Why I Am Not A Christian

[Sky Dancer]

Gees Cecile--You're comin on like gangbusters.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I have not called any particular person a nutter, Newby. Where is all this ultra-sensitivity coming from anyway? The whole thread is about why some people reject christianity -- when you began reading were you surprised it happened sometimes because the beliefs did not ring true for them?

This all feels like an elaborate dance around the issue and I have to wonder why the topic at hand is not being discussed.

Maybe you can send me a fucking list of pre-approved words that I can use to try and express myself, Newby.

Apparently anything is preferable to you to discussing the substance of what I or any other non-christian has said on this thread. Why is that, I wonder?

Proposal:

Maddy, I'll start a new thread specifically to try and answer your questions. The only way it will work is if you and I both promise to ignore others' posts until we've exhausted our dialogue. Having been a Christian for ten years and being one class shy of a degree in biblical studies I think we can get down to the nitty grity. The major perk is I don't give a fuck how rude you are so long as we are discussing the issue. Ball is in your court.

I would absolutely be willing to fill anyone in on confusing aspects of Christianity, and do so courteously so long as he or she was willing to be courteous and respectful in return. Despite my acerbic tongue and willingless to give as good as - or better than - I get, I'm actually a good source on both my own church and most mainstream Christian denominations, although I would have to look up some of the more obscure stuff.

But I abso-fucking-lutely will not even BEGIN to pretend that someone is one iota nicer a person than they actually are.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I don't know what Christian church you've ever attended, but the three things that you listed are absolutely taught. How could you read about the life of Jesus and the words and examples that he gave and not get those messages. So, you're wrong with your assumptions.

I've never attended any church that even addressed sexuality or lack thereof.

I've never been told that women are defective by anyone in any church.

I've never been told to go out and tell non-believers that 'they're going to hell', nor have I ever personally done that.

Abortion has never been discussed on the pulpit in the church that I attend, but I personally believe it to be wrong, it's the murder of your own child.

I'm supposed to govern the sexual conduct of others? Really?

Jesus personally stopped the stoning of a prostitute and told her to go and sin no more.

So, I don't know where you came up with all of these misguided notions, but they're so far off of the mark that I don't even know how to address them. Where have you learned such things, because it wasn't from any christian church that I'm familiar with? Or are you just making this up as you go along?

Seriously?

What church taught you such things or where did you come by those opinions? I was raised Catholic, and I'm not a catholic any longer, but I know for a fact that the Catholic church does not teach any of the things you mentioned either.

I was completely serious earlier when I said that Mad has some serious childhood psychological issues that she projects onto the rest of the world. I was also completely serious when I said she needs to take them to a therapist and work them out. She reminds me very much of a woman who was molested as a child and now can't wrap her head around the idea that ALL men aren't evil rapists.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Curvelight is wrong about the crucifixion. Jesus was crucified for being gay. He was the first gay rights activist.

I hope you're not imagining that you're adding anything of value to this thread. Even Mad is doing better than this verbal equivalent of a steaming pile of dung.

 

[Sky Dancer]

One step forward three steps backward.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Alrighty then. I feel thoroughly spanked for my bad manners.

Though I suspect no matter how I phrased it, an Op saying "I find some of this ridiculous" would give offense to some.

Insofar as it's offensive on the face of it to feel compelled to tell people that you consider their core beliefs ridiculous when no one asked you, yeah.

Is this revelation of basic human etiquette and good manners such a surprise to you?

Cecilie giving etiquette lessons!

As I've said before, when you're such a shithead that I'm justified in teaching you etiquette, you know you've scraped the bottom of the barrel.

But where Mad is an uncivilized savage, YOU are a chimpanzee in the monkey house, and I have neither the ability nor the interest to raise you the sufficient number of evolutionary rungs to make you suitable company for humans. FLUSH!

 

[Cecilie1200]

Here's an example of something I believed in as a child but now find ridiculous. That a fat man in a red suit could squeeze down my narrow chimney with a huge bag of toys just for me.

Lucky for me there is no santa religion so I don't have to worry about causing offense.

I never believed in Santa. My parents - and I continued this mindset with my own children - felt it was best to always tell me the truth as they knew it about everything, which made it much easier for me to believe them in everything they DID say. I considered that they might be WRONG, but I never considered that they were untruthful.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Cecille, the cure for what ails you is painfully obvious: stop reading this thread. Stop posting to it. I dunno where you get the notion that I wrote it directly to you but that just ain't so. We can carry on without you.

1,001 posts to claim "she started it" are not terribly illuminating.

Nope. Pretending that asinine jerks like you don't exist does not cure the fact that you do. In fact, it only encourages it by allowing you to be an asinine jerk without being called on it.

You have no cause whatsoever to have your panties in a ruffle with me, sweetie. I didn't start this fight, you did, and you're the one who continues to refuse to admit that you were wrong and apologize.

Maybe you should learn not to let your mouth write checks the rest of you can't cash.

 

[Cecilie1200]

There are some teachings that are ridiculous. I gave an example of one offered to me as a child by nuns in Catholic school. That good girls don't wear patent leather shoes because boys can see up your dress.

Now that's an example of a ridiculous belief passed on by Catholic clergy.

Did they tell you that was a central tenet of Catholic faith, or just their own personal observation (which, by the way, is true if your patent leather shoes are polished enough)?

 

[Cecilie1200]

There are some teachings that are ridiculous. I gave an example of one offered to me as a child by nuns in Catholic school. That good girls don't wear patent leather shoes because boys can see up your dress.

Now that's an example of a ridiculous belief passed on by Catholic clergy.

That's not a religious belief, that's advice.

The belief is that boys are looking up little girls dresses via their shiny shoes. It's ridiculous.

The mind of that nun teaching such a thing was definitely warped.

You don't think little boys try to look up little girls' skirts, and use any shiny, reflective surface handy to do so? I beg to differ, based on my memories of little boys from the time when I wore patent leather shoes.

 

[Sky Dancer]

The teaching was that girls who wore patent leather shoes were bad. I guess that includes you Cecile, since you wore those kind of shoes, you naughty thing.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If you want respect for your point of view, be respectful to others. You seem to forget that ones spiritual path is dearly held by devotees.

Exactly. As much as I might personally not care for Sky here, as much as I might disagree with her beliefs, I would never refer to them as "ridiculous", or use the term "nutters" in relation to, for example, Buddhists who choose to live in a remote monastery and keep a more severely Spartan lifestyle than others. I don't even vaguely relate to that mindset and life choice, but that doesn't make it okay for me to be derogatory about it to Sky.

Hahaha. That was cute. I appreciate the sentiment. You don't care for me, you disagree with my beliefs but you don't want to go out of your way to be derogative. Fair enough.

I don't want to be derogative at all. I don't adhere to the Buddhist faith, and I'm not built to share the mindset, but I have great respect for Buddhism and those who sincerely practice it. I'll admit to a bit of contempt for celebrity Buddhists, who appear a lot more interested in seeming mystical and spiritual than anything else, but that's not actually to do with the religion itself.

I even respect Islam as a religion, up to the point where it inspires people to start killing others. I personally know a number of Muslims who are every bit as peaceful and law-abiding as anyone else, and want only to live their own lives and serve their deity quietly, and I can do nothing BUT respect that. Shoot, I even respect that sincerity in Scientologists, and I would have to say in all honesty that I have trouble crediting that as even being a real religion. Nevertheless, if that's what someone truly believes and they are genuinely seeking after self-betterment without hurting anyone else, more power to 'em.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The belief is that boys are looking up little girls dresses via their shiny shoes. It's ridiculous.

The mind of that nun was definitely warped.

You said it was a religious teaching or belief tho, which it was not. You don't think little boys try to look up little girls' dresses by whatever means possible then?

OK. If you want to defend the nun's position, go for it. I see it differently. I think the nun was ridiculous about patent leather shoes.

I imagine she WAS more zealous on the subject than it required, but it's hard to blame her. Seriously, if you're someone who has a lifelong abjuration of all things sexual, you're not likely to approach the subject with the same equanimity as other people, are you?

 

[Sky Dancer]

You said it was a religious teaching or belief tho, which it was not. You don't think little boys try to look up little girls' dresses by whatever means possible then?

OK. If you want to defend the nun's position, go for it. I see it differently. I think the nun was ridiculous about patent leather shoes.

I imagine she WAS more zealous on the subject than it required, but it's hard to blame her. Seriously, if you're someone who has a lifelong abjuration of all things sexual, you're not likely to approach the subject with the same equanimity as other people, are you?

You've got a good point. How could one expect Catholics who are trained by celibate monastics (in your words, with a lifelong abjuration of all things sexual) to have a healthy view of sex?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think you can express your repugnance at crucifixes and your own honest reaction without implying that your reaction is the truth of how things are. It's just a reaction, Ang. The cross means different things to different people.

I personally wouldn't even express it as a "repugnance". It's entirely possible to express confusion as to its usage without ever mentioning THAT reaction at all.

For some reason Mel Gibson's movie The Passion of the Christ comes to mind. I understand it was very gory. One can certainly question why that was necessary.

You DO know what the word "passion" in this context actually means, don't you? (I ask in all sincerity, because it turns out many people actually don't.) It is defined as "the sufferings of Christ between the night of His last supper and His death". We get our current usage of the word to mean "intense emotion", usually romantic or sexual, precisely because those things so often FEEL like suffering.

Mel Gibson's movie was ABOUT the suffering of Christ, which was even more gory than that in reality. The Bible tells us that He was unrecognizable as a man when He was carrying the cross. The entire point of the movie was to bring home to the viewer what Christ went through and why.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Gees Cecile--You're comin on like gangbusters.

Hey, I was out of the loop for a while. What can I say?

 

[Cecilie1200]

The teaching was that girls who wore patent leather shoes were bad. I guess that includes you Cecile, since you wore those kind of shoes, you naughty thing.

Hey, I wore what my mom bought me. She didn't exactly consult me on the subject. Noticeably, however, she never polished them to the point where they were reflective.

 

[Cecilie1200]

OK. If you want to defend the nun's position, go for it. I see it differently. I think the nun was ridiculous about patent leather shoes.

I imagine she WAS more zealous on the subject than it required, but it's hard to blame her. Seriously, if you're someone who has a lifelong abjuration of all things sexual, you're not likely to approach the subject with the same equanimity as other people, are you?

You've got a good point. How could one expect Catholics who are trained by celibate monastics (in your words, with a lifelong abjuration of all things sexual) to have a healthy view of sex?

One of the many reasons why my church doesn't advocate celibacy for its clergy. In fact, my church positively ENCOURAGES its pastors to be married and have families, and it's quite rare to find a full pastor occupying a pulpit who is not or has not been married.

 

[Sky Dancer]

as an FYI for anyone interested:

edited with a new link to a better article:
http://www.humanismbyjoe.com/CatholicSex.htm

 

[Madeline]

If there's a problem with me acting according to my God-given nature, then it is for HIM to address it.

Here is demonstrated another reason why I could never be Christian. The attitude that some Christians have that they are not responsible for their actions. That God made them the way they are and being his children, so they have an excuse for their immaturity.

I am absolutely responsible for my actions. Point is, I'm not responsible to MAD for them. I'm responsible to GOD, and HE is the one who gets to question and chastise me for what I do with the personality He gave me, not Mad or any other non-Christian.

Oh, and this sort of criticism is rich coming from a group of people who like to tout the belief that we're all just animals, and therefore can't be wrong in acting on our animal instincts.

When did I ever say we're all just animals and no act of ours is wrong?

BTW, why are you not responsible to others for the impact your conduct has on them? Is this another flight of fancy you have as a result of being "christian"? The rest of us are responsible to one another -- what do you claim makes you so special?