This is why people hate Christianity and Christians...

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Actually, Ree, I think it all boils down to people cherish their pet hates and dont want to have to think that they are close minded or bigots for holding onto them. So they work very, very hard to justify them.

That goes for many things, not just this one.

[BlaqueKatt]

or are you saying that they need to change their stand on who is allowed to be married.

If sex is only a sin outside the marriage bed the people saying they shouldn't be allowed to be married are themselves creating more sin-by denying loving people the ability to have relations within a loving caring marriage.

I highly doubt God would think any love was wrong.

To counter that, I go back to my previous statement that, just because you want to live your life a certain way, and the church condemns that, it does not necessarily make the church wrong, and it does not mean that the church should bow to your wishes.

And what exactly gives them the right to judge or condemn anyone-"let he who is without sin cast the first stone" I'm pretty sure Jesus said that while defending a woman who had committed adultery-I see an awful lot of stones being thrown by people that aren't free of sin themselves. And an awful lot of people that are claiming to know the mind of God-which is in and of itself a sin.

[Ree]

I see an awful lot of stones being thrown by people that aren't free of sin themselves.

I can't speak for the Christian church in which you were raised and were a former youth minister, but in my church we are taught that nobody is free from sin, including our human priests and religious, and that's why the sacrament of Confession exists. We confess our sins and make atonement for them with acts of penance. This is done by everyone, including our church leaders.

And an awful lot of people that are claiming to know the mind of God-which is in and of itself a sin.

You have used numerous scripture passages to make your point, so may I remind you of Exodus 20:2-17 in which it is written that ten basic commandments were handed down by Moses, allegedly from the hand of God Himself?
Those commandments form the basic laws, not only of Juedo-Christian religions, but in everyday society as well.

As I said before, at least in my church, the leaders pray to God for guidance in making their rules. That is not presuming to know the mind of God. It is, as I said, faith and trust in a higher power, that he will speak through them, rather then them speaking for him.

Matthew 7:1-3
Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

Hmmm...seems to me we've also had a lot of people pointing out the speck in the eyes of the Christian church while ignoring the pretty large log in their own.

It's true, judgment is for God alone, but, as I mentioned, even in society, we have laws and rules, and a judicial system that hands out punishment based on these laws. These laws are based on those commandments.

"Thou shalt not kill."
"Thou shalt not covet."
Pretty basic stuff.

Prisons are filled with people who "sin" against the laws of society, and are judged accordingly.
Why is it so wrong for a church to also set out a clearly defined doctrine of what is a sin against the church, and against God?

[HYHYBT]

I'm sorry, but no! Those arguements just don't hold water!

I don't see any logic in saying "I choose to affiliate with group XYZ, even though I know their history has been guilty of ABC crimes to humanity - and still does condone some very questionable activities*".

Partly, it depends on what you mean by "affiliating with a group": I believe that Jesus is the son of God, died for our sins, and was resurrected. Therefore, I am a Christian. What horrible things someone else does who also believes this has nothing to do with it. Demanding that I change that belief because X also believes it falls somewhere between demanding that you (a) stop liking pizza and (b) stop thinking that grass is green, because there are wicked people who agree with you on those points.

You don't get to pick and choose the bits you like and reject the bits you don't.

Actually, you *do.* Naturally, it's best to pick the church that fits best with your own beliefs, but nobody has to agree with anybody else about everything except when church takes over state.

And that's the difference... if 'Christianity' is being attacked - that's attacking an organisation - not your connection with your deity or beliefs!

As has been pointed out, and ignored, many times before in this thread alone: "Christianity" is NOT an organization. Christianity is the sum total of all Christians. Therefore, "if 'Christianity' is being attacked," it BY DEFINITION is not merely "attacking an organisation," but is an attack on all of us. If the attack is meant to be against specific individuals, or against group(s) or organization(s) within Christianity, then it needs to be stated that way.

And anyway, can you truthfully say that you never associate in any voluntary way with anyone who disagrees with you on *anything*, or who *ever* does anything you don't approve of? Really?

[BlaqueKatt]

I can't speak for the Christian church in which you were raised and were a former youth minister

Raised Roman Catholic-youth minister for an Apostolic Church-We were required to read ALL the Gospels for the Apostolic, including the ones deemed as heresy by the Catholic Church, because they refuted established Catholic Doctrine-otherwise known as the Gnostic Gospels, or "Dead sea scrolls"-which include the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary, and the newly translated Gospel of Judas(I wish that had been around-it states that Jesus instructed Judas to betray him as he trusted him to do so-the others would not). Also due to the book of Matthew which I quoted earlier-we did not have a grand building to be "seen by men", as the hypocrites do we had an empty barn during the summer and a warehouse during the winter.

One of my classes involved each of us bringing in a rock song and giving our interpretation of God's message found in the song-I started with the moody blues "I know your out there somewhere" (God's message of love is everywhere if you look for it-but most are taught to close their eyes to it)

We did not pray in church, again due to Matthew's words-but spoke of the messages Jesus was sent here to instill-we supported each other, and reminded each other that God loved us sins and all, or he would not have sent his only son to die in our place so that we might live. He made us in his image, to condemn anyone would be as condemning God himself. He decided to give us free will, he sent his son to die so we would not be afraid to use the gift he gave us-to reject that gift is to reject the decision of God. He is a loving Father and knows on occasion we will disappoint him-but he still loves us all, and trusts that eventually we will find our way back to the path he cleared for us. He gave us the ability to learn from our mistakes, and does not turn away when we fail-he helps us up just as we are to help others.

That is not presuming to know the mind of God. It is, as I said, faith and trust in a higher power, that he will speak through them, rather then them speaking for him.

Humans are fallible, you trust they are not presenting their own bigotry or thoughts as being from God, but you don't know-the Catholic church unilaterally decided which gospels were cannon and suppressed, ignored or destroyed many(there were over 50 gospels)-how much knowledge was lost?

Why is it so wrong for a church to also set out a clearly defined doctrine of what is a sin against the church, and against God?

They can claim a sin against the Church(which is a creation of man)-but they CANNOT speak for God, and through the blood of Christ the sins of man are wiped clean if you believe, so there is no such thing as sin against God-he made sure of that.

John 13
34"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."

Ephesians 4
31Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. 32Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.


*disclaimer I am no longer a Christian-due to personal issues, but I can still have Theological discussions-I miss the Priest I used to have them with, in the bar....yes we shared ideas and differing viewpoints, but he liked having conversations with people that weren't in lock-step with everyone else-he referred to himself as "the only shepherd that didn't like sheep"-in other words he believed that one should have their own ideas not just parrot back what they were taught. That's indoctrination not free will.

[Ree]

They can claim a sin against the Church(which is a creation of man)-but they CANNOT speak for God, and through the blood of Christ the sins of man are wiped clean if you believe, so there is no such thing as sin against God-he made sure of that.

But sin is against God.
Obviously, we are divided on that point, but as to the other point, what you are saying is pretty much what I was saying. Christ died as a sacrifice for our sins. As long as we repent for our sins, God forgives those sins.

Proverbs 24:18
For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again; but the wicked shall fall into mischief.”

I don't see how accepting what has been taught, even after questioning it, is considered parroting and indoctrination.
Just because I questioned and still came away believing in my church does not make my arguments any less valid than someone who questioned and walked away from it.
Free will is free will.
It means we are free to believe as we wish, not rejecting all in favour of something else.
I wish to believe as I do. That does not make me a parrot.

[Slytovhand]

Partly, it depends on what you mean by "affiliating with a group": I believe that Jesus is the son of God, died for our sins, and was resurrected. Therefore, I am a Christian.

'Christian' is a label to denote a person who believes as you have just said. This differs significantly with choosing to belong to a particular church - an organisation that lays down particular rles, tenets and charters. Different kettle of fish.

The "pick and choose" was in reference to what rules, tenets and charters an organisation has once you've joined - not the actual act of choosing which group (if any) to join. eg, if a church group says homosexuality is a sin, and you don't believe it is, you don't get to join that group but believe it's not a sin... not if you're being honest about it!

As has been pointed out, and ignored, many times before in this thread alone: "Christianity" is NOT an organization. Christianity is the sum total of all Christians. Therefore, "if 'Christianity' is being attacked," it BY DEFINITION is not merely "attacking an organisation," but is an attack on all of us. If the attack is meant to be against specific individuals, or against group(s) or organization(s) within Christianity, then it needs to be stated that way.

yeah, alright, you've got me there....

Although, as has been stated quite clearly elsewhere, if you're a member of an umbrella group (such as Christianity... or Muslim, or Hindu or Pagan) and one of the other groups of your umbrella does something generally considered reprehensible, if you don't do anything to denounce it, then you're tacitly condoning it. You will see, for example, when a terrorist bombing goes off, one lot will claim responsibility, and a whole host of others will condemn it. THat doesn't always happen when it's a Christian group that does something like that... so, in essence, it comes across as "it's not us, it's them"... where to the rest of the community - it is! (might not be 'right', but it happens)

And anyway, can you truthfully say that you never associate in any voluntary way with anyone who disagrees with you on *anything*, or who *ever* does anything you don't approve of? Really?

Hairs... there's a difference with 'disagreeing' or 'disapproving', and finding stuff repugnant or anathema.

Hmmm...seems to me we've also had a lot of people pointing out the speck in the eyes of the Christian church while ignoring the pretty large log in their own.

Ah, but you see Ree, that's a Christian quote.. so it doesn't really apply to non-Christians

They can claim a sin against the Church(which is a creation of man)-but they CANNOT speak for God, and through the blood of Christ the sins of man are wiped clean if you believe, so there is no such thing as sin against God-he made sure of that.

Depending on which church or book you choose to believe....

[BlaqueKatt]

I don't see how accepting what has been taught, even after questioning it, is considered parroting and indoctrination.
Just because I questioned and still came away believing in my church does not make my arguments any less valid than someone who questioned and walked away from it.

it does not-but the difference is you have thought about it, you have questioned-which is why your faith is strong-sadly I have run into way too many people in my life that haven't-you ask them what they believe and it's vague(Jesus died for our sins-and that's it*), and ask they why they believe, and get the answer "well it's what my parents told me to believe" They never questioned-and that IMHO is wrong.

I think those are mainly the ones that cause problems because they've never thought about it, and are not motivated by faith-but rather a "false faith" if you will, which is merely going through the motions, due to fear of punishment, not because they feel in their heart it's the right thing.

They do not have a "personal relationship" with God because they never created one, yes they may go to church, but only because they feel they should.

It's kinda like going to visit a relative you don't know that well, you go because they're related, and you feel obligated to, but not because you want to get to know them, and make no effort to get to know them outside infrequent visits-if that makes sense at all.

*I have asked some people why Jesus died for us and have gotten some responses that clearly indicate no comprehension of the Bible what so ever-such as-"he was a good person", or "he was a martyr, and died because he believed in us"-and if you try to correct their misinformation-they get angry, because a Buddhist can't possibly know anything about Christianity.(I believe that falls under pride)

[Ree]

*I have asked some people why Jesus died for us and have gotten some responses that clearly indicate no comprehension of the Bible what so ever-such as-"he was a good person", or "he was a martyr, and died because he believed in us"-and if you try to correct their misinformation-they get angry, because a Buddhist can't possibly know anything about Christianity.(I believe that falls under pride)

Yes, that is pride.

Not all Christians are so narrow minded, though, and that was my point when I originally responded to the title of this thread.

[Kalli]

Depending on which church or book you choose to believe....

<FZ> Depending on which book you're using at the time, can't use theirs, it don't work, it's all lies, gotta use mine </FZ>

[Crazedclerkthe2nd]

I will admit I probaby should have retitled this thread in retrospect, but that doesn't change the root of why I started it.

I was looking at it from the perspective of someone who does not attend church regularly and does not necessarily believe in God but still have enough spiritual curiousity to want to explore religion and churches. I believe this person would be largely put off by a lot of the stories we see and hear through the mass media about Christians. I wholeheartedly agree that it is the sin related things that get more publibicty and that is a problem.

I could have used this thread to focus on a different religion as each has its pros and cons, but I chose Christianity because I am a Christian and have struggled with my own beliefs after reading articles like the one I posted earlier and because Christianity is one of the largest religions in the world and therefore one of the most prevalent.

One of the difficult things for me is to separate God and the bible from the Church. You don't need to be in a church to experience God and you need to realize that things a Pastor or Priest or Bishop might say are not always necessarily in line with the Word (since the Word represents God's feelings). Just because you hear it at a church doesn't mean it's coming direct from God.

And about the posted comic, I too have had issues with the "holier than thou" attitude of some Christians. Let me set the record straight. I don't conisider myself above anyone and I'm not cocky or arrogant, nor do I gloat because "I'm a Christian and you're not!" That totally flies in the face of the teachings of Jesus but sadly does happen far too often.

I became a Christian primarily because I wanted a deeper relationship with God, not because I wanted to spend two hours of every Sunday listening to a preacher. I do enjoy my church services, but I get more of out personal intimate experiences with the Lord than I do from hearing a Sermon.

[tropicsgoddess]

So, it's OK to hate an entire group and assume everyone in that group holds exactly the same warped and twisted views, based on one warped and twisted person?

What he was preaching was not Christianity.
He set himself up as a false prophet.
That is a cult. It is not Christianity.

Just because he said it was, does not mean it's right.

Assholes like him and Fred Phelps give Christianity a horrible name. Unfortunately it's those kinds of people that contort what the bible says into their own twisted ways of life and preach it to their sheeple. Don't get me wrong, there's good Christians out there but sadly it's the wackos like them that get so much press.

[Fryk]

Yes, but everytime I see their name on T.V., should I be calling a press conference publicly denouncing their actions? Or maybe I should just wear a sandwich board when I go out in public that says "I'm not with the WBC."

[Slytovhand]

Yes, but everytime I see their name on T.V., should I be calling a press conference publicly denouncing their actions? Or maybe I should just wear a sandwich board when I go out in public that says "I'm not with the WBC."

Is that rhetorical?

I ask, simply because if you did - and everyone else who thinks that way - then WBC would very quickly disappear.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

You think every Christian walking around with a sign on their shirt with the name of Fred Phelps church on it would cause him to go away?

Really.

Negative attention is still attention. Especially in his case. He doesn't think for one minute anyone is going to like what he's doing. He's actively seeking negative attention.

He would LOVE IT if everyone, Christian or no, had his name on their lips. Doesn't matter in what capacity.

Let me put it another way...why is it my responsibility to decry someone who has nothing to do with me? I don't even consider that the guy is a Christian. As far as I'm concerned, he's a bully, he's crazy, he's evil incarnate. He's got nothing to do with my religion. And yet, I'm responsible for making sure you all don't think I agree with him?

How about this...his crimes are against decency. I would argue that all the rest of you have no less responsibility than I to stand up and make sure nobody thinks you agree with him or any other of his ilk. It's not just on me, contrary to what all the self righteous here may think. Cowboy up and start making your sandwitch boards.