Christianophobia

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Well, ye did.

Maos revolution, Pol pots Cambodia, Etc

Please show where they did anything bad in the name of 'atheism'.

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I've never had a bad experience with the CC.

Lucky you. The sheer amount of people that have had a bad experience however says a lot about the organisation.

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I feel the rise of anti Christian sentiment in Irish society and media. It seems to be ok to take a shot at these people and ridicule them for their beliefs.

I know it's a wider issue, Judeo Christian culture which built the west and forged many of it's values is seen as the establishment. Far leftists want to tear down the establishment. Raging against what has served our people well for centuries.

I was one of these guys too in college but when I matured a little I realised how childish my views were. I've never had a bad experience with the CC. When somebody close to me committed suicide I sat by his coffin at the wake for a couple of hours with a Priest and he was just a lovely man, he explained to me how only God can judge the dead and not man.

I think the basic tenants of Christianity are good, they're followers of Christ and the New Testament. I like the whole ethos of 'Hate the Sin, not the Sinner.'

Never had a bad experience, that is great and should be the same for everyone. Religion should be a source of good. But you are aware of the terrible suffering that has been inflicted on many through the deeds of the CC, from the inquisition, abuse of children, allowing gay people to be cast as sinners and that is before we even get into the wars that have been waged on behalf of God.

In terms of the priest, wow. There you are sitting at the coffin of your dead friend, and the most comforting thing a priest could say is that God will judge him. Simple human decency would say that then wasn't really the time to discuss religion, a simple "we can pray he is now in a peaceful place" or "we can take joy in the time we did know him".

It is telling that you see this prients failure to preach the CC teaching that your friend was essentially a sinner and condemned as he sat beside the coffin as something to be held high.

The fact that you mention that you once felt the same way as those criticising the CC while in college but have since matured betrays your feelings on these people and it is clear that far from looking at them as equals you think they are beneath you. Yet your core problem seems to be that others are not giving your beliefs the respect you think they deserve!

History as shown us that most groups that were used to a position of authority and being seen as elite feel that when the scales are being rebalanced they view thes as being unfair to them rather than being fair to everyone. White people in South Africa, middle class white americans in the US feel like they are losing out, even men feel that the continued rebalancing of gender has resulted in things going too far. The CC has shown a clear propensity to violently protect and project it influence and will do whatever it takes to maintain its power. It no longer enjoys the same power or influence and so has been forced to take on this more benign approach in recent times but don't for a second think that, if it had the wherewithall, it wouldn't strike out as before. (This is of course not confined to the CC but all institutions of power but I am sticking to CC here as that is the OP point)

511 wrote: »

The sooner the ALL faiths die out, the better. We have less war and division on this planet.

Fixed that for you.

LuckyRoche wrote:

It's historical fact that Jesus did exist.

Definitely existed in the sense that Plato/ Socrates definately existed, but not in he sense that Julius Ceasar or Napoleon definitely existed.

There is some evidence of Jusus the man but it's more accurate to say that most historians accept the existence of Jesus the man because. There is little good evidence and it's mixed with known forgeries so it's too difficult to say one way or the other.

The more important point is that the effects of the teachings have led to Christianity which certainly does exist. In that sense both Jesus and Socrates have had a profound impact on the world regardless of their actual existence and their actual existence is less important than the impact of their following.


If you mean this argument or something similar, fine. If you mean the argument below then youre just wrong

Jesus existed -> Jesus was the son of god -> therefore god and Christianity are true

LuckyRoche wrote: »

It's historical fact that Jesus did exist.

All evidence of which has to be based on the Bible which was written a long time after his death.

LuckyRoche wrote: »

It's historical fact that Jesus did exist.

Far from it, it is quote contentious at best. And some of what little evidence people do cite about it has even been suggested to be fraudulent. But by all means lay out the historical case for me sometime.

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Well, ye did. Maos revolution, Pol pots Cambodia, Etc

Could you lay out the full connection there for me, because I am not seeing it.

Hoop66 wrote: »

They did it in the name of their ideology, which is kind of the same thing. Since their ideology required them to reject religion.

That is tenuous at best, it is not the same thing at all.

But even then these regimes have their issues with religion not because of atheism, but because the religion in question is a direct competition to what they are trying to install. Especially in areas where people have essentially tried to install what is in effect a state religion. Such as we saw in places like Russia.

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I feel the rise of anti Christian sentiment in Irish society and media. It seems to be ok to take a shot at these people and ridicule them for their beliefs.

I know it's a wider issue, Judeo Christian culture which built the west and forged many of it's values is seen as the establishment. Far leftists want to tear down the establishment. Raging against what has served our people well for centuries.

I was one of these guys too in college but when I matured a little I realised how childish my views were. I've never had a bad experience with the CC. When somebody close to me committed suicide I sat by his coffin at the wake for a couple of hours with a Priest and he was just a lovely man, he explained to me how only God can judge the dead and not man.

Many, many, women and children had very bad experiences with the CC in this country.

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I think the basic tenants of Christianity are good, they're followers of Christ and the New Testament. I like the whole ethos of 'Hate the Sin, not the Sinner.'

You mean fair weather christians who don't follow the literal word of the bible ie. the literal word of god, most likely because they've never read it in it's entirety. Instead they pick the nice bits and forget, or are ignorant to, all the horrific and scientifically inaccurate stuff.

There is some evidence that a man fitting Jesus' description lived around that time in Nazareth and was a travelling preacher who was eventually executed/martyred. Many of the stories around his life may well have been stories of his followers making sense of his loss and keeping alive his teachings (alternate explanations; a) it's absolutely true and there is no way other than divinity to explain it, b) it's all made-up and someone stumbled on a collaborative fiction work of the time that took off bigger than Twilight and Harry Potter combined).

Here, Christianity is slowly declining. We tamed Christianity and defanged it, took it out of positions of power and allowed people to make up their own minds. This is still contentious today. Still, good on, religion shouldn't have control over a state.

However, Christianity is a home-grown religion (well, it's not, but it's culturally ours). Arguing against its precepts does not actually place an intolerable burden (bar maybe a lot of irritation) on its adherents. Where Islamaphobia somewhat differs is that the -sort- of accusations lowered against it are as much against its adherents, and are used to advocate harsh treatment against Muslims -in general- based on their religion. That's where it gets dangerous.

BrokenArrows wrote: »

While the violent extreme actions are restricted to the "few" the general non violent extreme nature of the religion cannot be denied. This extreme nature allows for escalation to violent extreme actions.

I have friends who are Muslim and in my opinion they are good people, but that doesn't change the fact that they their wifes and daughters wear full burkas and are not in anyway free to live their own lives when compared to the rest of the non Muslim population.

The only solution to peace is the removal of ALL religion from society. We are advanced enough not to require the belief in some mythical god to scare us into being good. We have man made laws now which we all follow and immediate repercussions if we dont (jail) instead of the punishment/reward scenario offered by all religions after death.

I agree and take issue with many of the practises in Islam. Merely pointing our why people giving out about Christianity is not generally considered hatred while some of attacks on Islam are.

For the people who have not read the Bible, I found this to be a good online class:

https://youtu.be/3oH0ReL3Cew

deaddonkey15 wrote: »

Who am I insulting? Plus, it kind of undermines the whole religion doesn't it? If god really is real and the bible is his literal word, then what gives his followers the right to pick and choose what parts of his word they like and want to live by and what parts of his word they simply ignore? It's "on the fence" christianity. Either take the bible seriously, as the literal word of your god and creator, or else stop whining when people make fun of your childish cherry picked beliefs. It's not important enough for people to follow the literal world of the bible, but important enough to prevent children from going to certain schools unless they've had some water splashed over their heads. Ridiculous.

I quite agree that religion should be removed from the schooling system. The real question is do you want to be -right-, or do you want -results-?

Can't have both, not if your method of being right is to insult Christians doing their best to live between their beliefs and the secular state.