Community > General Religion Chat

Topic: Is Christianity Immoral?
funches Joined Sat 12/01/07 Posts: 12948	Sat 01/30/10 05:09 AM
IN what statement did I add 'outrage', I am pretty consistently responding to your current statements and questions, but I am open to redressing past posts if you can be more specific as to what they were. MsHarmony stated: I am anti violence,,,pro unity, not superior or inferior, and have great respect for consistency(not hypocrisy) does the God that you promote have those same values?

funches Joined Sat 12/01/07 Posts: 12948	Sat 01/30/10 05:20 AM Edited by funches on Sat 01/30/10 05:21 AM
I know i have a personal relationship with God and i'm sure msharmony does to. Alot on top of alot of people have personal relations with God. Cowboy...a lot of people may also be delusional...and one sign of delusion is to claim to have a personal relationship with an entity or a person that you never met and that you only read about in a book

creativesoul Joined Mon 04/16/07 Posts: 9166	Sat 01/30/10 08:02 AM
Let's think about the immorality aspect in a different 'light', one of which builds upon some of the fundamental aspects(beliefs) of Christianity. 1.)Every Christian calls 'God' - the father, the son, and the holy spirit(ghost). That is a fundamental aspect of Christianity - the holy trinity. The father meaning God the creator, the son meaning Jesus, the Holy Spirit meaning our guide in life(conscience). 2.)Another fundamental belief of Christianity is that we, as children of God, cannot possibly know the reasons for what God does because we cannot know God's will or plan. Yet no Christian can possibly deny that God has a plan because that is contained in scripture. 3.)Another fundamental belief in Christianity is that God is just, meaning one will get rewarded for their choices accordingly. 4.)Another fundamental belief is that God is all-knowing, all-powerful, all-good, and always present everywhere. Now referring back to the OP... The author proposed a simple consideration. That being one of redemption or salvation. God, through Jesus, has offered humans forgiveness for their own wrongdoings. All one has to do is ask Jesus to forgive them of their 'sins' and come into their heart and guide them in life. That is often referred to as 'being saved'. The act of doing so, as long as one is truly sorry for what they have previously done 'wrong', allows one to be 'reborn' or 'born again'. That is like a fresh start in life despite the wrongdoings that one may have already been guilty of, including acts against other people. Now think about that for just a few moments. With this given construct, one can self-justify any and all actions which they have taken against another - no matter what those effects caused - simply because the core belief system requires that 'God' will forgive any and all acts except one of blaspheme against the Holy Spirit. In addition to the "Do as I say, and not as I do" teaching methods consistently shown throughout the Old Testament, all of this seems very reprehensible to me.

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Sat 01/30/10 11:44 PM
Let's think about the immorality aspect in a different 'light', one of which builds upon some of the fundamental aspects(beliefs) of Christianity. 1.)Every Christian calls 'God' - the father, the son, and the holy spirit(ghost). That is a fundamental aspect of Christianity - the holy trinity. The father meaning God the creator, the son meaning Jesus, the Holy Spirit meaning our guide in life(conscience). 2.)Another fundamental belief of Christianity is that we, as children of God, cannot possibly know the reasons for what God does because we cannot know God's will or plan. Yet no Christian can possibly deny that God has a plan because that is contained in scripture. 3.)Another fundamental belief in Christianity is that God is just, meaning one will get rewarded for their choices accordingly. 4.)Another fundamental belief is that God is all-knowing, all-powerful, all-good, and always present everywhere. Now referring back to the OP... The author proposed a simple consideration. That being one of redemption or salvation. God, through Jesus, has offered humans forgiveness for their own wrongdoings. All one has to do is ask Jesus to forgive them of their 'sins' and come into their heart and guide them in life. That is often referred to as 'being saved'. The act of doing so, as long as one is truly sorry for what they have previously done 'wrong', allows one to be 'reborn' or 'born again'. That is like a fresh start in life despite the wrongdoings that one may have already been guilty of, including acts against other people. Now think about that for just a few moments. With this given construct, one can self-justify any and all actions which they have taken against another - no matter what those effects caused - simply because the core belief system requires that 'God' will forgive any and all acts except one of blaspheme against the Holy Spirit. In addition to the "Do as I say, and not as I do" teaching methods consistently shown throughout the Old Testament, all of this seems very reprehensible to me. I do not believe self justification can be present in true repentance. Repentance calls for accountability, not mere words. The common flaw in the logic is that JUST saying the words excuses people and they can therefore be atrocious with the intent of sayint the words after ,,,,which is not the case. Its more than saying you need forgiveness, it is REPENTING or truly taking accountability to right the wrongs and CEASE from repeating them.

creativesoul Joined Mon 04/16/07 Posts: 9166	Sun 01/31/10 12:36 PM
creative wrote: Let's think about the immorality aspect in a different 'light', one of which builds upon some of the fundamental aspects(beliefs) of Christianity. 1.)Every Christian calls 'God' - the father, the son, and the holy spirit(ghost). That is a fundamental aspect of Christianity - the holy trinity. The father meaning God the creator, the son meaning Jesus, the Holy Spirit meaning our guide in life(conscience). 2.)Another fundamental belief of Christianity is that we, as children of God, cannot possibly know the reasons for what God does because we cannot know God's will or plan. Yet no Christian can possibly deny that God has a plan because that is contained in scripture. 3.)Another fundamental belief in Christianity is that God is just, meaning one will get rewarded for their choices accordingly. 4.)Another fundamental belief is that God is all-knowing, all-powerful, all-good, and always present everywhere. Now referring back to the OP... The author proposed a simple consideration. That being one of redemption or salvation. God, through Jesus, has offered humans forgiveness for their own wrongdoings. All one has to do is ask Jesus to forgive them of their 'sins' and come into their heart and guide them in life. That is often referred to as 'being saved'. The act of doing so, as long as one is truly sorry for what they have previously done 'wrong', allows one to be 'reborn' or 'born again'. That is like a fresh start in life despite the wrongdoings that one may have already been guilty of, including acts against other people. Now think about that for just a few moments. With this given construct, one can self-justify any and all actions which they have taken against another - no matter what those effects caused - simply because the core belief system requires that 'God' will forgive any and all acts except one of blaspheme against the Holy Spirit. In addition to the "Do as I say, and not as I do" teaching methods consistently shown throughout the Old Testament, all of this seems very reprehensible to me. msharmony replied: I do not believe self justification can be present in true repentance. Repentance calls for accountability, not mere words. The common flaw in the logic is that JUST saying the words excuses people and they can therefore be atrocious with the intent of sayint the words after ,,,,which is not the case. Its more than saying you need forgiveness, it is REPENTING or truly taking accountability to right the wrongs and CEASE from repeating them. As I understand it as well... The Lord, or God, judges that which is in a wo/man's heart. For out of the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks... What bothers me most about the salvation aspect of Christianity is the idea that one can be truly sorry and repent for some atrocity committed against another who has never deliberately harmed anyone but has not been saved, and the repenter - even though the sum total of good deeds vs. bad deeds is immensely in favor of the bad gets the reward of heaven regardless. Now this may seem like a hopeful and just idea, but if the perpetrator goes to heaven and the victim goes to hell - because s/he has not been saved - where is the justice and fairness in that?

Eljay Joined Tue 05/08/07 Posts: 2426	Sun 01/31/10 03:27 PM
Let's think about the immorality aspect in a different 'light', one of which builds upon some of the fundamental aspects(beliefs) of Christianity. 1.)Every Christian calls 'God' - the father, the son, and the holy spirit(ghost). That is a fundamental aspect of Christianity - the holy trinity. The father meaning God the creator, the son meaning Jesus, the Holy Spirit meaning our guide in life(conscience). 2.)Another fundamental belief of Christianity is that we, as children of God, cannot possibly know the reasons for what God does because we cannot know God's will or plan. Yet no Christian can possibly deny that God has a plan because that is contained in scripture. 3.)Another fundamental belief in Christianity is that God is just, meaning one will get rewarded for their choices accordingly. 4.)Another fundamental belief is that God is all-knowing, all-powerful, all-good, and always present everywhere. Now referring back to the OP... The author proposed a simple consideration. That being one of redemption or salvation. God, through Jesus, has offered humans forgiveness for their own wrongdoings. All one has to do is ask Jesus to forgive them of their 'sins' and come into their heart and guide them in life. That is often referred to as 'being saved'. The act of doing so, as long as one is truly sorry for what they have previously done 'wrong', allows one to be 'reborn' or 'born again'. That is like a fresh start in life despite the wrongdoings that one may have already been guilty of, including acts against other people. Now think about that for just a few moments. C.S. So far - up to this point I would have to say that everything you've stated so far is right on - except that your "children of God" reference is a bit ambiguous. If you are refereing to "everyone" as children of God - we are in disagreement, for that is not the correct conclusion to the exegesis you have given. That being said... You've arrived at this: With this given construct, one can self-justify any and all actions which they have taken against another - no matter what those effects caused - simply because the core belief system requires that 'God' will forgive any and all acts except one of blaspheme against the Holy Spirit. Actually - this is a bit of a "shifting-middle fallacy" and assumes facts not in evidence, and ignores those facts not stated. For a major omission in your overview of Christianity - is that once one is saved - (or born again, which is the layman's term for being "sealed with the Holy Spirit") - one walks in the light as Jesus did. And if one does not walk in the light - they deieve themselves, and the Holy spirit is not in them. (See writings of John and James) So - to perform the acts which you say are self-justifyable is a walking contradiction, and a demonstration that one is NOT saved if this particular stance is adopted. It's more or less the litmus test for disproving a claim of Christianity - than the outcome the the premises you've laid out. Therefore - it is natural to say: at the end of your conclusion - because it is a fallacious conclusion to the aforementioned premises. Therefore... In addition to the "Do as I say, and not as I do" teaching methods consistently shown throughout the Old Testament, all of this seems very reprehensible to me. As it should. For all fallacious logic should be reprehensible. It is the "sandy foundation" of all presumed refutations of christianity. While I appreciate how the argument is constructed - I'd like to see it flushed out a little bit more before the conclusion you reached was stated.

Eljay Joined Tue 05/08/07 Posts: 2426	Sun 01/31/10 03:35 PM
creative wrote: Let's think about the immorality aspect in a different 'light', one of which builds upon some of the fundamental aspects(beliefs) of Christianity. 1.)Every Christian calls 'God' - the father, the son, and the holy spirit(ghost). That is a fundamental aspect of Christianity - the holy trinity. The father meaning God the creator, the son meaning Jesus, the Holy Spirit meaning our guide in life(conscience). 2.)Another fundamental belief of Christianity is that we, as children of God, cannot possibly know the reasons for what God does because we cannot know God's will or plan. Yet no Christian can possibly deny that God has a plan because that is contained in scripture. 3.)Another fundamental belief in Christianity is that God is just, meaning one will get rewarded for their choices accordingly. 4.)Another fundamental belief is that God is all-knowing, all-powerful, all-good, and always present everywhere. Now referring back to the OP... The author proposed a simple consideration. That being one of redemption or salvation. God, through Jesus, has offered humans forgiveness for their own wrongdoings. All one has to do is ask Jesus to forgive them of their 'sins' and come into their heart and guide them in life. That is often referred to as 'being saved'. The act of doing so, as long as one is truly sorry for what they have previously done 'wrong', allows one to be 'reborn' or 'born again'. That is like a fresh start in life despite the wrongdoings that one may have already been guilty of, including acts against other people. Now think about that for just a few moments. With this given construct, one can self-justify any and all actions which they have taken against another - no matter what those effects caused - simply because the core belief system requires that 'God' will forgive any and all acts except one of blaspheme against the Holy Spirit. In addition to the "Do as I say, and not as I do" teaching methods consistently shown throughout the Old Testament, all of this seems very reprehensible to me. msharmony replied: I do not believe self justification can be present in true repentance. Repentance calls for accountability, not mere words. The common flaw in the logic is that JUST saying the words excuses people and they can therefore be atrocious with the intent of sayint the words after ,,,,which is not the case. Its more than saying you need forgiveness, it is REPENTING or truly taking accountability to right the wrongs and CEASE from repeating them. As I understand it as well... The Lord, or God, judges that which is in a wo/man's heart. For out of the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks... What bothers me most about the salvation aspect of Christianity is the idea that one can be truly sorry and repent for some atrocity committed against another who has never deliberately harmed anyone but has not been saved, and the repenter - even though the sum total of good deeds vs. bad deeds is immensely in favor of the bad gets the reward of heaven regardless. Now this may seem like a hopeful and just idea, but if the perpetrator goes to heaven and the victim goes to hell - because s/he has not been saved - where is the justice and fairness in that? But the issue is not one of quality - but quantity, and it is not whether one is a perpetrator or a victim - but is one of pride and willfull defiance. Because of this - justice and fairness is irrelivant, becuase none are justified, and no one is subject to what is "rightfully" fair. The wages of sin is death. Period. The "fairness" comes only in the perception of the value of time. Were man to suffer the consiquences of his actions immediately - there would likely be no one alive mature enough to pro-create. Now - naturally this all presumes the tennets of Judeo/Christainity, because any discussion of heaven and hell presumes it - as these terms are pretty unique to any offshoot of O.T. Judism - else the argument becomes moot.

creativesoul Joined Mon 04/16/07 Posts: 9166	Mon 02/01/10 06:49 PM Edited by creativesoul on Mon 02/01/10 06:51 PM
creative wrote: Let's think about the immorality aspect in a different 'light', one of which builds upon some of the fundamental aspects(beliefs) of Christianity. 1.)Every Christian calls 'God' - the father, the son, and the holy spirit(ghost). That is a fundamental aspect of Christianity - the holy trinity. The father meaning God the creator, the son meaning Jesus, the Holy Spirit meaning our guide in life(conscience). 2.)Another fundamental belief of Christianity is that we, as children of God, cannot possibly know the reasons for what God does because we cannot know God's will or plan. Yet no Christian can possibly deny that God has a plan because that is contained in scripture. 3.)Another fundamental belief in Christianity is that God is just, meaning one will get rewarded for their choices accordingly. 4.)Another fundamental belief is that God is all-knowing, all-powerful, all-good, and always present everywhere. Now referring back to the OP... The author proposed a simple consideration. That being one of redemption or salvation. God, through Jesus, has offered humans forgiveness for their own wrongdoings. All one has to do is ask Jesus to forgive them of their 'sins' and come into their heart and guide them in life. That is often referred to as 'being saved'. The act of doing so, as long as one is truly sorry for what they have previously done 'wrong', allows one to be 'reborn' or 'born again'. That is like a fresh start in life despite the wrongdoings that one may have already been guilty of, including acts against other people. Now think about that for just a few moments. Eljay wrote: C.S. So far - up to this point I would have to say that everything you've stated so far is right on - except that your "children of God" reference is a bit ambiguous. If you are refereing to "everyone" as children of God - we are in disagreement, for that is not the correct conclusion to the exegesis you have given. That being said... You've arrived at this: With this given construct, one can self-justify any and all actions which they have taken against another - no matter what those effects caused - simply because the core belief system requires that 'God' will forgive any and all acts except one of blaspheme against the Holy Spirit. Actually - this is a bit of a "shifting-middle fallacy" and assumes facts not in evidence, and ignores those facts not stated. For a major omission in your overview of Christianity - is that once one is saved - (or born again, which is the layman's term for being "sealed with the Holy Spirit") - one walks in the light as Jesus did. And if one does not walk in the light - they deieve themselves, and the Holy spirit is not in them. (See writings of John and James) So - to perform the acts which you say are self-justifyable is a walking contradiction, and a demonstration that one is NOT saved if this particular stance is adopted. It's more or less the litmus test for disproving a claim of Christianity - than the outcome the the premises you've laid out. Good to see you Eljay! I hope life is finding you well, my friend. I think you have misunderstood my meaning, and if that is the case, it probably is because of how I wrote that response. I agree with you completely that one cannot be saved and continue to live and do the things that they know in their heart are wrong. It just does not work that way. The book of James is one which I hold fond in memory, therefore it was interesting for you to suggest it. That being said... The way that I wrote that may indeed sem like I was implying that one could continue doing wrong after being 'saved' and continue to be 'saved'. That is not what I meant, though... my apologies. I actually used the term 'self-justify' rather loosely. creative wrote: In addition to the "Do as I say, and not as I do" teaching methods consistently shown throughout the Old Testament, all of this seems very reprehensible to me. Eljay wrote: As it should. For all fallacious logic should be reprehensible. It is the "sandy foundation" of all presumed refutations of christianity. While I appreciate how the argument is constructed - I'd like to see it flushed out a little bit more before the conclusion you reached was stated. Fair enough Eljay. I would agree that my construct was flawed regarding the self-justification aspect. The 'Do as I say, and not as I do' aspects of the OT still irk me... seriously irk me.

TBRich Joined Fri 11/07/08 Posts: 8232	Tue 02/02/10 11:50 AM
This kinda reminds me of a short story I read as an undergraduate called the Lottery by Shirley Jackson. It gave me the heebee jeebies and so does the notion of how Xians have their sins forgiven.

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Tue 02/02/10 03:00 PM
Gives me the heebie jeebies to think of Christ being murdered,, and fills me with hope to think GOD didnt destroy this world then and there.

redonkulous Joined Tue 12/16/08 Posts: 188	Sat 02/06/10 10:27 AM
One of the primary foundations of Christianity is immoral, and this would be vicarious redemption, where you can throw your sins onto someone elses shouders. This is simply one example of scapegoating. When sins are taken away simply through prayer, this takes away personal responsibility, which is perverse and immoral. A man would not need to seek the forgiveness of those he wronged, but all a man need to do is seek the forgiveness of Jesus. In a sense, this robs us somewhat of our ability to love our fellow man, for if we can transgress against others and not need their forgiveness to be absolved of our sins towards them, the only word that comes to mind to describe such an individual that would make this statement would be deranged. Also, christianity teaches us to love our fellow neighbor as we would love ourself, which is impossible, so we are always guilty of this crime. It demeans the term of love by making it a compulsory action. Another example, a God-follower relationship can be called a sadomasochistic relationship. To show absolute love to a being that will show love back until you make a mistake, then once again, you are "a worthless and dirty sinner". The God-follower relationship, by definition, fits the sadomasochistic relationship, which is perverse, unhealthy, and unethical. One more point would be that Christianity is a totalitarian system. If there is a God who could do these things and demand all these things of us, who is eternal and unchanging, we would be living under a dictatorship in which there is no chance for appeal, and one that could never change. One that knows our thoughts and can convict us of thought-crimes, and can condemn us to eternal punishment for actions in which we simply have the urge to take. -This argument is borrowed from Christopher Hitchens, truly a wise individual. "where you can throw your sins onto someone elses shouders." this has nothing to do with christianity don't know where you came up with this. Reason being for our sins being forgiven was cause christ was the ultimate sacrifice for our sins. That is because before Jesus walked this earth, people would sacrifice animals and other objects for forgiveness of their sins. But Jesus came and did away with that and sacrificed himself for our sins so we no longer had to sacrifice animals and things. Are you kidding me, Christianity is all about bundling up your sins, piling them on to a scapegoat (in this case Jesus) and executing them/him. Jesus was the ultimate scapegoat, the ultimate blood sacrifice of the ultimate death cult.

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Sat 02/06/10 11:23 AM
The belief in Christ and following the example of Christ are the opposite of immoral.

funches Joined Sat 12/01/07 Posts: 12948	Sun 02/07/10 05:17 AM
The belief in Christ and following the example of Christ are the opposite of immoral. following the example of Christ would mean following all of his teachings ...in this case how many Christians can claim to be the opposite of immoral

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Sun 02/07/10 10:18 AM
The belief in Christ and following the example of Christ are the opposite of immoral. following the example of Christ would mean following all of his teachings ...in this case how many Christians can claim to be the opposite of immoral He lived how he taught, so there is no disparity there. No person can be the opposite of immoral except Christ. But following the example of christ is the opposite of immoral(when the attempts are successful).

Saturnine Joined Tue 12/01/09 Posts: 22	Sun 02/07/10 11:22 AM
I can't resist commenting any longer... Don't you ever get bored of this back and forth? I'm right and you're wrong! No I'm right and you're wrong! You don't agree with me so you're delusional! No you're delusional because you don't think like I do! I'm better because I have the solution! No I'm better.... SHEESH!!! It's primary school all over again. My doll is better than yours because it talks !No mine is better than yours because it can eat and poo.... blablabla! Both sides of this argument are equally ignorant and irritating. Ever heard of live and let live? You leave me alone and don't stuff your views down my through and I'll do the same???? And before anyone gives me a retort about how other so called Christians do this or say that,or for that matter what other belief systems or people (be it paganism or another another monotheistic religion, whatever). Other people do their thing and I do mine. It can be applied to anything. It's the classic 'if everybody else jumped off a cliff...' scenario. This argument has been going round and round since it began however long ago and will continue to do so. When have people ever been able to agree on anything?! Can't everyone just get on with their lives and focus on other issues? If people put this much energy into solving things like poverty it would be erradicated!

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Sun 02/07/10 11:34 AM
Forums are for people to express opinions,, nothing so ignorant about that really, although I agree it can get childish when the name calling and belittling starts,,

Dragoness Joined Wed 10/17/07 Posts: 23320	Sun 02/07/10 11:40 AM
Well, I think we have proven beyond a reasonable doubt now that Christianity is immoral, right? Right.

funches Joined Sat 12/01/07 Posts: 12948	Sun 02/07/10 12:10 PM
The belief in Christ and following the example of Christ are the opposite of immoral. following the example of Christ would mean following all of his teachings ...in this case how many Christians can claim to be the opposite of immoral He lived how he taught, so there is no disparity there. No person can be the opposite of immoral except Christ. But following the example of christ is the opposite of immoral(when the attempts are successful). I'm not talking about how Jesus lived since he is the one that supposedly set the rules ..I'm talking about those that do not live the way Jesus did is according to you immoral... and that would include the Christians that did not follow all his teachings ...I mean how hard is it to do that

creativesoul Joined Mon 04/16/07 Posts: 9166	Sun 02/07/10 12:13 PM
Sat wrote: I can't resist commenting any longer... Don't you ever get bored of this back and forth? I'm right and you're wrong! No I'm right and you're wrong! You don't agree with me so you're delusional! No you're delusional because you don't think like I do! I'm better because I have the solution! No I'm better.... SHEESH!!! It's primary school all over again. My doll is better than yours because it talks !No mine is better than yours because it can eat and poo.... blablabla! Both sides of this argument are equally ignorant and irritating. Ever heard of live and let live? You leave me alone and don't stuff your views down my through and I'll do the same???? And before anyone gives me a retort about how other so called Christians do this or say that,or for that matter what other belief systems or people (be it paganism or another another monotheistic religion, whatever). Other people do their thing and I do mine. It can be applied to anything. It's the classic 'if everybody else jumped off a cliff...' scenario. Is this any different, other than being just a different way of doing the exact same thing? The irony.

funches Joined Sat 12/01/07 Posts: 12948	Sun 02/07/10 12:15 PM
I can't resist commenting any longer... Don't you ever get bored of this back and forth? I'm right and you're wrong! No I'm right and you're wrong! You don't agree with me so you're delusional! No you're delusional because you don't think like I do! I'm better because I have the solution! No I'm better.... SHEESH!!! It's primary school all over again. My doll is better than yours because it talks !No mine is better than yours because it can eat and poo.... blablabla! Saturnine....what's actually is delusional is for someone to log into a debating forum to complain about people debating surely even in your life outside the forum you express your opinions to others which may differ from their opinion ...