What Non-Christians Want Christians To Hear

[AVG-JOE]

Not really.

My point in religion is always two:

Religion is a matter of opinion & All religious opinion has equal value.​

I don't know about that Joe.. People do not all worship the same God and people are not all the same inside. Some people are as innocent as puppies while others are snarling beasts drooling at the thought of devouring them.


Does the religious opinion that it is better to forgive sin and love your neighbor have equal value to the religious opinion that sin must be punished by chopping off your neighbors hands and feet ?


Is it not true that some religious beliefs are completely false and defile and contaminate the mind and have absolutely no positive value at all?

In my opinion, yes.

The fun part comes next... EVERY Monkey who reads this gets to judge both your question and my opinion of it. Each and every Monkey who gives a shit will be able to assemble a list of both bad and good religions and no two lists will be identical.


Beliefs are like nipples... Every Monkey has a set and no two sets are identical.

If you HAD to pick... Who judges? Rabbi, Priest, Mullah, Preacher, or We, The Peeps?


Are Civil Laws going to be similar to a wide sampling of Religious Law? I certainly hope so! Anything else would be a piss-poor reflection on humanity.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Not really.

My point in religion is always two:

Religion is a matter of opinion & All religious opinion has equal value.​

I don't know about that Joe.. People do not all worship the same God and people are not all the same inside. Some people are as innocent as puppies while others are snarling beasts drooling at the thought of devouring them.


Does the religious opinion that it is better to forgive sin and love your neighbor have equal value to the religious opinion that sin must be punished by chopping off your neighbors hands and feet ?


Is it not true that some religious beliefs are completely false and defile and contaminate the mind and have absolutely no positive value at all?

In my opinion, yes.

The fun part comes next... EVERY Monkey who reads this gets to judge both your question and my opinion of it. Each and every Monkey who gives a shit will be able to assemble a list of both bad and good religions and no two lists will be identical.


Beliefs are like nipples... Every Monkey has a set and no two sets are identical.

If you HAD to pick... Who judges? Rabbi, Priest, Mullah, Preacher, or We, The Peeps?


Are Civil Laws going to be similar to a wide sampling of Religious Law? I certainly hope so! Anything else would be a piss-poor reflection on humanity.

I always get a chuckle when you call all of us Homo Sapiens "monkeys", for in the broadest sense of the word, you are more correct than incorrect.

How about that for a backhanded compliment....


I read it and then, instinctively, I want to scratch my armpit.

Come on, who else read that and thought that, too????

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

As a Jew, I gave up trying to convince Christians or Muslims on the errors of their faith long ago. Got enough wayward Jews to focus my energies on without 'casting my net' any wider than that.

And here we have proof that religious arrogance is not unique to Christians.

 

[AVG-JOE]

I don't know about that Joe.. People do not all worship the same God and people are not all the same inside. Some people are as innocent as puppies while others are snarling beasts drooling at the thought of devouring them.


Does the religious opinion that it is better to forgive sin and love your neighbor have equal value to the religious opinion that sin must be punished by chopping off your neighbors hands and feet ?


Is it not true that some religious beliefs are completely false and defile and contaminate the mind and have absolutely no positive value at all?

In my opinion, yes.

The fun part comes next... EVERY Monkey who reads this gets to judge both your question and my opinion of it. Each and every Monkey who gives a shit will be able to assemble a list of both bad and good religions and no two lists will be identical.


Beliefs are like nipples... Every Monkey has a set and no two sets are identical.

If you HAD to pick... Who judges? Rabbi, Priest, Mullah, Preacher, or We, The Peeps?


Are Civil Laws going to be similar to a wide sampling of Religious Law? I certainly hope so! Anything else would be a piss-poor reflection on humanity.

I always get a chuckle when you call all of us Homo Sapiens "monkeys", for in the broadest sense of the word, you are more correct than incorrect.

How about that for a backhanded compliment....


I read it and then, instinctively, I want to scratch my armpit.

Come on, who else read that and thought that, too????

On the contrary!!

I have never referred to Homo Sapiens as "monkey". That term describes a related animal.

The word I like for humanity is Monkey. With a capital 'M'. Like the capital 'S' in Sentience.

In spite of what you may have read, I do find Monkeys special. I just prefer to see them in the proper context of the living planet that hatched 'em.

 

[Statistikhengst]

In my opinion, yes.

The fun part comes next... EVERY Monkey who reads this gets to judge both your question and my opinion of it. Each and every Monkey who gives a shit will be able to assemble a list of both bad and good religions and no two lists will be identical.


Beliefs are like nipples... Every Monkey has a set and no two sets are identical.

If you HAD to pick... Who judges? Rabbi, Priest, Mullah, Preacher, or We, The Peeps?


Are Civil Laws going to be similar to a wide sampling of Religious Law? I certainly hope so! Anything else would be a piss-poor reflection on humanity.

I always get a chuckle when you call all of us Homo Sapiens "monkeys", for in the broadest sense of the word, you are more correct than incorrect.

How about that for a backhanded compliment....


I read it and then, instinctively, I want to scratch my armpit.

Come on, who else read that and thought that, too????

On the contrary!!

I have never referred to Homo Sapiens as "monkey". That term describes a related animal.

The word I like for humanity is Monkey. With a capital 'M'. Like the capital 'S' in Sentience.

In spite of what you may have read, I do find Monkeys special. I just prefer to see them in the proper context of the living planet that hatched 'em.

Oh, I missed the big "M" !!!!!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Not really.

My point in religion is always two:

Religion is a matter of opinion & All religious opinion has equal value.​

I don't know about that Joe.. People do not all worship the same God and people are not all the same inside. Some people are as innocent as puppies while others are snarling beasts drooling at the thought of devouring them.


Does the religious opinion that it is better to forgive sin and love your neighbor have equal value to the religious opinion that sin must be punished by chopping off your neighbors hands and feet ?


Is it not true that some religious beliefs are completely false and defile and contaminate the mind and have absolutely no positive value at all?

It is indeed true that all religious beliefs are completely false in the context that those beliefs are ‘authorized’ by some omnipotent deity. And all religions contain doctrine and dogma that defile and contaminate the mind and have absolutely no positive value at all.

Hence the supremacy of secular law and its purpose to protect citizens from religious doctrine and dogma that defile and contaminate the mind and have absolutely no positive value at all; where as a consequence of that contamination religious extremists seek to deny citizens their civil liberties motivated solely that doctrine and dogma.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There will be no missionary work unless the missionary is free to say:



Christians are trying to convert sinners. If a person doesn't know he is a sinner he needs to be told. It is only those with horribly low self esteem who take it as a personal attack and get all indignant and self righteous about it. The exact opposite of what has been posted here. But as usual, non Christians who presume to tell Christians what they should do have it backward.

Even Jesus told Christians to stop bothering with those who will not hear what they have to say. As well they should. To not move on is self defeating.

Sunshine, what you say is true, but it has to be done in the spirit of the Second Great Commandment.

I have seen some missionaries that are so wound up they do the work of twenty devils.

I have never seen that, and I don't think we see that from the Christian posters on this forum, like Jeri.

Then I am glad you are blessed in that you haven't witnessed such. I certainly was not suggesting Jeri at all. But, yes, it happens, and, yes, I have witnessed it.

 

[hobelim]

Not really.

My point in religion is always two:

Religion is a matter of opinion & All religious opinion has equal value.​

I don't know about that Joe.. People do not all worship the same God and people are not all the same inside.
Some people are as innocent as puppies while others are snarling beasts drooling at the thought of devouring them.


Does the religious opinion that it is better to forgive sin and love your neighbor have equal value to the religious opinion that sin must be punished by chopping off your neighbors hands and feet ?


Is it not true that some religious beliefs are completely false and defile and contaminate the mind and have absolutely no positive value at all?

That is precisely why we have Civil Laws and precisely why Civil Law MUST trump Religious Law whenever the two conflict, and why Civil Law should try to err on the side of liberty.

Punish behavior not belief. Monsters of any faith should be isolated or terminated.

Every action is preceded by thought, belief. To punish unacceptable behavior without dealing with the beliefs that cause it is to insure its perpetuation..

It seems to me an injustice to punish certain behavior in civil court if civil law tolerates all religious teachings that inspire or condone behavior which is unacceptable in a equal and just society.

seems like a recipe for endless conflict and injustice to me.

How long was it between the time when religious people decided that alcohol was evil before civil law prohibited it and people were being shot dead over it?

How long did it take between the time when a few preachers started condemning rock and roll as the devil music before people in the pews started spitting on hippies and the police started cracking skulls?

can you see a pattern?

 

[AVG-JOE]

So who gets to judge this religion bad and another good?

I still say, establish reasonable Civil Law and punish behavior regardless of faith.


Do we really want or need thought police trying to anticipate bad behavior via beliefs?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Leave to God to judge morality, and do not touch religious or non-religious right to private association.

Punish behavior, not thought.

 

[hobelim]

So who gets to judge this religion bad and another good?

I still say, establish reasonable Civil Law and punish behavior regardless of faith.


Do we really want or need thought police trying to anticipate bad behavior via beliefs?

No, but if the validity or benefit of any religious belief cannot be established then they should be restricted learning for adults who deliberately choose to fill their heads with crap and minors should not be subjected to those beliefs for the same reasons pornography or violence has been deemed by civil law to be potentially detrimental to the developing mind and restricted..

Same for circumcision. If someone wants to expresses their faith in the God of Abraham by circumcising the foreskin of the penis then they should do what Abraham did and circumcise themselves as a grown man. Does any sane person really think God wants people to lop off the tip of infant penises?

Filling the minds of children with beliefs that are known to make grown adults go fucking nutz should not be allowed. Period.

 

[AVG-JOE]

If you're saying that the state should step in between a Jewish or Christian family bent on indoctrinating their spawn as best they know how, all I can say is 'good luck with that. Especially in America'. Tolerance is a two way street, you know.

 

[hobelim]

If you're saying that the state should step in between a Jewish or Christian family bent on indoctrinating their spawn as best they know how, all I can say is 'good luck with that. Especially in America'. Tolerance is a two way street, you know.

Are you saying that civil law should trump religious matters, punish behavior, except in the case of infant genital mutilation?

 

[Statistikhengst]

I don't know about that Joe.. People do not all worship the same God and people are not all the same inside.
Some people are as innocent as puppies while others are snarling beasts drooling at the thought of devouring them.


Does the religious opinion that it is better to forgive sin and love your neighbor have equal value to the religious opinion that sin must be punished by chopping off your neighbors hands and feet ?


Is it not true that some religious beliefs are completely false and defile and contaminate the mind and have absolutely no positive value at all?

That is precisely why we have Civil Laws and precisely why Civil Law MUST trump Religious Law whenever the two conflict, and why Civil Law should try to err on the side of liberty.

Punish behavior not belief. Monsters of any faith should be isolated or terminated.

Every action is preceded by thought, belief. To punish unacceptable behavior without dealing with the beliefs that cause it is to insure its perpetuation..

It seems to me an injustice to punish certain behavior in civil court if civil law tolerates all religious teachings that inspire or condone behavior which is unacceptable in a equal and just society.

seems like a recipe for endless conflict and injustice to me.

How long was it between the time when religious people decided that alcohol was evil before civil law prohibited it and people were being shot dead over it?

How long did it take between the time when a few preachers started condemning rock and roll as the devil music before people in the pews started spitting on hippies and the police started cracking skulls?

can you see a pattern?

Beliefs are free. You cannot punish someone for the thoughts that run into his head. Dictatorships have tried that, it did not go well.

Besides, were we to have thought police, millions and millions would be in jail just for having thought once of harming or even killing their partners.

Nope, we punish behaviour, not thoughts.

 

[BDBoop]

Leave to God to judge morality, and do not touch religious or non-religious right to private association.

Punish behavior, not thought.

What a freeing, grace-filled plan! Can you imagine? Meet and accept people just as they are. Let them SEE the truth and reality of who or what sets you apart spiritually.

No judging. None. It's a terribly negative, destructive behavior. Gives false positives *I just came up with that, and quite like it!* on the spiritual front. You would think judging is a positive indicator of a person of faith - but it actually damages both the judge, and those whom they judge (IF the person being judged allows it.)

Wow.

All the energy wasted on judging vast groups of people and demonizing them could be put to better uses. There are a million places to go with this line of thought, I would love to see others weigh in.

 

[Gracie]

I don't see what the big hoopla is about with Jillians posting of a book someone is/was publishing. Or the question asked, nor where it was asked. Does it matter? The point is...someone wanted to ask the question and got the answers. And the judgement then commences that she is atheist, she is pot stirring, blah blah blah.

I find it a telling response from the majority of the answers the author..which is obviously NOT Jillian, so why rag her about it? Geez. I am pretty sure people don't think I am a christian since I do the animal spirit messenger thing, talk to trees, save bugs and my church is not in my closet but underneath the stars or in my room...depending on the weather. I follow Christ the best I can...but I am not so much interested in His followers for the same reasons those who answered the ad in CL said. EVERYONE has their own path. No matter if it is Jewish, Hindu, Islam, Wiccan, Buddhist, etc etc etc.
I don't like being preached to. Nor do I like being told I am going to hell because I don't follow a certain set of "rules" for any organized religion. I follow MY path. Nobody else's. And that path is between me, and God.

I digress. I find nothing wrong with what Jillian posted, nor suspect any agenda in her OP. I don't understand why some find it suspect themselves.

 

[jillian]

You should stick with advising those in your own religion. You are out of line when you preach to Christians. As are the wiccans like bones, and the atheists like jillian. You have been doing that since your first day on this forum and it is not appropriate.

i'm not an atheist. so as usual, you'r wrong.

as for him watching *his* religion…

OUR religion does not run around telling others that they are going to hell or try to make this US a theocracy. our religion does not proselytize.

i find it bizarre that simple statements asking for nothing more than tolerance from the heavy-handed and intolerant would offend you or lead anyone to think that even posting the article indicates that i am in any way an atheist.

truly messed up.

 

[vanityofvanitys]

Very interesting, I find. And it is sad and in some ways true. I am glad you cited this. A number of perspectives could be brought out here.

For starters though, I think it only fair for the author or for non-Christians to understand there are some very different beliefs as to how we treat our neighbor within the various Christian creeds and missions. You can start with Catholicism vs. all the rest, and then of course you can divide “all the rest” into about 10 main different beliefs or approaches, and you can divide the Catholic segment into at least three different ways. The point there is that some of these approaches may be representing Jesus Christ far more or far better than the others. And the ones on the internet or in the news are overstated and maybe the most judgmental. So which ones are the non-Christians who are listening to the media and the internet going to conclude about “your average Christian?” They are going to conclude we are mostly aggressive, arrogant and judgmental.

And they would be right. Preaching Christians are in many cases doing God a disservice. And even worse than the wrong attitude is the wrong theology! By and large the Protestant faiths got it wrong on what it takes to be “saved” and who is saved and who is not. First of all, none of those three questions can be answered, so do not pretend to know! That is judging. Also sometimes referred to as the sin of presumption. Quickly; you may get into heaven based on believing alone but you may also spend a thousand years in purgatory first being purified. And another may make it to heaven based on their charity to their fellow man, but they too may spend an “eternity” in purgatory learning about God and how they ignored him, even laughed at those who tended to Him, because they violated the first of the two great commandments, Love thy God with all thy heart, mind and strength --- but did well with the second to love thy neighbor as thyself.

So there it is. It’s too bad we Christians are sinfully ego-driven and either ignorant or naïve. We turn people off. And the Bible speaks to that, making us culpable for the fate of others in some cases.

As to the non-Christians who see no reason to believe. It is incumbent upon them to go further than to just use the weak or pompous voices on the internet as the only source for their searches.

 

[jillian]

Very interesting, I find. And it is sad and in some ways true. I am glad you cited this. A number of perspectives could be brought out here.

For starters though, I think it only fair for the author or for non-Christians to understand there are some very different beliefs as to how we treat our neighbor within the various Christian creeds and missions. You can start with Catholicism vs. all the rest, and then of course you can divide “all the rest” into about 10 main different beliefs or approaches, and you can divide the Catholic segment into at least three different ways. The point there is that some of these approaches may be representing Jesus Christ far more or far better than the others. And the ones on the internet or in the news are overstated and maybe the most judgmental. So which ones are the non-Christians who are listening to the media and the internet going to conclude about “your average Christian?” They are going to conclude we are mostly aggressive, arrogant and judgmental.

And they would be right. Preaching Christians are in many cases doing God a disservice. And even worse than the wrong attitude is the wrong theology! By and large the Protestant faiths got it wrong on what it takes to be “saved” and who is saved and who is not. First of all, none of those three questions can be answered, so do not pretend to know! That is judging. Also sometimes referred to as the sin of presumption. Quickly; you may get into heaven based on believing alone but you may also spend a thousand years in purgatory first being purified. And another may make it to heaven based on their charity to their fellow man, but they too may spend an “eternity” in purgatory learning about God and how they ignored him, even laughed at those who tended to Him, because they violated the first of the two great commandments, Love thy God with all thy heart, mind and strength --- but did well with the second to love thy neighbor as thyself.

So there it is. It’s too bad we Christians are sinfully ego-driven and either ignorant or naïve. We turn people off. And the Bible speaks to that, making us culpable for the fate of others in some cases.

As to the non-Christians who see no reason to believe. It is incumbent upon them to go further than to just use the weak or pompous voices on the internet as the only source for their searches.

do you assume that if someone doesn't believe in what you believe they are "searching"?

 

[vanityofvanitys]

Very interesting, I find. And it is sad and in some ways true. I am glad you cited this. A number of perspectives could be brought out here.

For starters though, I think it only fair for the author or for non-Christians to understand there are some very different beliefs as to how we treat our neighbor within the various Christian creeds and missions. You can start with Catholicism vs. all the rest, and then of course you can divide “all the rest” into about 10 main different beliefs or approaches, and you can divide the Catholic segment into at least three different ways. The point there is that some of these approaches may be representing Jesus Christ far more or far better than the others. And the ones on the internet or in the news are overstated and maybe the most judgmental. So which ones are the non-Christians who are listening to the media and the internet going to conclude about “your average Christian?” They are going to conclude we are mostly aggressive, arrogant and judgmental.

And they would be right. Preaching Christians are in many cases doing God a disservice. And even worse than the wrong attitude is the wrong theology! By and large the Protestant faiths got it wrong on what it takes to be “saved” and who is saved and who is not. First of all, none of those three questions can be answered, so do not pretend to know! That is judging. Also sometimes referred to as the sin of presumption. Quickly; you may get into heaven based on believing alone but you may also spend a thousand years in purgatory first being purified. And another may make it to heaven based on their charity to their fellow man, but they too may spend an “eternity” in purgatory learning about God and how they ignored him, even laughed at those who tended to Him, because they violated the first of the two great commandments, Love thy God with all thy heart, mind and strength --- but did well with the second to love thy neighbor as thyself.

So there it is. It’s too bad we Christians are sinfully ego-driven and either ignorant or naïve. We turn people off. And the Bible speaks to that, making us culpable for the fate of others in some cases.

As to the non-Christians who see no reason to believe. It is incumbent upon them to go further than to just use the weak or pompous voices on the internet as the only source for their searches.

do you assume that if someone doesn't believe in what you believe they are "searching"?

Well sure. Is that controversial?

I am not saying they are on a constant search for this personal God, if He exists or not as Christianity teaches. At a minimum I assume most people are always searching for knowing more about the universe and if what they are doing is the best use of their years.