Why do non and anti Christians tell Christians how to be Christian?

[Polycarp_fan]

Oh oh....I think I agree with you, when it comes to religion, I'm an Atheist, but when it comes to something moving behind the scenes, I'm Agnostic.

Christians were called atheists by Romans "back in the day."

Let me add, that ANYONE that is an "atheist" because of man's injustice to his fellow man, or, because of pain and suffering to innocent people, is welcome - as a member - in/of my Church. My Christian, Bible-affirming Church.

 

[SiderealExalt]

What an odd question to ask. The reason why non-Christians tell Christians how to be Christian is because obviously many Christians don't know how to be Christians, and they need a little help in that area.

I can't help but feel a certain amount of apprehension with such questions. There definitely feels like a certain amount of undercurrent of to be non-Christian is to be lesser of a human being than a Christian, with the implication that to question the greater is anathema.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

What an odd question to ask. The reason why non-Christians tell Christians how to be Christian is because obviously many Christians don't know how to be Christians, and they need a little help in that area.

.

By what authority?

If you use the Bible, the New Testament part of it (too), you are claiming that there are absolutes, in the Bible, to judge a Christian by.

THAT, is my unwavering position. It is proven as valid and valuable BY the sound and logical judgmentalism of non and anti Christians about HOW a Christian should live as a Christian.

So, by what authority do you tell Christians how to be Christian?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

What make you think Jcooks sig is OK with me really? I just like his debate style. And, he doesn't freak out when accused or take things so personally when questioned. But I do see his sig yoked with yours in all reality. It never ceases to fascinate me how atheists and gays are so connected in their social causes and positions about Bible-affirming Christians.

I don't take things personally when questioned. You can ask me any question you like and I will give you a perfectly reasoned, polite, and honest answer.

I "freak out" when I tell you the truth about something and you say I am lying, and that you actually know my true stance on a subject better than I do.

 

[Aeris]

Somehow I'm not surprised that calling people "dumb" isn't well received. Depending on the situation I'm inclined to say kicking someone out of the church for such commentary may or may not have been appropriate.

I understand that atheist find the belief in any deity to be illogical. I find the behavior of some believers towards those who don't believe to be particularly atrocious. Some folks look at atheists as though they were some kind of puppy torturing sadists and treat them worse. I don't appreciate snarky comments (is snarky a word?) from people who aren't Christian about Christians in general. (any more than most atheists appreciate similar comments about atheists in general)

If one asks for some level of reasonable debate and discussion the only way to have it is to avoid silly insults. If one is here just to bait the believers I wonder why they wouldn't have better things to do. I also wonder why some Christians take the bait.

You seemed to have missed the rest of the post... the person was 10, although I dont agree with making generalizations about someones intelligence (or any other qualities) based on their faith (or lack of faith) most reasonable people could ignore silly comments like this when it is said by a child especially since anything that seems illogical to a child is normally labelled as "dumb". I believe the main point of this post was that some of us non-christians tell christians they arent acting like christians because we were raised christian (so therefore know how christians are suppost to act).

 

[wanderingone]

You seemed to have missed the rest of the post... the person was 10, although I dont agree with making generalizations about someones intelligence (or any other qualities) based on their faith (or lack of faith) most reasonable people could ignore silly comments like this when it is said by a child especially since anything that seems illogical to a child is normally labelled as "dumb". I believe the main point of this post was that some of us non-christians tell christians they arent acting like christians because we were raised christian (so therefore know how christians are suppost to act).

Oh goodness you've taken what I posted about his (her? I don't remember who made the comment anymore--) comment far too seriously yourself - if I was taking it that seriously I would have asked a little more about the context, I was merely commenting on how name calling doesn't tend to get us anywhere, that people don't tend to respond well to it and there's plenty of that all around by the supposed grown ups here (believers and non believers a like, they just find words that they think make them sound more like grown people instead of 10 year olds having a schoolyard spat)

And.. please ... you must know that being raised as Christian doesn't mean you know a thing about how Christians are "supposed to act" (same goes for any faith) have you seen some of the Christians who were raised as Christians? Surely you can see by whatever else I wrote I take no particular offense at someone commenting about Christian behavior.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

And.. please ... you must know that being raised as Christian doesn't mean you know a thing about how Christians are "supposed to act" (same goes for any faith) have you seen some of the Christians who were raised as Christians? Surely you can see by whatever else I wrote I take no particular offense at someone commenting about Christian behavior.

There are a great many Christians who feel qualified to condemn people of other religions for not being good disciples... Muslims being case in point.

However, as far as Christianity goes, in as much as there is a single culture in Western Civilisation, it is a descendant from a Christian culture. Even if a person is not a professing Christian, if he is from Europe, the Americas or Australasia, it is exceptionally likely that he is familiar with the basic tennets of Christianity, is related to practicing Christians, and has some basic idea about what Christianity is supposed to be about. It is quite possible that even if he doesn't believe all or part of the Christian story, he may have studied it, to quite an advanced degree. I have no problem with a learned non-Christian correcting me about an element of Christianity if I am mistaken.

To me, this whole thread smacks of the attitude of people who don't want to be told they are in error, and thence try to come up with reasons why they shouldn't have to listen to the facts, rather than acknowledging the facts for what they are.

This is a common attitude among pharisee like people, who think that avoiding corection is more important than being accurate.

 

[Beanieboy]

Gays yes. Family values being family values no. Wanting gay sex and gay culture taught to children in public schools is outrageous. I

This is an untrue claim. They aren't teaching kids about gay sex. They simply teach kids that gay people exist, and to treat each other with respect.

 

[wanderingone]

There are a great many Christians who feel qualified to condemn people of other religions for not being good disciples... Muslims being case in point.

I agree.. I'm not sure what the point is in relation to my comment-- far too many people feel they are experts on how OTHER people should act, and everyone has an explanation as to why they are qualified to do so, it's equal to the number of people who feel they are so perfected in their own behavior that nobody can possibly offer any worthy commentary. Again I take no offense at someone asking how something fits in with my faith. It is tedious to have people accuse others of not being Christian.. personally I think that happens most often between people professing the same faith.

To me, this whole thread smacks of the attitude of people who don't want to be told they are in error, and thence try to come up with reasons why they shouldn't have to listen to the facts, rather than acknowledging the facts for what they are.

This is a common attitude among pharisee like people, who think that avoiding corection is more important than being accurate.

As well as people feeling that there is a need to constantly correct others. There's not much you can say about an individual's personal understanding of their faith, and how that influences their day to day life (unless they specifically ask someone to have a go at commenting on it... which pretty much is what you're doing when you throw a comment out there on a forum ) There's a lot to be said about a person needing that faith to be supported by everyone else to the extreme that everyone else is expected to follow the "rules" of their beliefs.

I can't fathom why some people who have made it clear they think those who don't share their beliefs have anything of value to say would bother worrying about why people tell them "how to act" If I am arrogant enough to think a person's comments are useless because of their own belief (or non beliefs) then why would I be offended by anything they say?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

As well as people feeling that there is a need to constantly correct others.

Nail. Head. Shot over. Splash out.

If I am arrogant enough to think a person's comments are useless because of their own belief (or non beliefs) then why would I be offended by anything they say?

Absolutely. Indeed, I believe that people with overly simplistic "my view is the only possible correct one" versiopns of faith are actually quite weak in their faith, and that they need to cling to such absolutist dogma because their faith would shatter if exposed to anything contrary. Hence they seek to exclude anyone who is going to challenge their world view. Deep down, they know that reality does not agree with them, and rather than change their position to a more correct version, they seek to play semantic games regarding why the correction in question doesn't apply to them. If faced with a choice between admitting an error, and changing one's position accordingly, and being wrong, but not having to admit to being in error, some people would rather be wrong. Ever see "Eric the Viking"? In these discussions, I am often reminded of the population of Hy-Brazil disapearing beneath the waves while singing a happy song, as King Arnulf declares in a loud and cheerful voice "don't pay any attention to the rising water, the land isn't sinking because we're always incredibly nice to each other, everyone stay calm, this is not happeni...blub blub blub"

 

[WatersMoon110]

Absolutely. Indeed, I believe that people with overly simplistic "my view is the only possible correct one" versions of faith are actually quite weak in their faith, and that they need to cling to such absolutist dogma because their faith would shatter if exposed to anything contrary. Hence they seek to exclude anyone who is going to challenge their world view. Deep down, they know that reality does not agree with them, and rather than change their position to a more correct version, they seek to play semantic games regarding why the correction in question doesn't apply to them. If faced with a choice between admitting an error, and changing one's position accordingly, and being wrong, but not having to admit to being in error, some people would rather be wrong.

I agree, I also think that people who cling to dogma (or religious "talking points") are weak in their faith. I mean, it is probably really scary to need to have "all the answers" and be unable to do so.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

I agree, I also think that people who cling to dogma (or religious "talking points") are weak in their faith. I mean, it is probably really scary to need to have "all the answers" and be unable to do so.

How about people that cling to nothing, and say that everything came from it, and that that is the answer to everything? Literally, everything.

Melted minds?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

How about people that cling to nothing, and say that everything came from it, and that that is the answer to everything? Literally, everything.

Melted minds?

You are yet to provide an example of anyone saying that ANYTHING came from nothing... let alone EVERYthing!

 

[Polycarp_fan]

You are yet to provide an example of anyone saying that ANYTHING came from nothing... let alone EVERYthing!

Bunk. Evolution is used just that way by the nongodian and secularism hordes. Somehow "it" created everything. A Creator does not exist. Everything got here by accidents.

 

[Andreusz]

Evolution is not nothing. No-one who understands it would claim it is. Natural selection is a force: -- to say it is nothing is like saying that the action of water on rocks is nothing.

 

[Psudopod]

Bunk. Evolution is used just that way by the nongodian and secularism hordes. Somehow "it" created everything. A Creator does not exist. Everything got here by accidents.

Please learn what evolution is: an explanation for the patterns and diversity in life. Nothing more or less.

 

[dlamberth]

Bunk. Evolution is used just that way by the nongodian and secularism hordes. Somehow "it" created everything. A Creator does not exist. Everything got here by accidents.

And a Creator with out form (ie - nothing) somehow "it" created everything out of nothing?

.

 

[selfinflikted]

Bunk. Evolution is used just that way by the nongodian and secularism hordes. Somehow "it" created everything. A Creator does not exist. Everything got here by accidents.

You need to do some reading up on some things before you try to make sweeping accusations such as this. The ToE explains only the origin of species, not the origin of life.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

And a Creator with out form (ie - nothing) somehow "it" created everything out of nothing?

.

The Hebrews got the answer.