Fears

[Burning Zeppelin]

I said in that quote above that "inhibition is not an inherently wrong or bad quality." The flipside is also true; it is not inherently good, either. One of the worst things about Christianity is its grotesque doctrine of inhibiting a great deal of human nature, which I believe is key in understanding the genocidal, tyrannical history of that barbaric religion. But between these extremes of no inhibition and absolute inhibition is a more rational solution, one that makes it possible for human beings to build character above that of the animals without denying their own, unique perspective and subjectivity in the universe. "Inhibition" in its best sense is just another word for making good choices about the way we're going to behave ourselves.

When did Christianity come off as "genocidal, tyrannical history of that barbaric religion"?

[Sentenal]

Lord J is stuck on the Crusades and Inquisition, and paints modern christianity with that.

[Lord J Esq]

When did Christianity come off as "genocidal, tyrannical history of that barbaric religion"?

Of all the things you could have replied to in my post...you ask me, off topic, for a history lesson spanning 2000 years. How am I possibly supposed to reply? Don't take my word for it; go study the history of Christianity for yourself. You will find it to be an authoritarian religion based on fear and dishonesty that preys on the innocent, promotes egocentrism, breeds unrighteous arrogance, rejects intellectualism and stifles science and technology; a demeaning religion that venerates sin and imposes guilt upon the entire human race; a fictitious religion that stole most of its ideas and myths from older religions and corrupted them to suit its own bizarre theology; a psychotic religion that has a morbid, unhealthy preoccupation with sex that leads to sexual misery, and promotes violence and murder as the solution to almost every problem; a bigoted religion that obsesses over an exceedingly narrow view of morality, encouraging the acceptance of real evils while focusing on imaginary ones, all while depreciating the natural world and human nature, concentrating power in the hands of religious authorities and denying or attacking every other form of authority; subverting, ostracizing, or destroying its foes or even the ordinary unfaithful; glorifying misogyny, homophobia, racism, and blind faith; institutionalizing these prejudices into the very fabric of human culture, and demanding unwavering loyalty to an error-ridden, contradictory book of ridiculous credentials. Simply put, you will find that Christianity is cruel and wrong.

You live in the UAE, right? I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you've simply never learned very much about Christianity, and that whatever you have learned was due to whitewashing, honey-tongued missionaries who painted their pert little religion as a tradition of love and eternal life. Don't take their word for it either: The history books are there for you to open. Jesus himself was an okay guy, if you examine him within the context of the times, but Christianity as a force for good had died long before the fall of the Roman Empire, and has gotten worse ever since.

Lord J is stuck on the Crusades and Inquisition, and paints modern christianity with that.

The "tameness" of modern Christianity--which is itself an illusion, as Christianity is still very aggressive in the third world and still threatens to subvert the most powerful nation on the planet--this tameness owes itself to the Industrial Revolution, and the Enlightenment. These secular forces of industry and knowledge wrestled with the authority of Christianity and won many victories. As secular life took hold in the West, the devices of Christianity invariably lost some of their intensity. But make no mistake: Without secular power to hold the religion at bay, we would all be living back in the Dark Ages...and I ain't talking about the Kingdom of Zeal.

[Sentenal]

Lord J probably had his dog eaten by a Catholic priest when he was growing up.

[BlueThunder]

Nice thinking Sentenal.

[Lord J Esq]

You take my condemnation of Christianity so lightly, Sentenal. You continue to buy into that Christian stuff yourself but don't move to silence the opposition like somebody in the mold of Daniel Krispin would. I think that's the best I could hope for from red-meat religious conservatives like you. Thanks.

But I no like dogs.

[Sentenal]

I know my history, and I know my religion.

[GrayLensman]

When did Christianity come off as "genocidal, tyrannical history of that barbaric religion"?

Of all the things you could have replied to in my post...you ask me, off topic, for a history lesson spanning 2000 years. How am I possibly supposed to reply? Don't take my word for it; go study the history of Christianity for yourself.

It might help if you post a few specific examples.  I think you're a better study of history than I am.

[Lord J Esq]

When did Christianity come off as "genocidal, tyrannical history of that barbaric religion"?

Of all the things you could have replied to in my post...you ask me, off topic, for a history lesson spanning 2000 years. How am I possibly supposed to reply? Don't take my word for it; go study the history of Christianity for yourself.

It might help if you post a few specific examples.  I think you're a better study of history than I am.

Precisely my point, Mr. Guru of Reason. Anyone who has a thorough understanding of anything can only legitimately speak about it in two ways: detail or pithiness. The former is to educate by empirical inundation, like learning a play by memorizing the whole thing. The latter is to educate by conveying not the substance itself, but the essential meaning of the substance, which is much more qualitative and abstract. The former is irrefutable on all but a point-by-point basis, but for lack of time the latter is often preferred. I'm not willing to invest hours upon hours to get into 2000 years of history just so I can make an off-topic reply to a person whose mind is not likely to be changed anyway. I much prefer to invite people to do that sort of research themselves, and if they find specific points they wish to raise, I'd be happy to address them.

In that same spirit, it makes little sense for me to proactively drop a couple of examples to try and encapsulate the entirety of Christian history,  because history is full of aberrations and anomalies, and specific examples tend to prefer these in order to inaccurately bolster one's case, or an opponent's rebuttal. Implying detail without actually providing substantial detail  is a weak form of logical argument, and thus is a very easy tactic to attack. What good does it to me to talk about Tomás de Torquemada if I do not talk about the entire Spanish Inquisition? What good does it do me to talk about John Hathorne if I do not talk about the entire Salem witch trials? What good does it do me to talk about Eric Rudolph if I do not talk about the entire Culture of Life? And what good does it do me to talk about any of these specific pages in the annals of Christianity if I do not talk about the entire story in full? Instead, I rely on my paltry reputation here to not be dismissed out of hand as making shit up, and I speak pithily, qualitatively, conveying the gist of the substance rather than the substance itself. I suppose I welcome people to question me on individual points, or to raise individual points with which I may then contend, but I'd hardly be fool enough in a serious theater like this to "post a few specific examples" as part of a strategy to win an arugment.

No, my original recommendation stands. Burning Z should study more history himself, and then we can have a more scholarly discussion. I'm not in the business of teaching the alphabet.

[Sentenal]

IMHO, I think you shouldn't take the history of "Christians", and paint thats what Christianity is.

For example, the vast majority of examples you could provide would have been things commited by the Catholic church.  Not to say that certain Protestant "Christians" don't have their share of hypocracy, but it is vastly less than that of the Pope and his followers.

And I put "Christians" in quotes, because if it were my place to judge, I'd question their faith.

[Lord J Esq]

IMHO, I think you shouldn't take the history of "Christians", and paint thats what Christianity is.

For example, the vast majority of examples you could provide would have been things commited by the Catholic church.  Not to say that certain Protestant "Christians" don't have their share of hypocracy, but it is vastly less than that of the Pope and his followers.

And I put "Christians" in quotes, because if it were my place to judge, I'd question their faith.

Ah, yes. I'm aware of the rift between Protestants and Catholics. To those of you inside Christianity, it can be very important to stand on one side of the fence or the other. But to those outside the religion they're all just different branches of the same tree. As far as I'm concerned, Protestantism is a much graver threat to the world today than Catholicism is, because Protestants control the United States and are becoming more and more fanatical. If I had James Dobson and Benedict XVI in my sights, but only one bullet, it wouldn't even be close. Catholicism may be bigger and more centralized, but Protestantism is more hateful and evangelical.

I'm not dismissing Christianity as lacking any good whatsoever. Obviously that's not true. But most of that good comes despite the nature of that religion, not because of it, and what little of it truly is innate can be more legitimately produced without the superfluous framework of a religion, as the last three centuries have shown, and continue to show.

[Sentenal]

Protestiantism does not teach hatred!

And I fail to see how being evangelical is a bad thing.

[Lord J Esq]

Protestiantism does not teach hatred!

I understand why you say that. All I wish is that I could make you see why you're wrong. Tell me, in your view: What does Christianity teach? Love and kindness? Humility before the Lord? Prayer and charity and salvation? Sure, it teaches all of those things. But it does so with such a bizarre religious slant that the outcome of these lessons is the subjugation of women, bigotry against minorities of every stripe, a holy war on science, enmity toward the nations who should be our best allies, and an entire culture of people who do not want to think for themselves...just to name a few.

I went to a party at a friend's house after we graduated high school. It turns out that he and his family were deeply religious; he had never shown it in school. They used to live in Texas, and I remember his mother telling us that their reason for moving to California was that "the Lord changed our minds." Oh really? I beg your pardon, but "the Lord" did no such thing. Your husband got a job in California. That remark stayed with me even to this day, as a symbol for the Christian rejection of all human nature. Christians love God and hate themselves, and hate their neighbors, and hate the world. No wonder God never makes appearances anymore. I wouldn't want to show my face either, with followers like that.

How many people have I known who have suffered at the hands of Christian bigots? Do you even care about the number? You'll just write those Christians off as bad eggs who didn't understand the true meaning of the Gospel. Meanwhile, the bigotry continues and the suffering follows.

How many times has the Christian culture in this country--including the institutions built into our government and popular culture that arose from Christian traditions and beliefs--stood in opposition to a better way of life for all Americans, for me, and for my friends and family? Do you even care? You'll just say that the values that matter to people like me are misguided, no matter how well-meaning. Meanwhile, life in this world continues to stumble upon the cobblestones of Christian zeal.

I know, Sentenal, that your religion teaches kindness and respect. And I would like to believe that you are a decent guy, too. But I also know that the lens through which these teachings pass result in a practical agenda of slandering gays and jailing abortion doctors, etc., etc. And here you are, on this very day, arguing that poverty is one's own fault. One wonders if any Christian can escape the taint of Christianity.

At the root of it all is the essential Christian dogma. Human beings are wicked sinners. Most acts of pleasure are a sin. Most desires and ambitions are a sin. Most people are damned. Nothing made of human hands will save us; only Jesus can do that. We are the most pathetic creatures to ever live, praise God. All this self-loathing builds up, and it comes back to haunt the entire world.

Perhaps I could put it like this: Christianity speaks the language of love, but its handiworks are all made of hate. The entire religion is a delusion.

And I fail to see how being evangelical is a bad thing.

Evangelism is the doctrine of aggressively pushing the Christian faith on others, thus spreading the religion. The reason that Christianity and Islam are the largest religions on Earth is that they evangelize. They have a simple message, and they market it harder than any company has ever marketed any product. Evangelism means that Christianity is an aggressor. That might be tolerable if the effects of the religion were any good, but they're not. They're the very opposite of "any good." Eh, disagree with me as you must. That's just my opinion.

[Sentenal]

I'd say you lack understanding of Christianity, but thats just my opinion.  Oh yeah, the bible teachs that Men arn't worst thing ever, in fact, it teachs that humans are the greatest of God's creation.

[Lord J Esq]

I'd say you lack understanding of Christianity, but thats just my opinion.  Oh yeah, the bible teachs that Men arn't worst thing ever, in fact, it teachs that humans are the greatest of God's creation.

If we were that, we wouldn't be so helpless without God.

And truly, once your passion from reading my last post has subsided, I'd be delighted to hear a more detailed reply from you than a one-liner "you don't know what you're talking about." You can only imagine how many times I've had this sort of conversation with people, in the past. I learn something new every time. So give it your best shot.