Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just don't understand why we cannot tell people about how good God is and how he can help people who have a relationship with him without people saying we are cramming our beliefs down their throat. Christians just want to help. I think some go overboard but if a person has a rough time in their life I try to tell them to pray and trust God. Nowadays, you can't even go public with your beliefs yet it is ok for people to say that they don't believe in God. This is why I am scared to try to convince people to come to God. Folks get so upset.
What you're referring to is something I like to call spiritual flashing, and it's seriously annoying. Some of the most devout Christians I've ever known were not vocal about their faith. Rather than attempting to convince others, they simply served others. Stop talking and start doing. You might be surprised at where it gets you.
Isn't the contents of what is written more pertinent to the level of acceptability of imperfect evidence though?
Aristotle, Plato, etc. are attributed to (relatively) mundane stories and observations about the world around them. So even if they are not the actual authors of their books...it doesn't do much to the validity of whats written. Only the credit of who wrote it.
In the case of Jesus & the New Testament...given the extraordinary content involving resurrection claims and divinity...does it not require any more validity to accept those stories as actually true reality rather than just stories about somebody named Jesus like we might see in the Odyssey?
As well as the extraordinary claim by many Christians that these writings also declare that if you don't except all the other extraordinary content, there are dire eternal consequences. When a Christian is arguing that such a thing is unquestionably true based on such sketchy evidence, they should probably expect that most reasonable thinking people will ignore them, or tell them it is ridiculous, or that it is abusive brainwashing when taught to children. None of those completely appropriate responses are persecution.
As well as the extraordinary claim by many Christians that these writings also declare that if you don't except all the other extraordinary content, there are dire eternal consequences. When a Christian is arguing that such a thing is unquestionably true based on such sketchy evidence, they should probably expect that most reasonable thinking people will ignore them, or tell them it is ridiculous, or that it is abusive brainwashing when taught to children. None of those completely appropriate responses are persecution.
No they are not, but they are a violation of most believer's self image that they are benevolent, kindly, well meaning and loving and by responding appropriately you cannot help but be pointing out that they are credulous about ridiculous things and depending on context possibly also self absorbed and foolish.
I think one of the reasons theism works so well as that it leverages social reciprocity and people's need to save face. If you can be made to commit publicly to something completely unsupportable and silly, and are drawn into a bubble in which everyone else reinforces the silliness, and the silliness is seen as crucial to your eternal reward or punishment ... then for someone to come along who thinks your bubble and all that it supports is silly is suggesting that if you were a person of integrity you really ought to leave the bubble and stand up against it and admit to your friends and relatives and, most terrifyingly, yourself that you were subscribing all these years to silliness. And maybe threaten the dynamic of your marriage, extended family, friendships and associations, subject yourself to every fear that's ever been programmed into you, and be obliged to revise your entire worldview and many of your hopes, dreams and aspirations.
When I was a believer some of the churches I went to made a big deal indeed about water baptism. I always thought it was a silly ritual and never understood the point of it. But in light of what I discuss above it makes perfect sense. It is a very public commitment to the group and its teachings, coupled with a rather silly ritualistic act, heavily symbolic of dying to the world and rebirth as a creature of faith ... or more generically dying to reason and publicly and unmistakably committing to unreason (faith in the group's asserted truth).
That's a lot of heavy ego investment and that huge burden of ego investment can not help but be completely threatened by even a mild dose of indifference, disagreement or disbelief.
Well, it looks like the OP just wanted to lay a turd of a post to express a typically delusional persecution complex. Christians compose about 70% of the U.S. population, including the vast majority of public officials. In a representative democracy it's impossible for the majority to be persecuted in any substantial by a minority.
OP, get over it. You aren't being persecuted. Just because we secularists exist doesn't mean were persecuting you.
But Jesus is different. What is in the gospels has no force unless we know that Jesus actually said those things and backed up what he said by real demonstrations of divine authority. It is extraordinary claims and then some. .
You're totally correct, and absent first-hand witness testimony of such events in their own lives and an eventual event in your own life, the gospels have no force.
That's why I said earlier in this thread that "user reviews" are important and necessary and, fact, are what all Christians are obligated to provide, while only a few should be doing "evangelism" per se. And that is scriptural.
Well, it looks like the OP just wanted to lay a turd of a post to express a typically delusional persecution complex. Christians compose about 70% of the U.S. population, including the vast majority of public officials. In a representative democracy it's impossible for the majority to be persecuted in any substantial by a minority.
At some level they know that they need overwhelming numbers and hegemonic levels of influence in society to perpetuate their beliefs. Things are heading in the wrong direction for them and that's enough for them to feel threatened and be all bug-eyed about it because if they fall much below 70% it's a phenomenon that feeds on itself.
Besides, worldwide Christianity IS a minority, about 33%.
Also remember that people who tend to be most up in arms about such things tend to be part of a fundamentalist minority within Christianity. About 25% of that 70% in the US are evangelicals. So they inherently have a circle-the-wagons ethos even within Christianity, much less the world.
Because of all the above I don't think their persecution complex is entirely delusional. The delusional part, which is very real, is about conflating the slightest disagreement or indifference with personal annihilation and persecution. The non-delusional part is the existential anxiety and insecurity over their minority status over against the desperate need for social reinforcement and reciprocity to keep the belief system alive and healthy. Given their small numbers they really also needed the willing compliance of outsiders to be automatically and uniformly deferential and faithful to a now-crumbling societal taboo against overt pushback. And this explains their need to demonize simple disagreement as being impolite and rude, if not overtly part of some evil conspiracy.
I'm having an issue with the use of the word allowed in the post's title. Nice try. Feeling inhibited by a negative reaction you receive after an attempt at proselytizing is not the same as an actual prohibition.
At some level they know that they need overwhelming numbers and hegemonic levels of influence in society to perpetuate their beliefs. Things are heading in the wrong direction for them and that's enough for them to feel threatened and be all bug-eyed about it because if they fall much below 70% it's a phenomenon that feeds on itself.
Besides, worldwide Christianity IS a minority, about 33%.
Also remember that people who tend to be most up in arms about such things tend to be part of a fundamentalist minority within Christianity. About 25% of that 70% in the US are evangelicals. So they inherently have a circle-the-wagons ethos even within Christianity, much less the world.
Because of all the above I don't think their persecution complex is entirely delusional. The delusional part, which is very real, is about conflating the slightest disagreement or indifference with personal annihilation and persecution. The non-delusional part is the existential anxiety and insecurity over their minority status over against the desperate need for social reinforcement and reciprocity to keep the belief system alive and healthy. Given their small numbers they really also needed the willing compliance of outsiders to be automatically and uniformly deferential and faithful to a now-crumbling societal taboo against overt pushback. And this explains their need to demonize simple disagreement as being impolite and rude, if not overtly part of some evil conspiracy.
Christianity is supposed to be a minority. That is emphasized in the New Testament as the expected and normal state.
Because of all the above I don't think their persecution complex is entirely delusional. The delusional part, which is very real, is about conflating the slightest disagreement or indifference with personal annihilation and persecution. The non-delusional part is the existential anxiety and insecurity over their minority status over against the desperate need for social reinforcement and reciprocity to keep the belief system alive and healthy. Given their small numbers they really also needed the willing compliance of outsiders to be automatically and uniformly deferential and faithful to a now-crumbling societal taboo against overt pushback. And this explains their need to demonize simple disagreement as being impolite and rude, if not overtly part of some evil conspiracy.
Another typically articulate and thoughtful post.
Yeah, that's something I didn't consider - fundamentalists are a minority. Considering that about 50% of the U.S. population believes in creationism, I'm surprised they only compose 25%.
Considering fundamentalists have lost most aspects of the 'culture war' I understand why so many 'feel' persecuted. But as we know subjective feeling is often contrary to objective evidence.
No they are not, but they are a violation of most believer's self image that they are benevolent, kindly, well meaning and loving and by responding appropriately you cannot help but be pointing out that they are credulous about ridiculous things and depending on context possibly also self absorbed and foolish.
I think one of the reasons theism works so well as that it leverages social reciprocity and people's need to save face. If you can be made to commit publicly to something completely unsupportable and silly, and are drawn into a bubble in which everyone else reinforces the silliness, and the silliness is seen as crucial to your eternal reward or punishment ... then for someone to come along who thinks your bubble and all that it supports is silly is suggesting that if you were a person of integrity you really ought to leave the bubble and stand up against it and admit to your friends and relatives and, most terrifyingly, yourself that you were subscribing all these years to silliness. And maybe threaten the dynamic of your marriage, extended family, friendships and associations, subject yourself to every fear that's ever been programmed into you, and be obliged to revise your entire worldview and many of your hopes, dreams and aspirations.
When I was a believer some of the churches I went to made a big deal indeed about water baptism. I always thought it was a silly ritual and never understood the point of it. But in light of what I discuss above it makes perfect sense. It is a very public commitment to the group and its teachings, coupled with a rather silly ritualistic act, heavily symbolic of dying to the world and rebirth as a creature of faith ... or more generically dying to reason and publicly and unmistakably committing to unreason (faith in the group's asserted truth).
That's a lot of heavy ego investment and that huge burden of ego investment can not help but be completely threatened by even a mild dose of indifference, disagreement or disbelief.
Great post.
Its essentially "ego-hazing". Once you have done the same silly thing, proclaimed your belief in the silly thing, had the social reinforcement of the silly thing...now the silly thing becomes part of your outward representation of yourself, which most tie to their ego without even thinking about it. Conversely, it takes a lot of mindfulness and self-awareness to separate it (perhaps easier for some than others) for any of us. Some learn it very early on (usually thanks to their parents), some later in life after trying to resolve their angst & interpersonal issues, and some never do unfortunately.
But the reaction seems to be, in part at least, triggered by the idea that this new person has made a compelling argument which I might want to accept but would violate my ego-investment. So when that ego-investment is challenged, it quickly becomes rationalized as an attack on the self. And I say the argument is compelling precisely because the typical response is that "those mean atheists keep calling us stupid or ignorant"....when 9 out of 10 times I see that nobody said that at all.
Because even if somebody calls you "stupid"...unless you have a predisposition to thinking of yourself as stupid...you wouldn't likely take too much offense to it. You might wonder why this person is calling you stupid, or what behaviors would have made them assess you in this way. You wouldn't think it means the totality of who you are is "stupid" or "useless" unless you already had a complex about that label. Mainly because most people have proven to themselves sufficiently throughout their lives that they are not stupid (whatever that means to them). Or conversely, they might define stupid as a characteristic everybody displays at times...and thus no reason to be worked up about it when its "my turn" to be stupid about something.
But the visceral reaction of indignation & offense...essentially a defense of perceived self-annihilation...seems to happen because of the ego-investment. Because all of those things that make "me" a "good person" are all being attacked by your compelling argument. And it is compelling enough to make me question everything I thought I was, or that made me a good person. And somewhere deep down, I know its a bunch of silly stuff yet I value the feeling I have with all of my fellow theists, friends, family, etc. And I find the feeling unacceptable but rather than rebuild my outward self...which is quite the mountain to change....I'll simply ignore your compelling argument as "you are mean" or "I'm offended & done here".
It captures the old saying quite well..."people forget what you did, but they remember how you made them feel".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
