Ethnocentrism

MortonGneiss said:

A fantatics gotta do what a fanatics gotta do, I guess.

Click to expand...

The reason your argument doesn't sway me very much (not at all, actually) is because you define a fanatic as anyone who does something that you don't like.

arunma said:

The reason your argument doesn't sway me very much (not at all, actually) is because you define a fanatic as anyone who does something that you don't like.

Click to expand...

That's nice..I'll continue to take comfort in the fact that you are the minority, though. 3/4 of the Globe don't believe your 'truth'..and I'm being very generous in giving you the Catholics and all the other denominations that consider yours heretical.

MortonGneiss said:

I'm not an atheist, if you can read you'll see that I identify myself as agnostic.



Jesus should be left out of it altogether is what I'm saying. To bring Jesus into the matter is taking advantage of people that need food and medicine. They aren't in a position to refuse food, so missionaries know they aren't in a position to refuse their prostelyzing. Must be a language barrier here.

Click to expand...

YYou sound more like an anti theist. I understood what you meant you're agaiinst talking about jesus. You don't have to raise money just don't talk about jesus..

urnotme said:

YYou sound more like an anti theist. I understood what you meant you're agaiinst talking about jesus. You don't have to raise money just don't talk about jesus..

Click to expand...

I am anti-monotheist, mainly for the reason of the original argument of this thread. Which we should get back to.

The original point was that Judeo-Christianity, while being divisive enough to faction off into several thousand sects, is ethnocentric at it's core, which is why none of the factions will ever reconcile their differences.

The unanswered question is, if these beliefs aren't inherently divisive and ethnocentric then how is it possible that so many opposing sects of Christianity exist?

The most intelligble answer I got was from arunma who basically said 'I'm not going to give up the promise of an eternal afterlife just to be a tolerant person!'. Well at least we know where their priorities are.

Another question that arises from this topic is, if several thousand sects can't agree on the correct method of appeasing their child-like God, then how can it be assumed that any of them have the answer?

arunma said:

The reason your argument doesn't sway me very much (not at all, actually) is because you define a fanatic as anyone who does something that you don't like.

Click to expand...

I agree!

Morton said:

I am anti-monotheist, mainly for the reason of the original argument of this thread. Which we should get back to.

Click to expand...

When I would be jumped upon if I said that "I am an anti-Gentile," why you think that we should simply pass over a statement like this?

MortonGneiss said:

You have just told us that accepting Christ is the only way into heaven. And if you're not too thick, you might see how exclusive that doctrine is. Furthermore, if those who follow Christ are the only ones that go to heaven you are explicitly stating that God only favors Christians..which isn't much of a stretch from saying they are His chosen people.

Click to expand...

Your group, Christians, feel they are superior in that their way is the only way to get into God's graces ergo get into heaven. Which fits the definition quite well. It doesn't matter that they will accept anyone into their group, that doesn't change the attitude that their group, Christianity, is superior.

Click to expand...

Yes I believe that Christianity is superior to other religions. But I dont think that Christians are superior to other people at all. All we are saying is that Jesus Christ is superior to all other people and that the grace of God is superior to human endevor. Yes its exclusive. But to claim that there is any way to God or Heaven other than through the Grace of God is to put humanity on a par with God. This is incredibly arrogant, but if you look deep down close enough all the other religions and even some 'Christian' religions teach this. I believe in the Supremecy of God, not the Supremecy of Christians.
And I have explained that I believe that all who truly seek God will find Him. So that sorts out the issue concerning countries without significant Christian communities.

I know you dont like this. I know you are probably offended. But the Gospel of Jesus Christ is incredibly offensive. Jesus seriously upset and offended the Pharisees and Sadducees. This is because the Truth Hurts.
Jesus wasnt some nice polite little man who just tried to make people feel good. He was a radical who stuck up for truth and justice!
His love was and is real. He is the saviour not just another self-help guru.

Sorry if you dont like all this. You have the right to disagree with me.
But I am not ethnocentric! I am Christcentric!
And if Christians are ethnocentric then why are they encouraging other people to discover the spiritual treasure that they believe they have found?
If they were ethnocentric they would want to keep it to themselves. They wouldnt want other ethnic groups finding out that God loves them.

Now, Islam and Christianity view each other 'evil' and standard bearers of the 'adversary', and each view themselves as the righteous warriors of God who will defend God in the battle of Armageddon that the other side will innitiate.

Click to expand...

Not true. This total rubbish. The Battle of Amageddon is between Jesus and the AntiChrist. If there is human involvement then it will between the followers of the Antichrist left on the earth and the raptured church which have taken on heavenly bodies. It wont be between current religious groups. In fact as I understand it although the Antichrist will rise an army to fight against God, the battle will be over an instant after it starts. It will be won by a single word from Christs mouth.
This truly Holy War wont be like the Crusades or anything like that.

First, what I'm saying with this, is that with what each of the three accept as true(they are God's chosen, their scripture/beliefs are correct, and all other scripture/beliefs/Gods are false) makes it impossible that they will ever come together peaceably.

Click to expand...

This is not true either. Sure if three different groups believe in different things it makes it impossible for them to agree with each other. However it doesnt make it impossible for them to live in peace or even be friends. I can know that statement is wrong because at university I knew three people that shared a house together and were great friends. One was a Muslim, another a Jew and the third a Christian.

As for the "they believe that their scripture/beliefs are correct" and "all other scripture/beliefs/Gods are false" statements all I can say is -Well of course they are going to believe that. If a Muslim didnt believe that Islam is true then they wouldnt be a Muslim. And like wise if a Christian believed that Islam is correct then they would be a Muslim, not a Christian. What is the point of following something that you dont believe in?
And of course people who believe in A will reject B if B contradicts A.
This isnt intolerance, this is common sense. An atheist believes that the belief God exists is false. An evolutionist believes that young earth creationism is wrong. Because if they didnt they would no longer be an evolutionist.

Two, the members of each of these groups are only members of these groups because of which culture they were born into. It's not difficult to see that if a Christian person had been born and lived their life in the middle-east they would be Muslim, just as if a Muslim person had swapped places they would be Christian. So what really seperates these beliefs at this point is a cultural and geographic boundary.

Click to expand...

This is Rubbish! Sure some one is more likely to become a Christian if they live in a culturally Christian country. This makes sense. Its like someone is more likely to buy a Star Wars action figure if they have seen the Star Wars film. And that someone is more likely to be a John Lennon fan if they have listened to the music of the Beatles.

But there is plenty of information to show that your assumption that people only adopt the main faith of their country/culture is wrong.
What about all the Christians in South Korea, China and the Middle East?
There are Chinese Christians from Buddhist backgrounds risking their lives for their belief in Jesus. If people only ever adopted the local religion then explain religious minorities within the indigenous population?
It would far easier for those Arab Christians (from Muslim backgrounds) in Iran to simply adopt Islam. But they dont. They adopt Christianity even though it could get them executed.

Then you assume that most people in Western from a cultural Christian background are Christians. In the UK most people are NOT Christians. In fact real born again Christians are a minority group. The prevailing ideology in Europe is secular humanism. Therefore it could be said that humanists are only humanists because they are Europeans. Following your logic it could be said that secular humanists are ethnocentric by thinking that the European belief that God does not exist is the only correct belief system. However we then find secular humanists in Iran and some very religious countries.
Also if we say that France is a secular humanist country, then why are there people with no religious background at all becoming Christians in France? Why are former humanists and atheists becoming Christians? or even visa versa?

Third, ignoring threats isn't what has lead to the most human suffering and casualty..religion holds that title, specifically Christianity.

Click to expand...

I think you find it is the actions and the stupidity of human beings that causes all the wars. Religion is sometimes used as an excuse, but Hitler and Stalin proved that intolerance, bigotry, hate and violence are all possible without religion.

And to all those people who say: 'Religion causes all the wars, therefore we must get rid of religion'. I say this to you:"Most fights between two men are over women. Therefore do you propose that we get rid of women too?"

Bad religion, Man made religion can do some pretty evil things. If we look at the Bible we even find that the Bible condemns such religion. Such religion is called the 'doctrines of men'. But true Christianity isnt a religion and doesnt cause wars. It is a relationship with Jesus Christ that causes love.

Fourth, the motivation on both sides to kill/convert each other is born of exactly the same belief structure. Monotheism at it's core is devisive in creating this "Us vs. Them" mentality. How many sects of Christianity alone do we have? Have you ever watched members of one church try and convert another? If you haven't it's an ugly thing to watch and it certainly doesn't lead to a peaceful resolution.

Click to expand...

I dont know of any modern day Christian evangelist that tries to kill people. I just dont think murder is a good witnessing tool. Perhaps if you cared to study Christianity a bit more you will find many groups dont even believe it is possible for a Christian to 'convert' someone. I believe that it is God and not human beings that 'convert' people. Christians are called to 'share their faith', 'spread the gospel',to 'tell people about Jesus', to 'witness' and even to 'evangelise'. But every true Christian knows that they cant by themselves convert people. The Bible even instructs people to leave any house where the people hear the gospel and then reject it. All this violent and aggressive evangelism is unbiblical and simply does work.
Very few Christian churches do this.

MortonGneiss said:

I am anti-monotheist, mainly for the reason of the original argument of this thread. Which we should get back to.

The original point was that Judeo-Christianity, while being divisive enough to faction off into several thousand sects, is ethnocentric at it's core, which is why none of the factions will ever reconcile their differences.

The unanswered question is, if these beliefs aren't inherently divisive and ethnocentric then how is it possible that so many opposing sects of Christianity exist?

The most intelligble answer I got was from arunma who basically said 'I'm not going to give up the promise of an eternal afterlife just to be a tolerant person!'. Well at least we know where their priorities are.

Another question that arises from this topic is, if several thousand sects can't agree on the correct method of appeasing their child-like God, then how can it be assumed that any of them have the answer?

Click to expand...

It sounds like you want to make your own god.WWe bellieve there's onlyy one way but you wabt to allow for all these diferant ways,/ thus makingg god into whatever you want him to be.

MortonGneiss said:

That's nice..I'll continue to take comfort in the fact that you are the minority, though. 3/4 of the Globe don't believe your 'truth'..and I'm being very generous in giving you the Catholics and all the other denominations that consider yours heretical.

Click to expand...

I'd go further than that. 90% of the world doesnt believe our truth. Christianity is a minority faith even in America. Jesus predicted that it will always be a minority faith.


Can I just ask MortonGneiss, why does Christianity upset you so much? Why are you offended by the idea of an abolsute truth or anyone knowing an absolute truth? Does the gospel of Jesus Christ offend you? or are you simply ignorant of what Christianity is all about?

arunma said:

You'll have to forgive me for not seeing much of a difference between the two. Besides that, you are angry (at least as far as I can tell).

Click to expand...

Hey MortonGneiss,

Here comes the "I will pray for you bit".
You angry man...you need GOD and by the by you need "our" god and the only god...what you don't repent!! Okay, I will pray for you.

By the way, No Maleccha is even willing to try to "convert" me even after open invitations. They are only interested in "buying" the poor out with food, medicine and bible.

Sell me your God, Malecchas.

satay

Bonhoffer said:

This is not true either. Sure if three different groups believe in different things it makes it impossible for them to agree with each other. However it doesnt make it impossible for them to live in peace or even be friends.

Click to expand...

Israel is a bright shiny example to the truth of that statement.

Can I just ask MortonGneiss, why does Christianity upset you so much? Why are you offended by the idea of an abolsute truth or anyone knowing an absolute truth? Does the gospel of Jesus Christ offend you? or are you simply ignorant of what Christianity is all about?

Click to expand...

The Gospels don't offend me, they are just writing.

I think only Christians are ignorant of what Christianity is all about, converting people to the 'one' truth in a historically violent fashion.

You made a number of other points but I addressed all of them earlier, and have no wish to cover that ground again.

The original point was that Judeo-Christianity, while being divisive enough to faction off into several thousand sects, is ethnocentric at it's core, which is why none of the factions will ever reconcile their differences.

The unanswered question is, if these beliefs aren't inherently divisive and ethnocentric then how is it possible that so many opposing sects of Christianity exist?

Another question that arises from this topic is, if several thousand sects can't agree on the correct method of appeasing their child-like God, then how can it be assumed that any of them have the answer?

Malecchas have run away as usual. Silence is the escape route they use very often when they can't use violence or ban you.satay

satay said:

Malecchas have run away as usual. Silence is the escape route they use very often when they can't use violence or ban you.satay

Click to expand...

Well if no one can answer my questions withing the next 48 hours I will conclude that the answers are self-evident where they lack contradiction.

as far as christians go we do not believe we are the chosen people. Isreal...or jews are the chosen people. we are adopted into the family of God. We should not (by our word the Holy Bible) believe that we are better than every one just because we are right (or simply have a differant point of view). I think you judge God by the insufficient acts of the followers which is sad. If you want to know the truth as to what a christian is, do not look at me or any one else. Rather read the Bible and find out for yourself.

Adelheide said:

We should not (by our word the Holy Bible) believe that we are better than every one just because we are right

Click to expand...

And as I've demonstrated multiple times throughout this thread, the predominant Christian mindset runs contrary to that statement. If it didn't, if Christians truly were tolerant of 'different points of view' there wouldn't be so many sects. Which brings us right back to my first question.

I think you judge God by the insufficient acts of the followers which is sad.

Click to expand...

It's not sad, it's an honest appraisal of the religion. Why shouldn't we examine the influence it has on the people that have adopted it? It's akin to socialism in that it's very nice in theory, but in practice it has never boded well for those who subscribed to it or those around them. Christians in this very thread have demonized the actions of Stalin and Lenin, and what they were weighing was socialism in practice, not in theory.

do not look at me or any one else. Rather read the Bible and find out for yourself.

Click to expand...

I read it quite frequently, actually, and I find none of it terribly convincing. In my study of the Bible I have also found that the scripture is very much in line with the atrocities I condemn. And not just historically, but those currently perpetuating in the name of the Lord.

The unanswered question is, if these beliefs aren't inherently divisive and ethnocentric then how is it possible that so many opposing sects of Christianity exist?

There are differant forms of every religion, icluding your own and that doesn't mean that culture has caused those differances. If that were the case there would be a whole lot less sects, because we can both agree that there are less cultures than there are of sects of certain religion. Take christianity for example:
you have the differant sects of christianity, but they did not birth on the other side of the world. They birthed eachother within the same community and creating differant leaderships and authorities. I think there are valuable aspects of each religion that as time went on and people became more prideful certain authorities took it apon themselves to add or subtract to the truth. This is a falt on the followers not on God.

Again, if you want to know about the religion then go to the source instead of the misconstrued product of the source. If you did this you will most certainly see the differance in the God's and beliefs of all these differant religions.

If the differances in culture were the cause of the three major religions, then why do most of the problems between the cultures happen with the ones that are most similiar with each other?

example: christianity vs. catholiscm; muslim vs judiasm.
They birthed from the same culture but with differance in authorities and leaderships.

It's not sad, it's an honest appraisal of the religion. Why shouldn't we examine the influence it has on the people that have adopted it? It's akin to socialism in that it's very nice in theory, but in practice it has never boded well for those who subscribed to it or those around them. Christians in this very thread have demonized the actions of Stalin and Lenin, and what they were weighing was socialism in practice, not in theory.

When a parent teaches a child through disceplin that stealing is wrong and yet they go and steal....and beyond that excuse why it was ok to steal....does that disprove the truth in what the parent was saying? Simply because the child did not listen?

Please read the affore cited definition of ethnocentrism, and note that culture wasn't a qualifier. It was only brought up on an occasion to illustrate a point.

Adelheide said:

certain authorities took it apon themselves to add or subtract to the truth. This is a falt on the followers not on God.

Click to expand...

One might say that given God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent eh could have come up with a handbook that was a little clearer. One might also say, that given God's qualities and his failure to prodce such a handbook that either a) He didn't have a hand in it or b) He wanted to create the confusion.

Those minor points aside, you've claimed that Church leaders have added and subtracted from the 'truth'. So where is the whole and complete truth? In which church does it lay? In which copy of the Bible?