• 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!

Lies and Phony Caricatures of Christianity

sooda

Veteran Member
It is your hyperbolic and false narrative that only Christians are nasty. Who says things like that but Christian zealots like you trying to defend a religion increasingly being recognized as irrelevant in their lives? I don't, but you do,

Apparently, it is your hope that if nastiness exists anywhere else but in Christianity, that Christianity is not what its detractors actually say about it.



No, Christianity is dying because of suicide, not murder. Modern telecommunications have lifted the rock and exposed Christianity to the light. People just aren't interested. It's Christianity's failure on the big screen. Look at your net effect on RF. You are damaging Christianity. You've got this whole thread aligned against you. There was no indoctrinatioj or propaganda involved in that process except your own and its rejection.



The source of anti-Christian sentiments is Christianity and Christians in the news. You need to accept responsibility for your own part in this and stop blaming the apparent victors for Christianity's failures.



Yet none of those were attacks. To you, any contradiction is a vicious attack. But you're the aggressor here. You started the thread in attack, as you did the anti-science and folly of atheism threads. You're the jihadist here. Yours is the agenda, which includes playing martyr.



I'd say Christian zealot or Christian jihadist.



The topic ended hundreds of posts ago. It's been just you complaining while offering no evidence ever since the first page- just your regressive indoctrination phony caricatures. You were rejected, and have brought nothing new since.



I'll leave that to you.



You do it to yourselves. You're doing it now.

They are destroying Christianity.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
The Internationally recognised response to an implied concession is a yodel.
You only gave a Wahhoo 'cos you can't spell a yodel, is my bet.....
:p


I think so......
I don't expect a response to the copied verses of Paul's, instructing slaves to obey their masters in everything (shudder).

Could have been a yehaaa gone wrong or even a woot, woot, woot but yodel? Who does a yodel these days and besides, i cant spell it....
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
They are destroying Christianity.
The thing is............. are they Christians?

What better way to rubbish a religion, or any group, than to present oneself as a follower or member of same and then to cause it to crash and burn?

I'm not sure. Not at all.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
The thing is............. are they Christians?

What better way to rubbish a religion, or any group, than to present oneself as a follower or member of same and then to cause it to crash and burn?

I'm not sure. Not at all.
The thing is............. are they Christians?

What better way to rubbish a religion, or any group, than to present oneself as a follower or member of same and then to cause it to crash and burn?

I'm not sure. Not at all.

I'm pretty sure they are Christians.. Fundamentalism is reactionary.
 

tas8831

Well-Known Member
How about Hitler? Stalin? Ghandi? Jim Jones?

What does name dropping 'smears by association' have to do with Christianity? Or anything?
Good point - one has to wonder then why so many Christian creationists take such great care in equating Darwin with Hitler? Not only is this association spurious at best, it is is a sad fallacy. Yet EVERY major creationist organization does this, and likely most creationist individuals do, too (because they read it at creationist websites and books). Good for the goose is apparently not good for the gander.
Smears and caricatures of Christianity do not come from Christians, or those sympathetic to Christianity as an ideology. They come from bigoted enemies, with an agenda to smear and demean it. They usually promote THEIR worldview, as a substitute, but they are hostile toward Christianity and Christians.

A rather nice act of projection.
The bigoted enemies of science seek to promote their worldview and are hostile toward non-Christians or even to other Christians that are not part of their peculiar sect.
So they attack Darwin or those that accept evolution, as it is easier to attack the character of a dead man or declare evolutionists as 'indoctrinees' than to admit to not understanding enough science to counter evolution on its own terms.

Sad. So sad.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Good point - one has to wonder then why so many Christian creationists take such great care in equating Darwin with Hitler? Not only is this association spurious at best, it is a sad fallacy.

Yet EVERY major creationist organization does this, and likely most creationist individuals do, too (because they read it at creationist websites and books). Good for the goose is apparently not good for the gander.


A rather nice act of projection.
The bigoted enemies of science seek to promote their worldview and are hostile toward non-Christians or even to other Christians that are not part of their peculiar sect.
So they attack Darwin or those that accept evolution, as it is easier to attack the character of a dead man or declare evolutionists as 'indoctrinees' than to admit to not understanding enough science to counter evolution on its own terms.

Sad. So sad.

Maybe this missed out on education so that's what they are protecting.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Look at the 'black lives matter!' movement.. or the anarchy movement. Or the socialism movement.. or the antifa, white supremacy, aztlan, or any flavor of political movements anywhere along the political spectrum.

What do any of them have to do with Jesus's teachings? Biblical Christianity?

It is a smear by association, nothing more, to equate any fringe group with 'Christianity!' ..:eek:.., when there is no logical or ideological connection.
"Black Lives Matter" has much to do with the breaking down of power structures and oppression of the vulnerable, which is what Jesus taught.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
@usfan
To show us all that you would never support slavery in any way, could you just confirm that Saint Paul's instructions to slaves as shown was just outright bad.

Thankyou..... here we go:-

Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. (1 Peter 2:18)

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear (Ephesians 6:5)

Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything (Colossians 3:22)

Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them (Titus 2:9)

Usfan........... you do know what some slaves had to do to please their masters, don't you?
...Except that Paul likely didn't write any of these.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
...Except that Paul likely didn't write any of these.

OK..... I have little knowledge about Paul or his letters. Because Paul didn't write any anecdotes or reports about Jesus or his campaign my attention has focused elsewhere.

But unlike yourself, I don't often read other Christians questioning the veracity of Ephesians, I Timothy, Titus, Colossians, 1 Peter........
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
OK..... I have little knowledge about Paul or his letters. Because Paul didn't write any anecdotes or reports about Jesus or his campaign my attention has focused elsewhere.

But unlike yourself, I don't often read other Christians questioning the veracity of Ephesians, I Timothy, Titus, Colossians, 1 Peter........
Don’t get me wrong; they’re valid as authoritative texts, but I think we need to be clear that Paul is likely not the author of some And definitely not the author of others.

Your point still stands though.
 
Top