• 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!

Christianity must change or die

Trey of Diamonds

Well-Known Member
Christianity is a religion that has survived and flourished for nearly two thousand years. Through these years, it has changed, branched off, and evolved into what can be described as multiple Christianities. At the same time, much of Christianity has become stuck in the past, unwilling to change or improve. In the name of Christianity, atrocities are still committed, and intolerance justified. There are some forms of Christianity that has set out to rectify these wrongs; however, there are also those that refuse to make the changes that they need to. These forms of Christianity are now at a cross roads, in which they can choose to change for the better and continue into the 21st century, as respectable institutions, or they can slowly die out, leaving behind a legacy of intolerance, and disgust.

Baloney

Ok, what part of Christianity is "stuck in the past"? Christianity is constantly changing and evolving, even if it doesn't admit to it or want people to notice. I challenge you to find more than a handful of very small groups that even remotely resemble anything from Christianity's past. (a hint, Coptic Christians are one group). The vast majority of Christians today can only be called modern. There is no cross roads, no line in the sand to mark a point of no return. Christianity will continue to not only survive but to thrive, just as it continues to change. In a hundred years it will look nothing like it does today, just as it doesn't look like it did a hundred years ago.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
we have fundamental differences about how God's word is supposed to apply to our lives. You seem to feel that the Biblical heroes all had some authority that we don't have. My guess is that you're in a minority among Evangelicals in your thinking.

Would you please explain that to me? I have no clue how you got this from what I've written anywhere on the forum.

And for the love of god don't assume that I'm an Evangelical. That's the second misreading here, but this is like poking me in the eye with a red hot iron. And then ripping out my soul and shoving it up a goat's *** and throwing it into the mouth of the most ruthless volcano and reincarnating me as a cricket and stepping on me as a larvae.

And then eating my cricket family.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
My god that hurts!!!!!! O the inhumanity!!!! The agony!!!!

arrggrgrgrgrgagrgdgear
 
At least you can spell it. ;)

Well, the plural is bologne, LOL. But not like it matters... baloney is also in the dictionary.

And this is why Christianity must change, or die! :yes: Just like how we derive new neologisms and new spellings of words, so will Christianity continue to adapt to be applicable in modern times. :D
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
I have to agree... Four generations of Catholic Christianity, and other forms of Christianity, and I'm now saved by Krishna's grace~! ;)

And to quote the late great George Harrison "... I hope to get out of this place, by the Lord Sri Krishna's grace..." :)
 

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
My first impression, fallingblood, is that Christianity must change because it is in the hands of people who are constantly influenced by popular philosophy. If Christianity did not speak to a generation that breathes in the current popular philosophy, it would already be dead.

And we know that the various Christianities vary in their ability to be nimble - some Christianities change all the time and some are thirty to 500 years behind, but the entire landscape of Christianity is always in a state of change, even if it is difficult to perceive.
Very good points. I have to say that lately, I've been quite influenced by John Shelby Spong. I think he oversteps the line from time to time, but his book by the same title of this thread helped spearhead the OP.

I may have to go back and tinker with my position a bit.
 

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
If your going to ditch hell and intolerance and a literal reading, do you not loose most of the followers we have today.?
Honestly, I think that is just fine. However, I don't think there would be serious lost. Christians, at least in modern countries, are increasingly becoming more liberal. So there would be some loss, but I don't think it would be a major loss.
We are talking about some people being brainwashed since early childhood, asking for them to give up their faith will not come easy.
I think brainwashed it too harsh a term. For example, I grew up in a evangelical fundamentalist household. And it wasn't like anyone forced me to adopt that ideology myself. I may not have known any different, but I still accepted it out of my free will.

The problem was when I did start doing my own research, which was supported by my church and parents, I ended up rejecting the entire religion as I went from one extreme to the other (where I argued blindly that Jesus did not exist, and I was simply an angry atheist).

My brothers also ended up leaving the religion as well, but not with as much anger as I did. They also didn't leave it because of research, but because it just didn't fit them.

The problem for me is that I didn't have any credible driving force. The forums I belonged to at that time had hardly anyone who really studied Christianity, and it fueled my ignorant beliefs (I'm talking about beliefs like John the Baptist being the real Messiah, and things similar to what is found in Holy Blood, Holy Grail).

I think if many Christians are taught how to challenge the religion productively, and guided by serious scholarship, there will be little kicking and screaming. Others will definitely resist, and we have even seen some of that in this very thread.

A problem though is when people attack the religion. The reason is because people instantly become defensive, and then that person becomes isolated. We can also see that in this thread, as what I said could be seen as an attack by some.

And really, it is not about asking people to give up their faith, but to gain a more mature faith.
I think yout best approach is to start with a small change that will help leed to the possibility for more small changes in the future.
There could be some good in that; however, I don't really care for such a compromise. I don't think anyone should be able to be free to hide behind an institution while committing atrocious acts. No one should be free to persecute others, and then claim that their religion supports it and get off free. And if we go with just a small change, it allows people to continue to openly be bigots, while defiling the religion, and other members of it. More importantly, it defiles those who they are being bigoted towards, and that has to change immediately.
Maybe a non literal reading through education would break the ice and as the education progresses, it will be easier to loose the dogma holding it back.
That I agree with.
 

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
Changing God's laws to suit a person's desires isn't an act of love or tolerance, it is act of deception and therefore hateful. On the other hand, teachers of Scripture need to be gentle and loving toward those they're teaching. I haven't always been as gentle as I could've with Scripture and for that I'm truly sorry.
And perverting what one thinks is God's laws, in order to persecute, spread intolerance, and subjugate other individuals is simply hateful, and a shame.
 

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
And I was responding to that example.

Its no secret as its been repeated by Cafeteria Catholics and atheist alike. That the church is dieing and needs to modernize.
It was only one example. And really, it was hardly the point. It only supported a point that I had. I in no way single out Catholics, and I include them under Christianity.

More so, I know some great Catholics who are working to help reform the Church and the religion as a whole. I used to visit a Catholic Church that did just that.
 

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
Baloney

Ok, what part of Christianity is "stuck in the past"? Christianity is constantly changing and evolving, even if it doesn't admit to it or want people to notice. I challenge you to find more than a handful of very small groups that even remotely resemble anything from Christianity's past. (a hint, Coptic Christians are one group). The vast majority of Christians today can only be called modern. There is no cross roads, no line in the sand to mark a point of no return. Christianity will continue to not only survive but to thrive, just as it continues to change. In a hundred years it will look nothing like it does today, just as it doesn't look like it did a hundred years ago.
I'm thinking you completely missed the point of the OP. Because the OP does explain what I am talking about. That Christians, and forms of Christianities, need to cease the intolerance, narrow-mindedness, and the unquestioning blind faith.

So I think you should reread the OP.
 
Top