Christian concepts and behaviors that can/are offensive to others

[Scott C.]

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.

As one who believes in prayer, I must say that made me laugh.

 

[Scott C.]

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.

I think there's some truth here.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Could be that Jesus commanded his disciples to preach, but not in a pushy way. (Matthew 10:11-15)

If people did not want to listen, he told them to move on.

Not the real ones.

Not exactly. They pray to the Lord to help a blind man see.

This is an example of what I'm talking about

I know I live around christians in my immediate, town, society, and state environment I these things well intentioned or not is what folks nonchristian here a lot.

Its a passive agressive way of saying "you have chosen the wrong path" or "one day you all will see".

What is the benefit of wishing people to come to jesus without taking into account they they have found the Truth (not truth) of their faith and in their faith?

If a christian was empathetic not sympathetic to another person's needs they wouldnt pray to the lord for another persons salvation. Its not "needed."

Preaching are for those who wish to hear. Those who do not are not at a disadvantage. That is another well or not intended guilt a christian put on people not in "their circle." Its very unatttractive to be an Example that people would find christ On their Own.

Not the real ones????

Ive never heard of fake christians. Just those growing in christ.

 

[BilliardsBall]

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?

In the exchange above, the Christian is being harsh. Logic works better:

1. Are you perfect?

2. Can any religion, even Christianity, perfect you?

3. Do you understand that Christ died and rose to perfect those who cannot perfect themselves, so that they can enter Heaven, a utopia?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

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.

I like to say something like, "Let me reciprocate and telepathically petition to Raël to focus the yin and yan of his inner eye on your chakra and astrally project your aura to the ninth cloud of Kolob."

 

[Kenny]

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?

I find your example to be erroneous in its message to a seeker not to mention that nowhere does the message that Jesus commanded to share has any similarity to the one who presented it to you in this fashion.

But I also find that it isn't limited to Christians. Every camp seems to have people who present their viewpoints in an offensive way.

Jesus said "God didn't send the son to condemn the world" and then this Chrisitan turns around and condemns in Example #3.

Your position of "having a normal discussion" is how I came to know Christ.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

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.

lololol

 

[Epic Beard Man]

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



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.

I am sure at least for atheists it sounds better

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I find your example to be erroneous in its message to a seeker not to mention that nowhere does the message that Jesus commanded to share has any similarity to the one who presented it to you in this fashion.

But I also find that it isn't limited to Christians. Every camp seems to have people who present their viewpoints in an offensive way.

Jesus said "God didn't send the son to condemn the world" and then this Chrisitan turns around and condemns in Example #3.

Your position of "having a normal discussion" is how I came to know Christ.

With your dissertation I am sure you find it erroneous but the atheists have my back on this. We both agnositics and theists have heard this before.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

In the exchange above, the Christian is being harsh. Logic works better:

1. Are you perfect?

2. Can any religion, even Christianity, perfect you?

3. Do you understand that Christ died and rose to perfect those who cannot perfect themselves, so that they can enter Heaven, a utopia?

Great questions.

I understand Jesus as one of these bums who drink but or preach I rather listen to a drunk or wine drinking jesus than Pat Robertson like people.

 

[Skwim]

The Christian concept that Jews are too blind or too stubborn to see Jesus in the "old testament" is an example of an offensive concept.

Why do you value the opinion of Christians to the point of possibly taking offense at what they think? Most rational people don't really care what others think of their religious concepts, but seeing this isn't the case with you, you have my sympathies.

.

.

 

[Kenny]

With your dissertation I am sure you find it erroneous but the atheists have my back on this. We both agnositics and theists have heard this before.

Maybe I didn't say it right... I was saying that you were right and the one who acted in that fashion was wrong.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Maybe I didn't say it right... I was saying that you were right and the one who acted in that fashion was wrong.

Ok..thanks sorry for the misunderstanding. The examples displayed are mere examples but nothing more than experiences that I have felt and have been through.

 

[Kenny]

Ok..thanks sorry for the misunderstanding. The examples displayed are mere examples but nothing more than experiences that I have felt and have been through.

Yes... and my point was that this person didn't represent the message that Jesus gave. As you said, the best way to share is through discussion and it was through discussion (not like what you experienced) that led me to give my life to Jesus.

 

[Twilight Hue]

This is the kind of Christians that run rampant today:

It makes you wonder how they got to those positions that they are in.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Why do you value the opinion of Christians to the point of possibly taking offense at what they think?

I don't.

I feel like there could be a longer answer, but your question was poorly worded, so I'm going to just leave it there. It's up to you if you want to try again or not.

Most rational people don't really care what others think of their religious concepts, but seeing this isn't the case with you, you have my sympathies..

By that logic, you're an irrational person. You've taken the time to criticize me for my words about someone else's religious concepts.

What I pointed out wasn't a suggestion that Christians are passing judgement on Jewish concepts... it's a suggestion that Christians are passing judgment on Jews.

I can choose to be more or less sensitive about people saying offensive things about me and my people. As it happens, I'm not terribly sensitive and I rarely take offense. But this doesn't mean that the concept isn't offensive.

 

[Skwim]

I don't.

If one doesn't value their opinion then why should it offend?

I feel like there could be a longer answer, but your question was poorly worded, so I'm going to just leave it there.

Ha! Ha! Reminds me of the little kid who comes home from school with a poor score on a class test. His mother asks him why he didn't do better. He says, "The teacher didn't ask the right questions." She says, 'What questions are those?" "The ones I knew the answers to," he says.

By that logic, you're an irrational person.

So you honestly believe that most people care what others think of their beliefs? To the point of taking offense? Really???

You've taken the time to criticize me for my words about someone else's religious concepts.

Oh my. You think that just because I ask you a question it's criticizing you. You poor, tender soul.

What I pointed out wasn't a suggestion that Christians are passing judgement on Jewish concepts... it's a suggestion that Christians are passing judgment on Jews.

Perhaps you should look up the word "suggestion," because it certainly wasn't anything you did. You made an outright assertion.

"The Christian concept that Jews are too blind or too stubborn to see Jesus in the "old testament" is an example of an offensive concept." ​

I can choose to be more or less sensitive about people saying offensive things about me and my people. As it happens, I'm not terribly sensitive and I rarely take offense. But this doesn't mean that the concept isn't offensive.

And for any concept to be offensive the offended person would have to care about the person who presented the concept. If not, then just what is the psychology behind taking offense at a concept someone else presents?

.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Oh my. You think that just because I ask you a question it's criticizing you. You poor, tender soul.

You called me irrational. That's criticizing me. You poor, dense soul.

And for any concept to be offensive the offended person would have to care about the person who presented the concept.

Not at all, because the concept is still offensive, regardless of who presents it. An insult is still an insult. When insulted by a person, my decision to brush it off or make a big deal about it depends on how I feel about the person. But the idea expressed by the insult itself doesn't become a compliment just because I don't care about the person who presented it.

If not, then just what is the psychology behind taking offense at a concept someone else presents

If it was written on a sign on a post in the street, it would still be an offensive concept. At that point, I wouldn't even know who the person was who wrote that sign, much less care about them.

 

[Skwim]

You called me irrational. That's criticizing me. You poor, dense soul.

Well, you got me there, I did criticize you, calling you irrational.

"Most rational people don't really care what others think of their religious concepts, but seeing this isn't the case with you, you have my sympathies."​

And a valid criticism it is. But I'll certainly retract it if you can show us why taking offense at what others think of one's religious concepts is rational.

Not at all, because the concept is still offensive, regardless of who presents it. An insult is still an insult.

But why is it offensive? What is the psychology that drives the sense of offense over a concept?

Exactly what is it about "the Christian concept that Jews are too blind or too stubborn to see Jesus in the "old testament" that's offensive?

Why should it offend anyone that Christians believe Jews are too blind to see Jesus in the "old testament?

Why should it offend anyone that Christians believe Jews are too stubborn to see Jesus in the "old testament?

After all, they're only beliefs, not actions, or calls to action against Jews. I'm an agnostic, and believe me, I couldn't care less that Christians, or Jews, or Hindus might believe I masturbate with rubber duckies in the bathtub. Why? because their beliefs about my sex life are utterly unimportant to me. To be important I'd have to care what they thought., but why should I?


Now, maybe it's pretty darn important to a person what others believe about their religion, but lacking any rational behind it, it comes across as irrational. Sooo, what's the rational for why Christian concepts about Jews should be offensive?

.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

It makes you wonder how they got to those positions that they are in.

Right