New to Forum

[alien444]

Hello Everyone. I have posted a few times on the Apologetics forum, but am still a newbie. I am a high school history teacher and I am a proud non-believer in God and the supernatural. I am not posting to try to change anyone's mind but only to get a better understanding of Christian views. I promise to be respectful to all replies.

How do you guys view the two-thirds of the worlds population who are not Christians? This includes non-believers as well as members of other religions. Surely, with today's globalization and technology they have been exposed to Christian thought. Are they delusional, misguided, evil, etc.

I promise this is not one of those questions where I only want to say "A-ha" and then turn your answer into an attack. I really am curious?

 

[ViaCrucis]

Hello Everyone. I have posted a few times on the Apologetics forum, but am still a newbie. I am a high school history teacher and I am a proud non-believer in God and the supernatural. I am not posting to try to change anyone's mind but only to get a better understanding of Christian views. I promise to be respectful to all replies.

How do you guys view the two-thirds of the worlds population who are not Christians? This includes non-believers as well as members of other religions. Surely, with today's globalization and technology they have been exposed to Christian thought. Are they delusional, misguided, evil, etc.

I promise this is not one of those questions where I only want to say "A-ha" and then turn your answer into an attack. I really am curious?

My opinion of non-Christians is that they're not Christians. There's no moral valuation in that.

non-Christians are no more evil than Christians, sin is the common sickness of all people, being a Christian doesn't make one less a sinner. I've known plenty of misguided Christians, so that's a charge that can be applied to anyone depending on the circumstance.

I believe Christianity to be true, as it is the religion of the Incarnate Word, Jesus, which preaches, confesses, and teaches the Gospel of and about Jesus, which is for the salvation of the whole world. No other religion teaches that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, that He born of Mary suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, buried, dead, that He rose from the dead, He has ascended to the right hand of the Father, and is coming again with everlasting kingdom. No other religion teaches this, and if I believe this is utterly true, then I obviously believe that any religion that says otherwise is not true.

But I don't see the world divided between "good people" and "bad people", with "good people" being Christians and "bad people" everyone else. There's enough bad in all of us, and as far as society goes there's an equal amount of good as well. That is, as far as improving and bettering society, Christians don't have a monopoly, and non-Christians are perfectly capable of being decent moral people. Again, that is as concerns society; Christianity also speaks of another moral dimension: Righteousness and the Law of God, which everyone universally has failed without exception (again, being a Christian doesn't make one any less sinful).

But I believe what Christianity has going for it is the Gospel which is not a set of moral instruction; but a promise and proclamation from God to the world through Jesus the Christ.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[alien444]

My opinion of non-Christians is that they're not Christians. There's no moral valuation in that.

non-Christians are no more evil than Christians, sin is the common sickness of all people, being a Christian doesn't make one less a sinner. I've known plenty of misguided Christians, so that's a charge that can be applied to anyone depending on the circumstance.

I agree with this

I believe Christianity to be true, as it is the religion of the Incarnate Word, Jesus, which preaches, confesses, and teaches the Gospel of and about Jesus, which is for the salvation of the whole world. No other religion teaches that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, that He born of Mary suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, buried, dead, that He rose from the dead, He has ascended to the right hand of the Father, and is coming again with everlasting kingdom. No other religion teaches this, and if I believe this is utterly true, then I obviously believe that any religion that says otherwise is not true.

I dont agree with this. The Eqyptian god Horus and the Hindu God Krishna (and others) were born of virgins, human manifestations of the divine, crucified, went to the "underworld", and were resurrected.

But I don't see the world divided between "good people" and "bad people", with "good people" being Christians and "bad people" everyone else. There's enough bad in all of us, and as far as society goes there's an equal amount of good as well. That is, as far as improving and bettering society, Christians don't have a monopoly, and non-Christians are perfectly capable of being decent moral people. Again, that is as concerns society; Christianity also speaks of another moral dimension: Righteousness and the Law of God, which everyone universally has failed without exception (again, being a Christian doesn't make one any less sinful).

But I believe what Christianity has going for it is the Gospel which is not a set of moral instruction; but a promise and proclamation from God to the world through Jesus the Christ.

-CryptoLutheran

Disregarding labels of "good" or "evil" do you think they are delusional and being mis-led by the culture they were born into?

 

[ViaCrucis]

I dont agree with this. The Eqyptian god Horus and the Hindu God Krishna (and others) were born of virgins, human manifestations of the divine, crucified, went to the "underworld", and were resurrected.

That's the basic trope of certain mythicists and is widely distributed through the internet and less-than-scholarly books. But in the case of Horus you'll find nothing from credible Egyptologists and actual Egyptian mythology that has Horus doing that.

Horus, instead, was conceived by the goddess Isis who took the dismembered body parts (sans phallus) of her husband Osirus, and used magic to bring him back to life. She crafted a golden phallus by which she was inseminated and became pregnant with Horus. That's Horus' origin story.

Krishna, while a divine avatar of Vishnu (the 8th, to be precise); didn't have a virgin conception. Rather Krishna as a manifestation of Vishnu descended into the womb of Devaki, but it wasn't a virgin conception though the child was a manifestation of Vishnu, Krishna was still the fruit Devaki and her husband Vasudeva's union. Nothing in the story suggests Devaki was a virgin, and in fact had already bore seven sons from her husband.

The problem with Popular Mythicism is that, quite frankly, it just doesn't bother to actually give facts.

Now, on the other hand, the legend concerning the birth of Siddartha (Buddha) is that his conception was virginal. So there is that, that is a good treatment of the actual source material.

But, for example, Mithras is claimed to have been conceived by a virgin; except that Mithras' birth was from solid rock, and he emerged from said rock a fully-formed adult. Mithras had no mother to speak of. Likewise it's claimed Mithras had twelve disciples--the problem here is that this references Mithraic iconography showing Mithras as a solar deity surrounded by the twelve signs of the Zodiac. They aren't disciples, they are the signs of the Zodiac. It's that sort of sloppy work that makes most of Mythicism unscholarly nonsense.

Now this doesn't mean that there aren't actual examples of similarity and points of intersection with various myths from around the world. There are (I gave as an example above concerning the Buddha's miraculous conception from a virgin).

But as a rule, when I go and try and look at the actual myths and legends themselves, I find a stark lack of confirmation for the claims often touted about on the internet. I simply don't see any serious scholarly confirmation, instead I find sloppy ill-researched (or unresearched) works and blog posts that simply repeat the same tropes without solid sourcing.

Disregarding labels of "good" or "evil" do you think they are delusional and being mis-led by the culture they were born into?

Probably. But as I said, I think that charge can be labeled against Christians pretty often as well.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[oi_antz]

Hello Everyone. I have posted a few times on the Apologetics forum, but am still a newbie. I am a high school history teacher and I am a proud non-believer in God and the supernatural. I am not posting to try to change anyone's mind but only to get a better understanding of Christian views. I promise to be respectful to all replies.

How do you guys view the two-thirds of the worlds population who are not Christians? This includes non-believers as well as members of other religions. Surely, with today's globalization and technology they have been exposed to Christian thought. Are they delusional, misguided, evil, etc.

I promise this is not one of those questions where I only want to say "A-ha" and then turn your answer into an attack. I really am curious?

There are quite a few different reasons why someone might choose to accept Christian doctrines, and they do not all produce equally virtuous faith. With this in mind, you will observe what appears to be a variety of natures of Christianity, which is often said to be a problem by those who are resistant to the gospel "How do I know what true Christianity is?". It's not really our place to say who is likely to be a true Christian in our opinion, because it is Jesus' opinion that ultimately matters. However, we aren't left totally in the dark either. Jesus said this:

20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

And He also said this:

22 “The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are healthy,[a] your whole body will be full of light. 23 But if your eyes are unhealthy, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!

 

[alien444]

That's the basic trope of certain mythicists and is widely distributed through the internet and less-than-scholarly books. But in the case of Horus you'll find nothing from credible Egyptologists and actual Egyptian mythology that has Horus doing that.

Horus, instead, was conceived by the goddess Isis who took the dismembered body parts (sans phallus) of her husband Osirus, and used magic to bring him back to life. She crafted a golden phallus by which she was inseminated and became pregnant with Horus. That's Horus' origin story.

Krishna, while a divine avatar of Vishnu (the 8th, to be precise); didn't have a virgin conception. Rather Krishna as a manifestation of Vishnu descended into the womb of Devaki, but it wasn't a virgin conception though the child was a manifestation of Vishnu, Krishna was still the fruit Devaki and her husband Vasudeva's union. Nothing in the story suggests Devaki was a virgin, and in fact had already bore seven sons from her husband.

The problem with Popular Mythicism is that, quite frankly, it just doesn't bother to actually give facts.

Now, on the other hand, the legend concerning the birth of Siddartha (Buddha) is that his conception was virginal. So there is that, that is a good treatment of the actual source material.

But, for example, Mithras is claimed to have been conceived by a virgin; except that Mithras' birth was from solid rock, and he emerged from said rock a fully-formed adult. Mithras had no mother to speak of. Likewise it's claimed Mithras had twelve disciples--the problem here is that this references Mithraic iconography showing Mithras as a solar deity surrounded by the twelve signs of the Zodiac. They aren't disciples, they are the signs of the Zodiac. It's that sort of sloppy work that makes most of Mythicism unscholarly nonsense.

Now this doesn't mean that there aren't actual examples of similarity and points of intersection with various myths from around the world. There are (I gave as an example above concerning the Buddha's miraculous conception from a virgin).

But as a rule, when I go and try and look at the actual myths and legends themselves, I find a stark lack of confirmation for the claims often touted about on the internet. I simply don't see any serious scholarly confirmation, instead I find sloppy ill-researched (or unresearched) works and blog posts that simply repeat the same tropes without solid sourcing.

Probably. But as I said, I think that charge can be labeled against Christians pretty often as well.

-CryptoLutheran

Your post is very enlightening and informative. I obviously concede that you have researched these individual myths more than myself, and we seem to agree that there was a massive amount of cultural diffusion between the ancient cultures that surrounded and pre-dated the birth of Judeo-Christian mythology. I guess where we may disagree is on the point that Christianity is a cultural construct with the same validity of the multitude of myths that influenced it. However, I think you could teach a lot of people on this site how to be better 21st century Christians.

 

[parsley]

Welcome to the forum! Oh my I hope our conversations are not beaten about in a HS classroom.

IMO, people are doing what they believe to be right.
Devotees of any religion tend to use a common filter on the information they espouse. If they find something violent or uncomfortable in the texts, they skim over it or toss it aside for later study.

I have heard Muslims, Christians, and people of other religions defend, "Oh-but that's not what we believe." Their practice of their faith can be different from the faith documents, or the organizations that dominate.

We humans have instincts for compassion -- we feed birds and pat children on the head. There is something in most of us that compels us to want to nurture and protect. We see a stranger injured, and think, "Someone should help them!" Whether it's us or not.

That does not mean we will always be selfless and generous, or fair and honest, or decent people -- but that there are aspects to other belief systems that are common to man. Even when people are cruel and shifty, they still recognize that society needs structure and limitations, moral codes, to prevent us from killing ourselves.

But also, there is an unseen supernatural world that has been active throughout history, and people have interpreted their experiences in written form. Many of the stories coincide from one religion to another. I believe that Jehovah/Yahweh is the sole creator of the Universe, and that Jesus offered Himself in a redemptive plan to set us all free -- those of us who choose. But I also recognize that the experiences others recorded can have veracity.

People see apparitions. They hear voices in their heads. They feel oppressed by unseen forces. These things are given names, definitions, warnings, cures and preventions, cultural filters. Speaking of them does not make a person wrong or insane, paranoid or anti-God. They are speaking of what they have learned.

Whenever there is a religion, there is also a group of people who want to use the religion to promote their own agendas. This can distort the truth, the appearance of the adherents, public perception of the faith, and understanding of what the faith walk is about.