Christianity and arrogance

[Kenny]

Christians have a sense of entitlement and privilege because they have enjoyed a cultural dominance for so long. They believe their own marketing because until recently they had enough power to socially destroy anyone who dared question or criticize what they say about Christianity. Heck, until recently they could and would kill, impoverish or imprison non-Christians.

I don't think so.

Love is an emotion. And it is one that people experience without any reference to Jesus. Or god. Or Christianity. Every. Single. Day. Christian's try merely to mark it as their territory.

Love is a spiritual force IMV. It does affect the mind and body, but I believe it is a spiritual force

 

[ppp]

I don't think so.

That's it? Just a nah?

Love is a spiritual force IMV. It does affect the mind and body, but I believe it is a spiritual force

Nah.

 

[Kenny]

That's it? Just a nah?



Nah.

There wasn't much that was given that I could work from

 

[ppp]

There wasn't much that was given that I could work from

I am not even sure why it's a point of contention. People who are members of a dominant culture become more and more entitled the longer that they enjoy that privilege. That's not just a Christian thing. It's true of any such group in any culture or sub-culture. Christianity dominated western cultures for the better part of two millennia. That they have a sense of entitlement and privilege because they have enjoyed a cultural dominance for so long is a given.

 

[Kenny]

I am not even sure why it's a point of contention. People who are members of a dominant culture become more and more entitled the longer that they enjoy that privilege. That's not just a Christian thing. It's true of any such group in any culture or sub-culture. Christianity dominated western cultures for the better part of two millennia. That they have a sense of entitlement and privilege because they have enjoyed a cultural dominance for so long is a given.

yes.. that can happen. But what were are suppose to follow is the commandments of Jesus such as being a servant and not an entitled one

 

[ppp]

yes.. that can happen.

Not only can that happen. But it is standard behavior. Routinely. Ubiquitously. Prevalently. Ever since your religion gained an empire and came into power in 325 CE.

But what were are suppose to follow is the commandments of Jesus such as being a servant and not an entitled one

This is going to sound about 60% harsher than I mean it to.

I do not care what Christians are supposed to do. I do not care what the ideal of Christianity behavior may or may not be. Nor do I care who the "real" Christians might be. What I care about are the actual effects of the beliefs and practices of people who think that they are Christians upon each other and the rest of us. Every act, laudable or despicable, that has been done by someone who thought they were acting in accordance with their Christian faith was a product of Christianity. Whatever ones ideals maybe, it is only our actions that matter.

As Adron said, right before he plans went to hell, "Don't tell them that I meant well".

 

[eik]

The fact that they expected me to go without inviting me means that they have way over estimated their power and popularity in that they just expect people to go without even an invitation. That is arrogant.

It's a subtle distinction between an invitation and an expectation, a question of degree that may of course be transgressed in certain situations.

According to my stats:

The Religious Demographics Of Texas
Rank Affiliation % Of The State Population
1 Evangelical Protestant 64.4%
2 Roman Catholic 21.2%
3 Mainline Protestant 8.1%
4 Unclaimed 4.5%​

You're in a minority of less than 1 in 20 in Texas. In espousing UU we're talking about only 199,850 members of Unitarian Universalist Association congregations in the whole of the USA, which puts you in a minority of 1 in 1500. You are thus something of an exception to a rule.

Others will inevitably find it hard to identify with you if they don't know you. It's not necessarily deliberate arrogance. I accept that in reality they might not actually care much if they do offend you, because giving offence to non-Christians in a moderate kind of way, i.e. in the course of challenging other's purported beliefs, is is a time honoured part of Christianity. The idea that Christian's shouldn't offend by challenging others' beliefs is more to do with modern political correctness than with religious correctness.

 

[thomas t]

Love is an emotion. And it is one that people experience without any reference to Jesus. Or god. Or Christianity. Every. Single. Day. Christian's try merely to mark it as their territory.

no.
Bible acknowledges anyone can love, Luke 6:32b*. If you say Christians claim love to be theirs against the Bible claim, give evidence please. Otherwise I regard it as presumption.

Not only can that happen. But it is standard behavior. Routinely. Ubiquitously. Prevalently. Ever since your religion gained an empire and came into power in 325 CE.

before you judge Christians, also note that they saved many lives. In hospitals and so on.
When you say professing Christians murdered more than they saved... please provide the numbers. Checkable data please, otherwise I won't believe you.

* by citing this verse I'm not claiming that Christians are better people.

 

[viole]

but the message of Jesus is still love.

Yes, accept it. Or else ...

Ciao

- viole

 

[ppp]

no.
Bible acknowledges anyone can love, Luke 6:32b*. If you say Christians claim love to be theirs against the Bible claim, give evidence please. Otherwise I regard it as presumption..

I did not say that Christians claim that non-believers cannot love. I said that Christians claim that their god equates to love and that he proved the ontological foundation for the existence of all love. I reject that claim.

before you judge Christians, also note that they saved many lives. In hospitals and so on..

Already noted.

When you say professing Christians murdered more than they saved... please provide the numbers. Checkable data please, otherwise I won't believe you..

What the hell are you going on about? I said no such thing. I am talking about the sense of entitlement and social privilege expressed by Christians in modern society. What I said was...

I do not care what Christians are supposed to do. I do not care what the ideal of Christianity behavior may or may not be. Nor do I care who the "real" Christians might be. What I care about are the actual effects of the beliefs and practices of people who think that they are Christians upon each other and the rest of us. Every act, laudable or despicable, that has been done by someone who thought they were acting in accordance with their Christian faith was a product of Christianity. Whatever ones ideals maybe, it is only our actions that matter.​

There is no statement or implication that "professing Christians murdered more than they saved" in that paragraph.
My point was that the ideals of Christianity do not exculpate the religion and its practitioners. Christianity is all of the acts produced by its believers. Even the ones that may or may not run against the ideals of the Christian to whom I am speaking at any given moment.

* by citing this verse I'm not claiming that Christians are better people

Me either.

 

[Kenny]

Not only can that happen. But it is standard behavior. Routinely. Ubiquitously. Prevalently. Ever since your religion gained an empire and came into power in 325 CE.

Your history is wrong. It was in power in the first 100 years of existence.. it was "recognized" in 325 -- they couldn't shut it down, as the proverbs says, "if you can't beat them, join them"/

This is going to sound about 60% harsher than I mean it to.

I do not care what Christians are supposed to do. I do not care what the ideal of Christianity behavior may or may not be. Nor do I care who the "real" Christians might be. What I care about are the actual effects of the beliefs and practices of people who think that they are Christians upon each other and the rest of us. Every act, laudable or despicable, that has been done by someone who thought they were acting in accordance with their Christian faith was a product of Christianity. Whatever ones ideals maybe, it is only our actions that matter.

As Adron said, right before he plans went to hell, "Don't tell them that I meant well".

No problem... but what you have described is applicable in any area of thought and belief.

Personally, i DO care what Jesus says--as do the majority of Christians IMV.

 

[Kenny]

Yes, accept it. Or else ...

Ciao

- viole

Or else you live in bitterness and hatred.

Adios

Ken

 

[ppp]

Your history is wrong. It was in power in the first 100 years of existence.. it was "recognized" in 325 -- they couldn't shut it down, as the proverbs says, "if you can't beat them, join them"/

I don't think that's entirely true.. Christianity had power centers.by the mid second century, but y'all were still enclaves of people scrapping and infighting. Christianity had power, but it was not in power until Constantine became convinced of either its truth or its utility. Or both.

No problem... but what you have described is applicable in any area of thought and belief.

Yes. It is. But it is Christians who balk when it is pointed out that their beliefs and practices endorsed and enacted slavery. I don't quibble when someone points out that the US beliefs and practices endorsed and enacted the same.

Personally, i DO care what Jesus says--as do the majority of Christians IMV.

Of course you do. I don't expect otherwise. Yet the fruits of what Christians attribute to Jesus make the quality of Christianity indistinct from any other purely human group. It has no elevated or divine nature.

 

[thomas t]

What the hell are you going on about? I said no such thing. I am talking about the sense of entitlement and social privilege expressed by Christians in modern society. What I said was...

look, I referred to you painting Christians to be cruel here:

Heck, until recently they could and would kill, impoverish or imprison non-Christians.

It's true @KenS replied to it already... but it seemed to me that I could also say something...

 

[ppp]

look, I referred to you painting Christians to be cruel here:

My point was not that Christians necessarily cruel. My point is that the sincere practices of Christianity can, have, and do produce cruelty. I fully and loudly acknowledge that Christianity can, has and does produce compassion. But we don't get to ignore the cruelty and pretend the compassion is all that is relevant.

 

[Kenny]

I don't think that's entirely true.. Christianity had power centers.by the mid second century, but y'all were still enclaves of people scrapping and infighting. Christianity had power, but it was not in power until Constantine became convinced of either its truth or its utility. Or both.

OK... we can agree on disagreeing.

I do count Acts as historical:

Acts 19:10
And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heardthe word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks.

No small impact in two years.

Yes. It is. But it is Christians who balk when it is pointed out that their beliefs and practices endorsed and enacted slavery. I don't quibble when someone points out that the US beliefs and practices endorsed and enacted the same.

i think that is somewhat skewed. Yes, there were Christians who believed in slavery, but it was the Christians that led the movement to outlaw slavery.

Of course you do. I don't expect otherwise. Yet the fruits of what Christians attribute to Jesus make the quality of Christianity indistinct from any other purely human group. It has no elevated or divine nature.

Again, that is an opinion.

What I do know is that Christians are involved in rescuing sex-slave children, helping drug addicts, feeding the hungry all over the world, helping the homeless, educating those who can't afford it, have medical ships that reach the world etc.

i think it is the Divine that motivates these people.

 

[ppp]

OK... we can agree on disagreeing.

I do count Acts as historical:

Acts 19:10
And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heardthe word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks.

No small impact in two years.

I don't understand what that is supposed to show. I already acknowledged that there were assorted enclaves of power.

i think that is somewhat skewed. Yes, there were Christians who believed in slavery, but it was the Christians that led the movement to outlaw slavery.

There have been tiny anti-slavery factions of Christianity since the mid 300's. Never the less Christians, in the majority, practiced, depended up on and profited from slavery for more than 1,800 years of their 2,000 year history. It was not until the Industrial revolution changed the economic situation, making slave labor unprofitable for Christian societies, that the majority of Christians began to repent their Christian ways. You are trying to give Christians credit for abolishing a problem that they were themselves a major actor in creating.

And Ken. The Bible endorses slavery. Clearly and Explicitly.

Again, that is an opinion.

Is it? If so, then things with divine natures are indistinguishable from things with human natures.

What I do know is that Christians are involved in rescuing sex-slave children, helping drug addicts, feeding the hungry all over the world, helping the homeless, educating those who can't afford it, have medical ships that reach the world etc.

All true. I think it is their humanity and their communities that motivate them. After all, people who don't believe in the divine are motivated to do these thing as well.

But your list is incomplete. Here are some other things that Christians do based on their belief that the divine motivates them:

• Christians hold that food hostage for sermons.
• Promote "Abstinence-only" sex education resulting in 5 times the average STI rate and teen pregnancies. Not to mention promoting the spread of AIDS in Africa.
• They engage in world wide conspiracies to hide child rapists and to intimidate their victims into silence.
• They teach their children to hate and fear science and scientist.
• They deny their children blood transfusions, antibiotics, and other life saving treatments.
• They demonize other religions and non-believers.
• They teach children that eternal torture is the act of an all loving being.
• They destroy art and literature that they consider to be blasphemous or pornographic.
• Blue laws. They spend billions on houses of worship.
• They claim to be providing a public service, but don't open their books to public scrutiny..

Et cetera.

 

[Kenny]

I don't understand what that is supposed to show. I already acknowledged that there were assorted enclaves of power.

Just that Constantine didn't start the influence... he just acknowledged the influence. The influence had been going on for centuries.

There have been tiny anti-slavery factions of Christianity since the mid 300's. Never the less Christians, in the majority, practiced, depended up on and profited from slavery for more than 1,800 years of their 2,000 year history. It was not until the Industrial revolution changed the economic situation, making slave labor unprofitable for Christian societies, that the majority of Christians began to repent their Christian ways. You are trying to give Christians credit for abolishing a problem that they were themselves a major actor in creating.

And Ken. The Bible endorses slavery. Clearly and Explicitly.

I know that we can make mountains out of mole-hills but "in the majority, practiced" might be better said "in the majority of those who had power" which would be a very small majority.

And, in my understanding, scriptures does not "support" slavery but rather, "when those in power utilize slavery, how do you live under those circumstances as a Christian. It never said "Christians, get your slaves" In the beginning God didn't create slaves, He created free people.

No more than saying "God supports divorce" because God allowed it, when Jesus said "because of hard hearts, He had to give grace because of the reality of what is happening.

Is it? If so, then things with divine natures are indistinguishable from things with human natures.

how so? For me it isn't hard. Fruit of the Spirit vs lust of the flesh is pretty distinguishable.

All true. I think it is their humanity and their communities that motivate them. After all, people who don't believe in the divine are motivated to do these thing as well.

But your list is incomplete. Here are some other things that Christians do based on their belief that the divine motivates them:

• Christians hold that food hostage for sermons.
• Promote "Abstinence-only" sex education resulting in 5 times the average STI rate and teen pregnancies. Not to mention promoting the spread of AIDS in Africa.
• They engage in world wide conspiracies to hide child rapists and to intimidate their victims into silence.
• They teach their children to hate and fear science and scientist.
• They deny their children blood transfusions, antibiotics, and other life saving treatments.
• They demonize other religions and non-believers.
• They teach children that eternal torture is the act of an all loving being.
• They destroy art and literature that they consider to be blasphemous or pornographic.
• Blue laws. They spend billions on houses of worship.
• They claim to be providing a public service, but don't open their books to public scrutiny..

This too superficial, IMV. That there are some who have done it, it would be wrong to paint the whole of Christianity because of what some do.

But I must say, thank you for enjoyable dialogue without all the digs and innuendos that tend to permeate a discussion like this one.!

Appreciate you -- even if we don't see eye - to - eye.

 

[ppp]

I know that we can make mountains out of mole-hills but "in the majority, practiced" might be better said "in the majority of those who had power" which would be a very small majority.

No. Pre-Civil war, in Virginia and North Carolina 1 out of 4 families owned one or more slaves. That is about the same percentage of people who read recreational on a daily basis. Slaves made up 40% of the population of the American South. The prosperity of the entire Christian-dominated Southern economy was slave dependent.

And, in my understanding, scriptures does not "support" slavery but rather, "when those in power utilize slavery, how do you live under those circumstances as a Christian. It never said "Christians, get your slaves" In the beginning God didn't create slaves, He created free people.

The countries that had legalized slavery didn't have laws that said "Citizens, get your slaves." either. They were still immoral and inhumane laws.

When one has the power to stop slavery and does not, one is acting immorally. If one goes so far as to say owning people as property is permissible, one is an immoral thug.

No more than saying "God supports divorce" because God allowed it, when Jesus said "because of hard hearts, He had to give grace because of the reality of what is happening.

Are you seriously trying to tell me that God, the supposed moral authority of the universe - he who banned shellfish, murder, cannibalism, and fornication - had to give surrender to social conventions on slavery? Because shellfish, tattoos, and mixing flax/linen were much more dire moral hot-button issues than owning people as property..

If I did believe in God, this would convince me that he was evil.

how so? For me it isn't hard. Fruit of the Spirit vs lust of the flesh is pretty distinguishable.This too superficial, IMV. That there are some who have done it, it would be wrong to paint the whole of Christianity because of what some do.

My list is no more superficial than yours. And just as true. And I am not "painting the whole." I am saying that all of those acts your, list and mine, are the threads that comprise the fabric that is Christianity. They are all an interwoven part of the faith.

 

[Kenny]

No. Pre-Civil war, in Virginia and North Carolina 1 out of 4 families owned one or more slaves. That is about the same percentage of people who read recreational on a daily basis. Slaves made up 40% of the population of the American South. The prosperity of the entire Christian-dominated Southern economy was slave dependent.

yes... but did you make note? Even when Virginia was the highest percentage of slave ownership, it still represent only 25% of free people owning slaves.

75% didn't and there were a host of other states that didn't agree with slavery. So I think the figures are still in my favor

The countries that had legalized slavery didn't have laws that said "Citizens, get your slaves." either. They were still immoral and inhumane laws.

When one has the power to stop slavery and does not, one is acting immorally. If one goes so far as to say owning people as property is permissible, one is an immoral thug.

And we did... it was called the Civil War.

re you seriously trying to tell me that God, the supposed moral authority of the universe - he who banned shellfish, murder, cannibalism, and fornication - had to give surrender to social conventions on slavery? Because shellfish, tattoos, and mixing flax/linen were much more dire moral hot-button issues than owning people as property..

If I did believe in God, this would convince me that he was evil.

I think if you take it in context, there is a lot of wisdom in that position.

If, indeed, He did wipe out all people except those in the Ark because the very thoughts of mankind was evil, what other alternative did He have?

The moral authority of the universe, can't have mercy? If there was no mercy, we would all be in jail.

My list is no more superficial than yours. And just as true. And I am not "painting the whole." I am saying that all of those acts your, list and mine, are the threads that comprise the fabric that is Christianity. They are all an interwoven part of the faith.

Again, I would take exception to the phrase "comprise the fabric that is Christianity" because it gives the illusion that there is no good in Christianity.

For an example you said, "They deny their children blood transfusions, antibiotics, and other life saving treatments." - Without saying "The Jehovah Witnesses have interpreted the Bible as saying".... you would think it was the norm, which it isn't.

Or, "Promote "Abstinence-only" sex education resulting in 5 times the average STI rate and teen pregnancies. Not to mention promoting the spread of AIDS in Africa." as if the teaching was at fault. Hard pressed to prove it was the teaching. I taught my children about the purpose of sex which included, "save yourself for the one you love". All three have healthy marriages, no STI, no teen pregnancies, and my son marriage someone who had previously had sex.

So, when I said, "superficial", forgive me if it was taken as a dig. What I meant is that it had no additional information that made what had some truth to it into a half-truth to the casual reader.