizing

[3] Referring to atheism as a religion, saying that atheism requires faith, or calling an atheist a fundamentalist

[4] Trying to prove something by quoting the Bible

[5] Threatening nonbelievers with damnation

[6] Pretending that you don't have the burden of proof

[7] Using cut and paste arguments from others that you can't defend, and often don't understand.

[8] Repeating arguments that have already been refuted and rejected

[9] Saying that we believe nothing, that our lives are without purpose or meaning, or that we have no basis for moral behavior

[10] Announce that you'll be praying for us

[11] Invoking Pascal's Wager, which says that there is everything to gain and nothing to lose by believing in Jesus. Also, Employing the No True Scotsman fallacy, straw man arguments, and other common fallacies.

[12] Telling us that we can't or don't understand the Bible.

[13] Saying that we hate your god, are rebelling against your god, or really believe in a god

[14] Misrepresenting scientific knowledge.

[15] Blaming secularism for the deaths caused by zealous ideologues like Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot.

[16] Telling us that the reason we left Christianity is that our faith was inferior or because something bad happened to us.

[17] Telling unbelievers that they are rebellious, hate your god, prefer to live dissolute lives, or are trying to escape accountability

[18] Blaming natural disasters on assorted scapegoated groups.

 

[Jainarayan]

I find example #3 to be rather passive-aggressive. Sure they believe its the truth, but they're only thinking of their beliefs and opinions when making such a statement, never what the secularist might think. This is why I find some forms of proselytisation to be uncouth. It's basically saying "you're wrong, and I hope you find that we are right". Such behaviour rewards non-diplomacy, a current ill in our society.

And then of course we have "you worship false gods/idols/demons, I'll pray for you"... can't forget "you worship false gods/idols/demons, I'll pray for you" can we?

 

[ajay0]

So in my encounters with certain Christians I've noticed when they want to discuss Jesus they use phrases like "I'm saved" or they'll say "I'll pray for you" etcetera. Now, I'm all for the praying and a friendly discussion about Jesus of Nazareth and their views on him but sometimes the context in which the discussion about Jesus can be somewhat offensive.

Example #1 "Jesus said nobody comes to the Father except through me....It does not matter if you're a good person if you don't know Jesus you will not go to heaven"

I would say this is because orthodox Christians have not properly understood the philosophical basis of Christ's teachings.


Jehovah has stated Himself as ‘I am that I am' .

Jesus similarly stated, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'

The ‘I am ‘ which Jehovah and Christ are referring to here, is a state of pure consciousness, devoid of psychological content which creates the ego through cravings and aversions.


In the Vedas, it is declared thus, ‘Prajnanam Brahman – God is pure consciousness’.


Similarly Muhammad had stated thus ‘ God is closer to you than the veins in your neck. ‘


Thus it is a purified state of consciousness that all religions emphasize, characterized by Awareness or love.

Thus Jehovah, Jesus and Muhammad are all declaring that a purified consciousness is God Himself and it is there in each and every person. Religion is just a methodology for purifying the impure consciousness of its vices and cravings, which create the ego , and thereby elevate it to the level of pure consciousness as that of Jehovah or Brahman or Tao.

Imho, Jesus attained this state himself through enlightenment, and taught the same to others. However he was grossly misunderstood, and by ‘I am ‘ or ‘me’, people started thinking of the person, rather than the purified consciousness within, which he was originally referring to.

Pure consciousness and pure love are one and the same thing. This is why Jesus declared that ‘ God is love’, and that loving God and neighbor is his true commandment.

 

[syo]

Example #1 "Jesus said nobody comes to the Father except through me....It does not matter if you're a good person if you don't know Jesus you will not go to heaven"

that's not the meaning of his words. jesus' teachings will get us close to the father. if someone never heard of christ but lives in love, he will get to the father. jesus showed/is the WAY. he isn't supposed to be worshipped but he came to teach a way of life.

 

[ajay0]

Similarly Krishna states in the Bhagavad Gita thus…

Of all creations I am the beginning and the end and also the middle, O Arjuna.( Chapter 10, Verse 32)

The ‘I am ‘ here which Krishna refers to is the purified consciousness within, termed as Self or Brahman in Hinduism, just as Jesus and Jehovah put it.

Similarly the Sufi enlightened sage, Mansur Al-Hallaj, also declared thus, Anal-Haq, Anal-Haq meaning 'I am the Truth, I am the Truth'.

He was similarly executed for heresy like Jesus, due to misunderstanding of what he actually meant.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

So turn the channel...Or pick up the cross and show Pat how it's done..

I don't watch him

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I don't believe that's at all what people think it means. I think he was saying that he knew God, he had "realization", that he would teach others, and that you can't really know God like Jesus knew him without learning from Jesus. I don't think it has anything to do with going to Hell. That's my take on it.

Let a Christian tell it....They love quoting the phrase "man cannot live on works alone." Hence the whole nobody coming through the father except through me. The interpretation I get from that is you need to believe in Christ. Your good works are not enough otherwise you can live a moral non-Christian life which would ultimately render Christianity useless.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

So in my encounters with certain Christians I've noticed when they want to discuss Jesus they use phrases like "I'm saved" or they'll say "I'll pray for you" etcetera. Now, I'm all for the praying and a friendly discussion about Jesus of Nazareth and their views on him but sometimes the context in which the discussion about Jesus can be somewhat offensive.

Example #1 "Jesus said nobody comes to the Father except through me....It does not matter if you're a good person if you don't know Jesus you will not go to heaven"

My response: "Ok that is fine, it demonstrates the conditions of love your Christ has for me"

Example #2 "No conditions, it is what is written in the Bible."

My response: " Ok well, I'll continue to go my own way"

Example #3 "Ok. you'll be damned for hell, but I'll pray you find Jesus."

Now, this is just one of many examples how Christians tend to approach secularists when discussing their faith and of course in their mind, this approach in teaching others about their faith is fine, but from the outside, it seems aggressive and insensitive. I think context is necessary when discussing their faith because everyone does not share the same belief system. Instead of the righteous approach using Biblical fervor, the approach ought to be more of a common dialogue. What I mean is, the discussion should be less about the fears of the hereafter and just merely discuss the human side about Jesus and what he means to you. Less about not coming to the father stuff and more about just purely doing good works. Less about "I'm gonna pray for you since you're a sinner" and more about having an open invitation to a cup of coffee with his/her congregation.

I think one of the best ways to win people over is just purely having a normal discussion without the whole scriptural thumping. I think scripture comes into play when the person sincerely inquires about certain things. I'm not sure if any of my atheist counterparts have encountered this but I know I have many times. I'm truly not for the conditional God as the Abrahamic faiths have presented. The conditional God is not an attractive metaphysical concept. But I am curious for those who are agnostic/atheist have you encountered this as well?

Yes, I have encountered this, although what annoys me the most is when they insist that they are *certain* that all of their beliefs are true. I can demonstrate, based on the nature of knowledge, that no one *knows* they are going to live forever or that they have encountered some supernatural being, yet they arrogantly insist that they have the ability to know with certainty things that they cannot even demonstrate to be true. Same goes with other religions of course.

 

[Jainarayan]

Let a Christian tell it....They love quoting the phrase "man cannot live on works alone." Hence the whole nobody coming through the father except through me. The interpretation I get from that is you need to believe in Christ. Your good works are not enough otherwise you can live a moral non-Christian life which would ultimately render Christianity useless.

Not sure what you mean, but I used to be Christian, for 30 of my 60 years. I was raised Roman Catholic then became Eastern Orthodox. Christians largely take what Jesus said at face value and literally, forgetting that he was a master at using parables, metaphors and allegories.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I would say this is because orthodox Christians have not properly understood the philosophical basis of Christ's teachings.


Jehovah has stated Himself as ‘I am that I am' .

Jesus similarly stated, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'

The ‘I am ‘ which Jehovah and Christ are referring to here, is a state of pure consciousness, devoid of psychological content which creates the ego through cravings and aversions.


In the Vedas, it is declared thus, ‘Prajnanam Brahman – God is pure consciousness’.


Similarly Muhammad had stated thus ‘ God is closer to you than the veins in your neck. ‘


Thus it is a purified state of consciousness that all religions emphasize, characterized by Awareness or love.

Thus Jehovah, Jesus and Muhammad are all declaring that a purified consciousness is God Himself and it is there in each and every person. Religion is just a methodology for purifying the impure consciousness of its vices and cravings, which create the ego , and thereby elevate it to the level of pure consciousness as that of Jehovah or Brahman or Tao.

Imho, Jesus attained this state himself through enlightenment, and taught the same to others. However he was grossly misunderstood, and by ‘I am ‘ or ‘me’, people started thinking of the person, rather than the purified consciousness within, which he was originally referring to.

Pure consciousness and pure love are one and the same thing. This is why Jesus declared that ‘ God is love’, and that loving God and neighbor is his true commandment.

Well the consequence of learning is misinterpretation which is the result of a cognitive disconnect to the true message. A lot of modern Christians attend church to attain a interpretation by someone who is ordained in ministry. People forget even ordained ministers can fall victim to overemphasizong simple concepts and thus could be using their own interpretation of religious texts.

We see this with Islam. ISIS, Hezbollah, or other radical groups can ise Imams to interpret religious text to an uneducated, poor, and grevining people to hate and claim it is God's will.

We see the same in the U.S. when pastors claimed Obama was Muslim even though the first criticisms of Obama was of his Christian pastor.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

that's not the meaning of his words. jesus' teachings will get us close to the father. if someone never heard of christ but lives in love, he will get to the father. jesus showed/is the WAY. he isn't supposed to be worshipped but he came to teach a way of life.

I have heard of Jesus. Hell I was raised baptist christian baptised and all. Apparently that denomination like many other teaches you that you cannot just do good and not believe in Jesus as Lord and Savior. That alone trumps doing good. Apparently you are put of touch with that.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Yes, I have encountered this, although what annoys me the most is when they insist that they are *certain* that all of their beliefs are true. I can demonstrate, based on the nature of knowledge, that no one *knows* they are going to live forever or that they have encountered some supernatural being, yet they arrogantly insist that they have the ability to know with certainty things that they cannot even demonstrate to be true. Same goes with other religions of course.

I believe it. Back in undergrad I used to date a Christian girl who spoke in tongues at random times even during casual conversation. She claimed that thw Holy Spirit was speaking to her but I often questioned if she knew the threshold between religious fanaticism and schizophrenia.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Not sure what you mean, but I used to be Christian, for 30 of my 60 years. I was raised Roman Catholic then became Eastern Orthodox. Christians largely take what Jesus said at face value and literally, forgetting that he was a master at using parables, metaphors and allegories.

Perhaps it's the interpretation based on the sect you followed at that time. I do know that evangelicals and baptist christians do not believe simply doing good and not believing in Jesus as Lord and Savior will land you in heaven. I know plenty upstanding atheists who according to Evangelical and Baptist Christian teachings, most certainly would burn in hell.

I knew if I didn't stop being a baptist christian I would be an atheist.

 

[ChristineM]

When met with such ugly behavior and if you do not care if it devolves into a flame war when someone offers to pray for you you could always offer to think for them.

When someone offers to pray for my reply goes along the lines "please dont bother, it would be more beneficial if you donated a couple of pounds to charity"

Sometimes more forthright than that.

 

[Jainarayan]

Perhaps it's the interpretation based on the sect you followed at that time.

Nothing to do with that. It was all my interpretation, which I thought I made clear in my post. The "I believe"s, "I think"s and "my take on it" should have been dead giveaways.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Nothing to do with that. It was all my interpretation, which I thought I made clear in my post. The "I believe"s, "I think"s and "my take on it" should have been dead giveaways.

They were but like your interpretation my response is based on my experiences and i interpretation as well.

 

[pearl]

Example #1 "Jesus said nobody comes to the Father except through me....It does not matter if you're a good person if you don't know Jesus you will not go to heaven"

All are 'saved' through Christ even if they do not acknowledge him as savior.

Example #3 "Ok. you'll be damned for hell, but I'll pray you find Jesus."

Its not for them to judge, they are assuming the role of God. Its almost like their afraid you might be getting away with something, and they cannot allow it.

 

[ajay0]

Well the consequence of learning is misinterpretation which is the result of a cognitive disconnect to the true message. A lot of modern Christians attend church to attain a interpretation by someone who is ordained in ministry. People forget even ordained ministers can fall victim to overemphasizong simple concepts and thus could be using their own interpretation of religious texts.

The misunderstanding and misinterpretation here actually is very old , starting with the romans who reluctantly accepted Christianity after centuries of persecuting it, due to the conversion of Constantine.

In the first council of Nicaea, organized by Constantine, Christian teachings were codified into a standard version , edited to suit the conditioned sensibilities of the Romans. This was then enforced on the rest of Christendom and all variations and views of it, such as those of Arius and Origen, were not tolerated.

The romans , though having expertise in administration and warfare, were not able to comprehend the philosophical basis of Jesus’s teachings, interpreted them as per their own conditioned viewpoints about religion, and rigorously edited the teachings to conform to it.

Thus Christianity at present, is not the original teachings as Christ taught , but the interpretation of it by the Romans as per their intrinsic conditioned nature.

Inquisitions, witch burnings and crusades, if you look into it, clearly are quite contrary to the teachings of Christ, and stem from elements of roman imperialist conditioning sewed into the standardized version of Christianity we have now, which are as barbaric as the practice of crucifixion itself which Jesus was subjected to.

Thus a study of Christianity and the bible ought to be conducted prudently, so as to understand its essentials without being carried away by literalist interpretations.